to continue though delayed the meeting between president biden and naftali benefit the prime minister of israel. that has been delayed but it will take place. later this afternoon with we'll wait to see if we hear from the president who will be appearing with naftali bennett. will the press be allowed in the room? will he answer any questions? we don't know. neil, my time's up but it's yours. neil: thank you very, very much, stuart, we're following up on same issues you just did. we're trying to get an indication out of the airport everyone is able to fly out. we're told the last two hours no one has. 13,400 had been evacuated last night going into this morning right before the so-called coordinated attacks. there were two. one at the kabul airport and still another at a hotel, the baron hotel frequented by a lot of westerners including americans in a separate attack.

we're also told that to date, again, before this attack, 95,700 had been able to evacuate the city. but now there are indications everything is frozen in place. we know that there are a number of afghans nationals we're told, hundreds waiting near or at the tarmac. they are not, you know, being allowed to leave out an abundance of caution and safety and concerns that this isis-k splinter group you heard about might be planning more attacks. separately a report as stuart was telling you, hundreds of these splinter members, started in pakistan, they broke off with other taliban members, if you can believe this for not being brutal enough and they have launched attacks in the past on taliban soldiers and fighters not only in afghanistan but in places like pakistan. this is the enemy of thy enemy

thy enemy too kind of thing, it's a confusing mess. what we know the markets got wind of all of this. they turned south, they stabilized a little bit, don't know what to make of this pretty much like the rest of the world. we're waiting for updates on this. we're learning number of other countries in the region trying to get their people have stopped doing so. they include turkey and belgium, canada, denmark, germany, the netherlands, a host of others who said it is simply not safe. those who are in the country trying to get out of the country are also being told for the time-being avoid any of the entrances or gates you hear so much about at at the kabul gate including abbey gate where this first happened and northgate and frequenting any sports of westerners few of them, the

baron hotel which was the second explosion target today. the fear is still more attacks could be planned. there is no way of knowing, but when you get reports that hundreds of these so-called isis-k terrorists are now descending on the airport at the very least, you worry. griff jenkins at the state department following all of these fast-moving developments. griff, what can you tell us? reporter: neil i can tell you the situation here at the state department is very fluid and at the top of their priority list are those 1500 americans now stranded in afghanistan unable to make it to the airport. now let me show you, neil, just in the last hour, that warning that went out to u.s. citizens in afghanistan. it says as you mentioned they should avoid traveling to the airport and avoid airport gates. those at the abbey gate, eastgate, northgate should leave immediately. as you mentioned with two explosions and gunfire breaking

out that is nothing short of coordinated it send as very clear message to not only americans but the thousands of afghan allies they will not get to the airport lest they should lose their lives. this complicated the situation with the state department trying to get americans and allies out. remember yesterday we got a warning about this threat, neil, from secretary of state antony blinken. here is a little bit of what he said yesterday. listen. >> we're operating in a hostile environment, in a city and country now controlled by the taliban with the very real possibility of an isis-k attack. we're taking every precaution but this is very high-risk. reporter: high-risk indeed. now yesterday the secretary also telling us, neil, there are about 1500 americans they were looking at, 500 of whom they were in direct contact with. a thousand or less they were aggressively pursuing contact

with. we do not know the latest status on the 500 they were in contact with. did they get out around the 1000 they were trying to reach but he also told us that the taliban, that getting americans out after the deadline of august 31st was contingent upon the taliban insuring their safe passage. we don't know where that stands now or what the taliban can do. we know one thing, that is, that the state department now warning americans to avoid even trying to get out. we also have learned that the state department reached out to congressional hill staff and congressional offices because many americans are reaching out to the representatives and senators help, i need to get out. i'm not able to get out. they're telling the congressional staff to cease doing any sort of operation, because the environment, the threat is too great at this hour. another thing, not to get too far ahead, neil, remember before this explosion there was a lot of negotiation going on with countries like turkey and others

who would control the airport beyond the tuesday deadline. there was no decision made that will be significant obviously because there is a real likelihood if there are threats and these attacks continue that the americans left behind will have to be dependent upon whatever is in place after we are out on tuesday, neil? neil: that is a very griff point, griff, there there is an understanding that turkey would be playing that role. now we're hearing turkey is taking all of its remaining people out of the country, presumably giving up on any rescue efforts. i did want to also, griff, have you heard anything about where things stand now with planes being able to depart? we were told for the better part of two hours has not been the case. do we know whether that is changed or whether flights are to resume or is it kind of a lockdown? reporter: there are questions surrounding that indeed and as all of our viewers watch as

we've been monitoring the live shot of the airport as we call it, we've seen planes lifting. sources pushed back when there were saying there are lockdowns, that some flights are indeed getting out. that is only for those on the tarmac, that are perhaps on planes that were already taking off. the real concern now is that the semantic debate we were having in the past several days, neil, whether or not americans or allies were quote, strapped, now if you're not on that tarmac, on a flight possibly taking off, you are running out of luck and you are very dependent now on what the state department guidance will be how we get you out. neil: if we get you out. griff, thank you very, very much. and to that point here we're learning that italy is now reporting that its c-130 aircraft filled with afghan refugees came under fire at takeoff just a little while ago.

it wasn't damaged but this might be fueling that argument that the better part of valor is for planes not to take off in this environment. again on reports that a lot of these so-called isis-k fighters are surrounding the airport. this is concerted effort to do just that. this happen ad short time ago where italy was dealing with this and under fire after a jet took off. it did successfully leave the airport but that might have been the very last one that did. we'll keep you posted on that. also keeping you posted on the developments at the white house with the president. he has put off his meeting with the prime minister of israel. we don't know for how long but hillary vaughn on the latest there, hillary? reporter: hi, neil. we do know the bilateral meeting has been delayed but another meeting that the president had scheduled with governors at 3:00 p.m. this afternoon has actually been canceled. we did get an update moments ago from the white house. we do know that the president

met this morning with his national security team including secretary blinken, austin and chairman millie, also commanders on the ground in afghanistan. the white house telling us he will continue to be briefed on updates on the evolving situation throughout the day but advises there will be changes to the president's schedule. we also do know that the vice president who just touched down in guam also showed up to that national security briefing in the situation room virtually over video at 9:00 a.m. this morning with the president. she also is being actively briefed while she is out of the country on this evolving situation. but i want to touch on what we're hearing from sources. griff jenkins mentioned that memo from the state department to those congressional offices essentially saying stop talking to these sivs. stop working and encouraging people to go to the airport, to try to get evacuated because the security situation on the ground is so sensitive.

i got off the phone with one capitol hill source who has been actively working to get hundreds of special immigrant visa applicants out of afghanistan. this source tells me that they are not going to listen to that. here's the problem because this is the only way that a lot of these siv applicants or recipients have to get in contact with anyone here in the u.s. they have repeatedly told the congressional offices they have been advised to call the state department. they get an automated message, no one is actively picking up the phone as the situation is evolving here. that is how this delegation and network of congressional offices got so actively involved in trying to get these sivs. of course americans out of afghanistan because they are picking up the phone. they are a point of contact who can help monitor the situation on the ground and advise them where to go. it brings me to another tidbit

of information that we got today. we, capitol hill source confirm to us in touch with the sivs on the ground u.s. forces were welding gates at the kabul airport completely closed. the situation occurred where some of these sivs were told to go to the black gate because the abbey gate was too crowded. they went to the black gate. that is a point of entry had been in operation but just shortly before they arrived that gate was welded shut. they were told it was permanently closed. so that funneled before the explosions occurred a lot of people on the ground to go just to the abbey gate, creating a bottleneck with thousands of people crowded outside when that explosion occurred. the problem is now these people are actively seeking shelter and congressional offices are trying to find safe houses to people these people overnight. because as our reporting at fox and fox business has shown,

there is a concern these threats and the security situation is ongoing, that might not be over and that there may be more coordinated attacks occurring. as we get more updates from the white house we are hearing that the press briefing has been delayed. we will bring those updates to you. neil? neil: hillary, thank you very much. you're looking at footage today, not looking at live footage outside of kabul airport as you see planes are leaving. none have done so the past two hours. there is no way to guaranty that. we do know among the last planes to leave was the italian c-130 jet that had left under fire as it was leaving, so that could explain reluctance obviously to still have more planes from the area. these are from earlier today. these are not live images coming back. this is after reports of first explosion. this is not live what you're looking at now, i want to stress

that. ii want to bring you up to datea couple developments you often here the reference to sivs. this is an important distinction here. these refer to those who have special immigrant visas. they're like gold right now. if you got that piece of paper you're good to go. that is if you get to the airport entrance with that it is a way also for us to keep track who does have the proper paperwork to leave, how many out there are cleared to leave. so you look at the concentration of people with such documents and where they are, but here's the problem, you can't get to any of these gates that are affected. you can't get to the abbey gate where the explosion occurred. that is where most of them are drawn. you can't get to the eastgate or the north gate so where do you go? you literally have the means to find your freedom, if the taliban or anyone else doesn't rip up your paperwork, we've heard reports of that. we you now don't have that

option. you're good to go but you can't go. that is the tragedy unfolding here in light of these developments it really could dramatically affect our ability to get our people out of the country. we're getting at a pretty good clip 13,400 over the last 24 hours. about 11,000 over a 24 hour period before that. about 9,000 over the period before that to date. close to 100,000 american and afghan nationals have been evacuated from the country since the taliban retook the country. we were hoping to maintain that fast pace and clip. so that most who wanted out could get out. you're going to hear a lot of numbers thrown at you. these might not be entirely reliable. we are told there might be anywhere from 225,000 to 250,000, largely afghans who are now unable to leave this country and might never leave this country. dave sears, former navy seal

team six commander. david, if planes can't take off, we're still looking at leaving by the 31st, couldn't any of those folks are ever going to leave, are they? >> no. they're not. absolutely not. so what you just said is some of those conditions have to change to get people out. you have to extend the timeline. not a timeline anymore, make it conditions based. the taliban has not upheld order for safe passage, orderly passage, planes are coming under fire, we should feel no obligation whatsoever if we ever felt any. re-establish other airheads in bagram and other areas. we have single choke point, the single worst strategic and tactical mistake you can make. neil: i'm wondering if the taliban can control this now? if isis-k whatever you make of this group, you are probably more familiar than i, if it is revealing these you know,

visions, these factors control of afghanistan, what you do make of it? >> you're exactly right, neil. the taliban can't control isis-k. they're doing as much as they can. never mind hq. they have so many different fighting factions, warlords, different groups and especially in this urban environment. it becomes a real nightmare to secure that, to find out who the people are, where they're coming from, how do i sift through the crowds. all the refugees, everybody coming from other cities into kabul exacerbate it as well. isis-k is able to manuever between them. i don't think they can secure it. i don't think they could ever guarranty safe passage. we need to be proactive, start establishing secure routes for people to get out. neil: i'm just worried, david, about the safety of the 5200 or so soldiers we have within the kabul airport compound to say nothing of those waiting on the tarmac for flights to leave. as i said, with the intelligence

we have, they're not leaving, understandably in this environment. so play that out for me? >> so this is something relatively new i never heard of. military personnel, soldiers, our job is to protect civilians who go get them. we're willing to take that risk, and incur casualties. when you make it a simple single mission of every single u.s. citizen will come out and then we will do our best to get others out, sivs, people who worked with us, but when you make that the singular mission, the american soldier, the troop on the ground is more than willing, accepts that risk to go get u.s. civilians or people that are there in danger. neil: so we know that we're winding down, we were winding down before this attack to the tune of about a few hundred troops a day.

dave, this is the best intelligence. yours might be better, so that continues in this environment. that is again, if you can take off and leave. so they're kind of frozen in place. they were having a devil of a time just getting themselves out let alone others out. that could be a very tenuous next few days? >> it is. so what this administration has done is essentially said we're taking most of our elements, we're taking a lot of our elements of national power off of the table to accomplish the mission. they have not said the mission is to get everybody out. they have said we're going to go diplomatically, maybe people will get out. they have taken the military piece as an element of national power off the table for getting people out. i know from sources and guys i'm contacting with, there are u.s. passport holders in he will sharif and passport holders in

kandahar. they're all over the country, you make the decision to get every american out. what follows is military, diplomatic, economic, all those elements of national power to accomplish that singular mission. neil: what is going to happen to all those thousands of afghan nationals, interpreters, others, closely with our own military with the afghan government and now can't get out? what is their fate? >> you know unfortunately i think the fate of afghanistan is extended civil war. afghanistan's a new populace from when the taliban lost power. you have people that are educated. people used to a lot of western, sort of niceties to put it mildly like power and running water, at least in some of the major cities. these people are not just going to roll overallally. you see them kind of already still waving afghan flags, things like that. the taliban will crack down but you will have a resistance come

up. you still have a small piece of resistance in the pan cheer valley that can grow and expand. i think it will be a very ugly civil war for a while there. neil: you know, dave, i know you were very kind enough to stay on with us, so i appreciate that, my friend. i do want to go back to you in a bit. meanwhile, jeh johnson former homeland security secretary under president obama. secretary, always good to have you. obviously there is heighten terrorist is an understatement. do you feel there is heightened terrorist risk as a result? >> neil, thanks for having me on. over the last 20 years, neil, under multiple administrations, bush, obama, trump we have done a significant amount to degrade the ability of terrorist organizations from overseas to launch a large-scale attack on the united states on our

homeland. we went from foreign directed attacks to foreign inspired attacks. now we see threat from within from violent extremism of domestic stripe. the situation now in afghanistan is troubling. i worry that because of the nature of afghanistan and your prior guest alluded to this, it is rough terrain, much of it is ungoverned space, it is type of country where a terrorist organization looks to start up another caliphate where they can train, launch large-scale attacks and operatives to other nations. it is the situation right now is very fluid. one of the things i would like to point out is in the initial moments after a terrorist attack a lot of information you get is simply incorrect. the number of casualties is

likely to grow and once we leave afghanistan it is something we'll have to continually monitor from the so-called over the horizon capability to insure afghanistan does not revert back to a place where terrorist organizations can threaten the united states. neil: you know, secretary, we can sort of lump terrorist groups all together, they're joined at the hip, they're all on the same page when it comes to in this case terrorizing americans but in fact here with this isis-k splinter group, whatever you want to call it, they are a whole different force. difficult from what we've seen in the past, former taliban members disenchanted with the taliban because we're told the present day taliban wasn't deemed ruthless enough even though we have proof since the taliban have taken the reins certainly in afghanistan there are brutal images that have been shared with us including the

killing of a number of former top government officials, some on videotape. leaving that aside what does that mean for the future of afghanistan when we do leave, and when all these nato countries that are leaving as we speak? >> good question. and that is the main question in my judgment for our intelligence community right now. before i was head of homeland security i was general counsel for the department of defense. i know from my experience within terrorist organizations you can have rival factions. you can have more militant factions. you can have more moderate factions. you can have terrorist organizations at war with each other. the taliban right now overtly seems to try to project a moderate image to behaving is like a government. they know doubt want the afghan assets in this country unfrozen at some point, but within the taliban i'm sure we're going to

soon see more militant factions of the taliban, like the group that splintered off and formed isis q. within isis-k it may be an internal disagreement about the objectives of that terrorist organization. should they focus their efforts internally on afghanistan? should they attack western nation which will bring counter attacks on that organization? one of the things we need to come out of this discussion today with is an understanding that there has to be a price to pay if americans are harmed in any terrorist attack. so i would look for the right time and place, manner, to respond to whatever terrorist organization is responsible for today's attack. neil: you know, secretary, you're quite right to say the initial reads we get on an

attack or attacks in this case are wildly off. the best figures we have is provided by the taliban, at least a dozen killed in the attacks. they don't break it down. close to 60 injured. that echoes on the injured part what we've been reporting but the numbers could go substantially since we're told outside of the gate where the first attack happened there were thousands packed like sardines waiting to get clearance to go into the airport. leaving that aside, we're also hearing, secretary, that these isis-k soldiers, whatever you want to call them, hundreds of them have descended on, one of them was quoted in the financial times today like cockroaches on the airport and they are surrounding the airport. do you think this is an indication of a follow-up, of a follow-up strike? >> neil, i have been hearing those reports. i think we have to be concerned about that. if i were in government now, if

i were in the situation room now first thing i want to get is the best available intelligence report we can get. then frankly i would think seriously enough about one way or another we try to buy more time beyond the august 31st deadline. i'm very, very concerned, that is next tuesday by the way, i'm very concerned that deadline itself will create a crisis and a frenzy to get to the airport by whatever means. i'm looking to see buy more time, possibly enhance our troop presence there on the ground beyond the 5200 reported to be there to help secure the immediate area but i'm very worried that the deadline that everyone knows about is going to create, is going to add to the crisis that is existing right now on the ground there in kabul. neil: you know far more about this sort of stuff than i do,

secretary, but do you really think that we would extend that deadline? now in light of these developments if anything, it is going to speed it up? >> i think that today's attacks are a set back that will slow down the pace of the airlift. it was up to almost 20,000 a day we've got to make american citizens a priority, sivs a priority, others showing up who don't necessarily follow up who fall into those categories that simply want to get out of the country. we should look for ways to buy more time to alleviate the stress on the situation right now. neil: secretary, god knows the kind of stuff you were privy too and scene when you were homeland security secretary. who knows what our top officials are witnessing right now, just not sharing with us, thank you for joining us and your service to this country, sir. >> thanks, neil.

thanks for having me. neil: secretary jeh johnson, former homeland security secretary. go to chad pergram on capitol hill following on all of this. there is very little i guess the administration is sharing with them as we wait to hear from the president himself on this but what can you tell us? reporter: neil, information out of afghanistan right now is pretty fragmentary. lawmakers on capitol hill say it is hard to get concrete information because things are so fluid and fox is told is likely a coordinated event and also an ongoing event. fox is told there may be more attacks yet to come. also it is such a challenge to get information because congress is not in session. so lawmakers may be briefed locally in secure locations. fox is told there were multiple persons with suicide bomber vests on the ground there. the state department this morning reached out to congressional staff with an urgent message, they begged congressional staff to cease directing people to the airport in kabul to evacuate.

a fox is told the hill staff we're still sending messages to people trying to escape kabul this morning. part of the message incident by the state department to capitol hill today says the following, quote, all staff engaging in this type of uncoordinated messaging to people on the ground must cease due to the security situation. now gop south carolina senator lindsey graham says he advocated for days that the u.s. reopen bagram air force base. graham says the u.s. must re-establish our presence at bagram as an alternative. graham says that that was the biggest mistake of all. lawmakers from both sides have pushed the biden administration to extend operations beyond the 31st of august. the severity of events today reflect concern by congressional leaders about lawmakers free-lancing going to afghanistan on their own. seth moulton of massachusetts. peter meyer and they were -- about the administration. >> explain to them i doesn't think they should.

i think it creates a greater risk. you've got enough americans over there to be held hostage. they would make a point out after member of congress. reporter: house foreign affairs committee chairman greg meeks called the free-lancing selfish. meeks said the members were trying to get attention for themselves. neil? neil: you know, chad, we were just from jeh johnson the former homeland security secretary, the deadline, the august august 31st deadline could boomerang on us and put pressure on those at the kabul airport of something happening to them. it's a big target for those that wish us ill. he thought the administration might want to seriously consider pushing that deadline back. that seems seriously unlikely now, right? reporter: it cuts both ways.

large coalition are saying extend the deadline. not impose a artificial deadline to get people out. this cuts two-ways the idea if you bought more time, said you were going to stay longer, even if you didn't say you were going to stay longer, and just be there longer, well that does two things maybe you get more people out, gives you time to go in and fight back, maybe even get some intelligence on these sources on the ground there and figure out if there are other attacks in the mix, what the threats are. the other way though if you're, you know, you stay longer, then it invites more problems. then you have this humanitarian crisis that continues to escalate at the airport. this is really not a great set of choices that they have. neil: but just to clarify what you're saying too about those republicans, democratic congressman who flew over to afghanistan, the message from both party leaderships that stops, right? >> exactly. i was told yesterday afternoon there were members planning to go or who were enroute.

by the evening i was told that everybody a had pretty much called off the dogs. that nobody would be going at least as far as we knew. there are 535 members of congress. it is hard to keep track of all 535 of them. neil: chad, thank you very much for that. we're waiting to hear from the administration on this. jen psaki's briefing might be pushed back as they get more information. that has become routine out of this white house, getting the latest information and pushing back announcements sometimes hours as was a couple days ago when it was delayed by five hours by the president here. but i do want to bring your attention back to whatever happened at abbey gate. this was the most popular means by those which were the popular paperwork, sivs, you hear so much about, special immigrant visas would go to this gate to get access, show it to the taliban and walk through. there were we're told thousands of them, whether they all had to

paperwork or not, very unlikely, they were all crowded there when this first explosion went off and we had gotten access to some video from that night that shows quite a few lifeless bodies. that is all i can say. so those numbers that you are getting are at best premature. the idea of a dozen killed, up to 50 or more injured. that might be conservative. that was the vehicle through which a lot of people afghans in particular would gather to get to the airport and leave. there were other entrance points as well. abbey gate, eastgate, northgate, all gates are not accepting anyone. the gates and means by which you let the country, even if you have the paperwork to leave the country you cannot go there. you can have visas up the ying-yang but you are not going to leave because they will not let you go there to leave. so it is a scary time not only

for those wanting to leave but loved ones wanting to find out what happened to go them. irk that is here. reporter: relief their family members are alive. my good friend a former translate erred for the u.s. military in pakistan, his brother is with his family, wife, four very young kids, one-year-old, two-year-old in the family, they were at the airport. for the last two hours we could not get in touch with them. we didn't know where they were. we didn't know if they were okay. that was a really, a really stressful period of time for him and myself. we just made contact with them. we know they are alive and they are safe and they are on their

way back now, back to their apartments. so that is good news, but neil, my friend's brother took his wife and four kids to the airport yesterday because frankly they got tired of waiting at their apartment for the past week 1/2 on the embassy to let them know when they could come to the airport. they are sivs. they have their application in and they were told just to wait for a phone call. that phone call never came. they saw the window of opportunity to leave was closing in on them. so they felt like they had today and tomorrow to get to the airport and perhaps get out. overnight we had been discussing where they should go and unfortunately abbey gate kept coming up because that is the gate more likely you would be plucked out of a group of afghans. there are u.s. military there

that perhaps could look at your papers and find but of course i was relaying to them the risk. i was relaying to them all of the alerts that were coming in, that there could be a bomb that could go off. they knew the risk, neil. they knew the risk, they knew what they were going to have to go through. they knew they were going to be taliban checkpoints on their way there, they knew was there embassy alert for a possible suicide bombing and they took the risk, neil, and they still went. he still went with his wife and four young children. in a little bit of irony perhaps what saved him was that the taliban had essentially last night taken, essentially put up barriers, had stopped people from coming to the gates and preventing anyone that didn't have a blue passport a u.s. passport from entering in through the gates. he texted this to us last night. he said, still outside. taliban closed all the gates, not given permission. so he was prevented from getting

to one of the gates. we found out later he was not at abbey gate. he went to the southwest gate, thankfully not anywhere close to where this bomb went off. he is okay, his family is okay but i want to emphasize to these viewers at home, these families are playing a deadly game of chess with their lives. this is russian roulette for them. on one hand they're sitting at home, wondering what's going to happen, will the taliban come find them? these are people fought with the u.s. military. they were translateors. they trained the afghan military. but on the other hand they should think just go for it? there are great risks. we find out this morning those risks came into fruition. it is just incredibly tough for these families. now it appears that they're stuck you know, they're on their

way back to the apartment. they don't have a backup plan, neil. neil: you know ashiah, you know the region so well, i'm wondering when i hear these latest reports about this isis-k splinter group, hundreds of these guerrillas, whatever you want to call them, circling the airport, your mind races ahead what are they planning. these are lethal enemies of the taliban. they are former taliban fighters themselves who now don't fashion the tailed ban up to the battle. this this is who is running the show. they're at each other's throats quite literally, i'm wondering when we go, when all the other nato countries go, many of them already indicated they are going, what is left for your friends and everyone else you know there? reporter: neil, that is why we're seeing the streets of kabul practically empty.

they were when the taliban took kabul, people were so afraid, rather sit in their homes to wait for some word from the u.s. what to do next because they're so afraid of even walking out. not just women. we talk a lot about girls and women but i have friends have been telling me their male relatives refuse to go outside of their homes. it is hard because it is hard to tell who to trust. you know we still don't know the details of who carried out this bombing. we don't know about it was a man or a woman. we don't know where they came from so it is hard to tell. i went through, i wasn't there, my family was close by in pakistan in the 2016 easter bombing by the pakistani taliban. happened right next to my grandmother's home in a park that i've been too many, many times. that one really hit close to home. i was in the country on my way to the airport but i wasn't next to where it happened. i was still in the country, it

is hard to tell who to trust. hard to tell who is carrying a bomb. these people are essentially feeling they are stuck, their window of opportunity has closed likely now, they don't know what the future holds for them because you know, they worked with the americans. at least for this family in particular you know they're not just afghan refugees. they're likely their names have been likely flagged by the taliban. they're really, really worried that the taliban is going to go hunting for them. neil: just amazing. asia, thank you very much. glad to here about this. aishah hasnie following all of that. i want to bring in eric kantor, former house majority leader, his read on this. eric always good having you. you always worry, our mind races not knowing details what happened, who was behind it in the two coordinated attacks. we do know they were separate

suicide, homicide bomber attacks, whatever you want to say, don't know whether male or female. indications are this splinter group, isis-k group which seems to remind people not all terrorists are on the same page. i'm wondering what that says about about our drawdown now when they're going at it? >> neil, first of all it is heart breaking to see some images on the tv and desperation on the part of american citizens there and of course those afghans who were on our side furthering our cause. all of this reflects the consequences of the incredible mismanagement on the part of the biden administration in terms of the decisions that they have made. the botched withdrawal that they have made and frankly it is

worrisome to me because i think america as a country has taken a real hit now in terms of the leadership that we're supposed to be providing worldwide. neil: i'm just wondering what's next though, right? when we go, whether it's the 31st or as you know some have been trying to push the administration to push that back. i have no idea that will succeed or what that could imply down the road but it sounds to me like once we're gone all the europeans, all the others who have indicated they're going to leave including today, turkey, belgium, canada, denmark, i could go on and on, that it is going to be a mess. this notion that the taliban has everything under control certainly given this isis-k movement indicates just the opposite. so what do you think about the future there? >> neil, i agree. i think this whole concept

somehow we're going to rely on the leadership that the taliban is providing to usher our citizens to safety to get out of that country, number one, is preposterous. we've seen the taliban in action before and now apparently the biden administration is relying on this newfangled taliban now to trust them, to be the leaders in this country. you know i think what is more likely there is going to be a lot of unrest, a lot of civil skirmish if not war that develops in afghanistan. all of this can be prevented. that is what someone like myself who spent many, many years, been to afghanistan, been to kabul, seen the investment on the part of our troops as well as our government in terms of the blood and treasure that so many put forth. yet now, it is almost as if we're back to 20 years ago. i don't think there is any question that afghanistan is going to be now once again

sanctuary for the bad guys from which hopefully they cannot but i think more likely we'll be able to launch terror attacks globally. you know, if you ask what's next, i worry because again america is the leader of the world. this botched withdrawal and the decisions that were made at the white house i think is just a huge setback for us. and frankly not consistent with what that message that joe biden has given, that he wanted to restore our credibility globally. again very -- neil: do you think it would have been, eric, do you think it would have been any different with the prior president? i try not to delve into the politics of this, of course donald trump wanted us out of there in may. would have had a more severe drawdown in troops. the biden folks have come back to say is their political wont,

we inherited this plan. we pushed it back a little bit. would it have been different? now the former president himself said it would have been different he never tolerated this. there is no way of knowing that but do you think the stage was set when we legitimatized and talked to the taliban and assumed that they would be honorable? >> my assumption, my belief in secretary of state pompeo and the others in the administration prior the decision to withdraw would have been premised on conditions on the ground. i have to be that was the context which any discussions with the taliban was occurring and, that this just would not have happened. now, you know, hindsight is 2020. you can't tell but at the end of the day when this administration, the biden administration is the one responsible now, the american people i think have spoken in terms of polling. they don't want our troops in afghanistan. but the fact of the matter is,

if we're going to be the leader of the world, we demonstrated our ability to maintain the piece in europe, with the troops in germany and the ability to maintain the peace on the korean peninsula, with remaining troops there. again i think true leadership is about stepping up an demonstrating that america is committed to doing that. i think neil, the consequences of our not doing that i think are again worrisome to me, if you remember, you know, globally from an economic standpoint we, we benefit tremendously from the fact that the u.s. dollar is the world's reserve currency. that respect and that trust in the dollar is inextricably tied not only to the size of our economy and our capital markets but it is tied to our military might and capability. and that's again another sign which points to the weakness in terms of this administration and the decision making that occurred and the botched

withdrawal that we're seeing unfold in front of us. neil: so you think that if there was this complete, you know, panic with the government collapsing, the prior administration, any other administration might have reacted more dramatically, it might have taken the fight even at the risk of prolonging and extending the deadline they didn't want to extend? >> well, begin i think, i cannot imagine that there wasn't an assessment on the part of the intelligence community, that predicted these things could have happened. and yet in light of that, this administration and the president made the call to proceed with this move. clearly that was not the right decision to be made. and we continue to hear from the white house that oh, as the american people will be on our side because they didn't want us in afghanistan to begin with, i don't think the american people like to lose.

i think that this country wants america to lead the world. we want the adherence globally to the rule of law, to human rights, the rights of minorities and women and the rest, something we're not going to see in afghanistan at this point. so you know, again you can look at the polls but i do think true leadership was not on display here. we're paying the price for it we have u.s. citizens on the ground in afghanistan as well as our allies who fought along ourside the afghans who are also paying the price. >> we'll see what happens, eric, very good catching up to you former house majority leader. want to give you an update on what little we do know of these two twin attacks. they occurred half an hour after each other or between each other. one at this gate that you heard a great deal about, abby gate, which generates the most traffic of those who want to leave the country. you have to process your

paperwork, show it to guards and if you're lucky, they will let you in. that's where most folks go when we're told thousands did at this abbey gate which tends to be far busier than the eastgate, the northgate, other entrances from the airport. that is cordoned off by taliban solers. we heard brutal stories how they handle that, ripping up or taking paperwork from those that leave the country. and god knows what else. what we mr. wondering about, how many were hit in this attack. they are officially saying right now that you know, we've had about dozen people killed and up to 52 to 60, depends on the source have been injured but some of the folks on the scene, some of the video that made its way to us seems to indicate numbers that are far, far higher. just no way of knowing but

griff jenkins is following this very, very closely at the state department. this notion of holding off all departures from the airport because at least one plane, an italian plane was hit by fire. it got out, but as far as we know that is the last plane that did. that was close a little more than two hours ago. griff jenkins with more. hey, griff. reporter: neil, things are very fluid at the state department and it is worth reminding our viewers that the state department has had the lead in this non-combatant evacuation operation since august 14th, continue to have that lead and nothing is more important right now, hour by hour, minute by minute than tracking the 1500 roughly americans that they believe are now stranded being told from the alert that we reported on just two hours ago telling americans to avoid traveling to the airport and if you are at that abbey gate, east

gate, northgate, leave immediately. they will be told to follow the instructions. we heard the state department telling congressional offices on the hill not to encourage independent operations in coordinating any of those americans or afghan allies with siv applications approved to come to the airport. however we dead get an update here just moments ago, neil. that is the story of the california, southern california cajon valley area schoolchildren. they were afghan nationals resettled in california. they were over in afghanistan traveling during the summer, visiting family members back there. we've learned from congressman darrell issa that some of those families and children have gotten out safely. darrell issa thanking the team working tirelessly to get people but he also wants to put the attention on much more work left to do under extremely difficult

situations. now another important point we need to remind our viewers, neil, is that while secretary blinken yesterday warned of the quote, hostile environment and likelihood that we could be facing an attack from isis-k, now confirmed, that he would be dependent after the august 31st deadline on the taliban's cooperation in getting americans or afghan allies out. that now is on an entirely different footing because we do not know how long the threat will be or the attacks will continue possibly at the airport, meaning that we may now be in a situation with how many americans are left behind. they will be dependent whatever comes after that deadline this coming tuesday. now if you break down the roughly 1500 we don't have an update on the status. we do know the state department was in direct contact with about 500 of them. another 1000 they were aggressively trying to reach. we don't know where those things

stand with the 500 actively trying to evacuate. neil? >> griff, thank you very, very much. the taliban just tweeted, they can still tweet by the way on this attack saying it is not us. don't blame us. quoting here, the islamic emirate strongly condemns the bombing of civilians at kabul airport which took place in an area where u.s. forces are responsibility for security. that is not correct. the taliban is. there are no u.s. forces at this point. having said that the islamic i am mir -- emirate paying close attention to its people. evil circles will be strictly stopped. dave sears, former seal team six commander what do you think about that, dave, it is not us, blame the americans? >> yeah, i'm pretty surprised they're able to get through a taliban check. i think there is complicity in this. there is no way you're getting suicide bombers with the

pictures that you're showing and the amount of explosives that would take to cause that, that somehow they're able to get past taliban checkpoints. this is unbelieverrable and, you still again, you cannot rely on the taliban. we need to take a different tact. state department no longer needs to be in charge of this. it should go back to the department of defense and some heads there that can be used better. neil: you know, dave, i'm trying to connect dots that are days old, you're so much better than this, meeting the cia director had with the top taliban leader, right? presumably that greased the skids for the president sticking to this august 31st departure. it got my mind going, which is always a dangerous signal, was, was the taliban's first attempt to throw out the possibility of these other elements, this

isis-k group, whatever you want to call them, that they could rain on the american exodus parade here, don't blame us? furthermore they're saying other intelligence is such that you don't want to extend your welcome here. it is going to get very dangerous and very messy, not us, we're just saying these other guys. it has like an evil compact to it but what do you make of it? >> absolutely, it is plausible deniability what they're trying to establish and sit there we'll have it both ways. we want you out. we're not the bad guys. we're the new taliban, whatever you want to call it, 2.0, 3.0. concerned about climate change and human rights, just not humans we don't like. we're going to be the peaceful ones. it is all these other people that will be the problem. so don't point at us. don't drop a bomb on our governing body here or wherever we're sitting in this capital.

it's a joke. we need to recognize it as a joke. the taliban have never been trustworthy. they have never been. treat it as such and move forward. neil: i just wonder, i try not to play politics with this, i know you don't, the notion this would not have occurred under the prior administration, i don't know how that fosters solving this but what do you think? no one could have predicted the rapid decline and tumult in the government, even to your credit you actually did see a lot of it coming but that people are playing politics with this? >> they are. people are playing politics with it. i don't know how different it would have been under the either administration. you had between generals admirals, politicians that have played with ulterior motives behind afghanistan, that they never had a succinct mission what they're doing. we go back to 2001 when the taliban offered to unconditionally surrender. we said no, we would rather invade. this whole thing, i don't know how it would be and you

different administration. it is not useful to drive the car looking in the rear view mirror. learn from it. neil: yeah. i hear you. dave, thank you so much and again to your service for this country actually walk the talk and then some. bottom line going back rear view mirror in his point doesn't do much good. we'll look forward here. what do we do now, after this. gold. your strategic advantage. ♪♪ ♪♪

that building you're trying to buy, ♪♪ - you should ten-x it. - ten-x it? ten-x is the world's largest online commercial real estate exchange. you see it. you want it. you ten-x it. it's that fast. if i could, i'd ten-x everything. like... uh... these salads. or these sandwiches... ten-x does the same thing, but with buildings. sweet. oh no, he wasn't... oh, actually... that looks pretty good. see it. want it. ten-x it. yum! (vo) at t-mobile for business, unconventional thinking means we see things differently, so you can focus on what matters most. whether it's ensuring food arrives as fresh as when

it departs. being first on the scene, when every second counts. or teaching biology without a lab. we are the leader in 5g. #1 in customer satisfaction. and a partner who includes 5g in every plan, so you get it all. without trade-offs. unconventional thinking. it's better for business.

♪♪ neil: all right, we are learning right now from the "wall street journal" that four u.s. marines were among those killed in the first explosion outside that gate right north -- or south, i should say is, of kabul airport. that was abbey gate where most of those who who had the proper paperwork or assumed they did would gather to be let in by the taliban. a u.s. ambassador said the four u.s. marines were killed in the explosion, three were woundedded. two two other explosions ripped through crowds of afghans trying to enter the airport. that was earlier today, but part of the same series of explosions. is so you'll hear these reports, one explosion at the gate when, in fact, there might have been multiple ones. and then, of course, at hotel nearby.

the parent hotel nearby frequented by westerners, even u.s. troops. that was a separate attack. depending what numbers you buy right now, close to a dozen killed. that would apparently include the four u.s. marines and a number of other foreigners among those injured, close to 90 -- close to 60 of hem. these are moving numbers and moving targets. also, the taliban is out putting out a statement or at least one of its top officials on turkish tv saying, and i quote, targeting innocent civilians is an act of terrorism that the whole world should condemn. now, this is a taliban person saying this, that attacking end innocent civilians is a bad thing. but that as it may, this same official is telling turkey's tv that as soon as the airport situation is figured out expect foreign forces leave, quote, we will not have such attacks anymore. all right. for the time being, they do not

have control of that airport, we do, but it is now a very tightly-guarded compound and on high alert right now. hillary vaughn at the white house on what the commander in chief is saying or thinking about all of this. what can you tell us, hillary? >> reporter: we're still waiting to hear frommed president biden. we've had multiple events that were planned for today postponed, delayed or canceled. we would expect that at some point, especially with the updates that you mentioned, neil, with four u.s. troops killed in that attack, that we would hear from the president himself at some point today. we have not received any guidance that that is imminent or that that is happening. we also do know that the white house press briefing that was supposed to be happening last hour has been delayed indefinitely, but with we expect that that will happen today at some point. we're also working to confirm some updated numbers about the number of civilians that were

injured in these dual attacks today. "the new york times" is reporting that at least 40 people were killed in these explosions, 120 people are are injured and are currently at hospitals around kabul, and 60% of those injured in the hospital are in critical condition. we also are getting reaction from the taliban. a spokesperson for that group issuing in this tweet saying the islamic emirates strongly condemns the bombing of civilians at kabul airport which took place in an area where u.s. forces are responsible for security. the islamic emirates is paying close attention to the security and protection of its people and evil circles will be strictly sought. now, we are waiting to get any confirmation or any group to claim responsibility for who was behind these attacks. obviously, the taliban is trying to distance themselves from any responsibilityif through that ing. we aweo dls dooo from fromm

lltehathhaert ethere are off isi is-k ter he area, a b yth yet have h navote claedlala responlisitybi, sibi welsid fging from t ry s sigcant.nt's h had alear cl s aihe ations, tns u.s p presencreeree will beft a tpoeses will be aend orsrs force fl. we've mae ma clear to the talibn that any attack oncessr disr of ourrations aonts the aport wilrtl met wit t and f ffule. so at this point, the president has drawn a very fine line towards the taliban that if any situation like this were to occur, there would be a response. but the taliban saying that they are not responsible for this, at least through their spokespeople x. so we're waiting the hear what happens next, what the messaging from the president will be and what the next step will be coming from the commander in chief.

neil: neil you know, hillary, it's interesting, when you hear the taliban's official position on this, they're saying it's our fault, it's the americans' fault. e isville circles will be strictly stopped saying as well this took place in an area where u.s. forces are responsible for security, but almost everything else we've been told indicates that it's the taliban that controls the access points, these various kuwaits including -- gates, including the heavy gate, and that they decide who gets through and who doesn't. >> reporter: yeah, exactly. they're inside the airport securing that area. outside the airport along the perimeter and extended throughout is, of course, the taliban that is controlling and checking and deciding who they're going to let through and who they're not going to let through. so there is obviously a very

strong taliban presence, military presence there that is blockading people from accessing the airport, and then they have the control to relate people in. to let people in. so it is misleading and incorrect to say that this is an area since the explosion happened outside the airport, that this is an area that is controlled by u.s. forces. of course, the taliban not taking responsibility for this and trying to blame the u.s. and troops on the ground there for not securing itfectively. but you're right, they don't have control over this area. and if they did, sivs and americans would be getting through 100% of the time which we know is not the case and is not happening. neil: also not happening, to your point, hillary, at these gates and anyone being allowed to go to them. so all these thousands who want to leave and depending on the number, 250,000, i is are no idea, it just seems to increase every day. they're not allowed to go there,

so how the heck do they get out, paperwork or no? >> reporter: exactly x. that's exactly the struggle that we're hearing from people who are actively working to not only get americans out there are remaining there, but these sivs, special immigrant visa holders as well. many congressional offices are trying to secure safehouses for these individuals because it's not safe to be at airport. the state department has issued guidance saying none of these gates are accessible, people should not be going to the airport. but the situation was put to me like this from one source i talked to who's at least been inning contact with over 300 different individuals trying to fete them out, basically said these sivs know they either show up and risk their life and go to the airport or they stay where they are and they die. that is the choice that these individuals are facing. so it should not be, you know,ty lawsuited, really -- diluted,

reallying it can life and death situation that these individuals are facing right now and this increasingly dangerous situation outside the airport really puts them in a bad situation. they either choose to risk their life staying where they are, or they choose to risk their life trying to get out. neil: yeah. hillary, thank you for your just great reporting on this. again, we can confirm right now that "wall street journal" report and others as well, four u.s. marines were killed in that first explosion, the one at the abbey gate, the most popular, the most crowded of all the gates. some of the video coming in here is, to put it mildly, horrific. but end again, it's still early on in the process here. concerns building within the kabul airport, reports of isis-k fighters, hundreds of them, now ringing the airport followed by one account, no idea whether that could be hinting of a

follow-up attack or just making things difficult for the talibanand/or us. keep in mind that the taliban and isis-k are not fast friends. these two apparently are not bedfellows and, in fact, this isis-k group is a splinter group itself of taliban in pakistan, disaffected and unimpressed by the taliban saying that it had lost the fight and wasn't showing the fight. if you believe that. want to go to chad pergram right now on capitol hill because, chad, i would imagine confirmation of the death of four u.s. marines has changed the equation here yet end again. what do you make and what are people telling you? >> reporter: absolutely. this was a time when congress was in session. you would have reporters chasing members up and down the halls trying to get information. congress is not in session is. there's no members here right now, very few, in fact. and that does not diminish the number of questions that they

have. does the united states now today longer? do they send in more troops? what's the risk that is imposed because of that, you know, with other terrorist attacks, and what happens to current troops in afghanistan? does the u.s. extend the mission if or does the go in somehow with a bolstered international to coalition? all house members were briefed on afghanistan this week, tuesday. you had the defense secretary, lloyd austin, come in, secretary of state tony blinken, and the run resounding message from most members was that they wanted to stay longer. as ai said to you last hour, if members say let's stay longer, does that impose a greater risk to u.s. forces. this is why this is such a tough decision for members of congress and for the biden administration. if you stay longer, you incur more risk like we saw today. and i've been told repeatedly this morning, neil, that this is part of an ongoing operation, an ongoing terror operation, and so there might be other explosions and other suicide bombers to

come. we'll see. but the other thing is if you pull everybody out, what happens to these americans who are still on the ground, what happens to all these afghans, interpreters and fixers who were on the ground for so long who helped. and then you have this tremendous humanitarianing situation where you have these people boxed in by the airport with the scant hope that maybe they would be able to get out sometime between now and the 31st. i want to draw you back to one other thing here. this is -- you've heard me say this before, this is beware the eyes of august. i realize the i'ds would be the -- i'd would be the middle of the month, but some of the most bizarre political news often unfolds in a august, and this is a case study of that we three or four days to go. you have this news vacuum that sometimes happens, things started ramping up badly about a week and a half ago here. the biden administration, they were trying to focus attention on congress working on the infrastructure bill, trying to

focus attention on getting this budget framework together for the social spending plan, and all of that has gone away. it's not to say they won't do those things at some point, but right now everybody is trained on afghanistan. bear with me one second here, i just got one bit of information here. i thought that might be something, my phone just buzzed, someone i've been texting back and forth, but no new information yet. you know, members have really been struggling to get information because the administration itself doesn't know much. you know, they're on the phone, they're on e-mail, and here's something else significant. there has been kind of a rough operation that's formed here on capitol hill where members' offices have been trying every possible thing they can dealing with contacts in the region, flexing their political muscles to get people out of afghanistan. and you had this statement that was sent today by the state department saying, you know, look, we ask you to cease sending people to the airport.

that's a dangerous situation is and we don't want you guys to be doing this right now. and hillary vaughn reported earlier that some of these offices said, no, no, we're going to continue to do this. and this is why you had people like seth moulton and peter meijer from michigan freelancing, going to afghanistan on their own to try to see what the situation was on the ground and then trying to get people out on their own. and this is the conundrum that these lawmakers face, what can they do now with these thousands of people that they're still trying to evacuate if the u.s. is, you know, ceasing that operation and getting an official statement like that from the state department. neil? neil: you know, if i'm reading the tea leaves right and some of the signals the administration is serving, it's not going to change that august 31st deadline. be very unlikely to. and i'm wondering how will congress react in -- react? >> reporter: well, i'm going to go to nuts and bolts here.

later this afternoon we're to be briefed, members of the press, on the defense policy bill, the annual defense policy bill they're going to start to assemble in the next couple of week here, and i have been told for a couple of days now that you will see language inserted into that bill or attested to be inserted probably by democrats and republicans to influence what we're doing in afghanistan. now, it's probably going to take a little bit of time before that bill actually passes and, certainly, you have to get it through the senate before it becomes law, but there's going to be language and amendments and proposals in that bill that will -- that dictate, to tense by, what -- ostensibly, what our path forward is in afghanistan; whether we stay longer, whether we administer money. remember, we have to fund the government by the 30th of september, maybe to get people funded if they decide more of a military operation is what they need. you know, and that's the problem the biden administration has. if they just withdraw, you know, they look bad because it was the whole cut and run idea.

if they stay, that flies in the face of the idea that therm going to get out by -- they were going to get out by the 31st of august. there is truly a no-win situation. and a lot of folks are going to jump true arely into the politics, it takes a while to figure out what the situation is. there's a lot of hot takes right now. we're probably a couple three weeks away from truly understanding what the resonance of this is with the public and maybe what the electoral consequences might be in 2022 or 2024. neil: you're quite right, my friend. it's too early to be doing any of that stuff, and we try to's choose that here and just stick on what's happening right now and what could happen in the hours ahead because, obviously, the latest news is of these al-qaeda operatives but even though they're not al-qaeda operatives, isis-k operatives or who are now surrounding the airport. again, our policy here is we'll

not delve into the politicses. various people are fond of the former president, equally. fond of the present president. have at it right now. i feel there's a good time for commissions and all that to look into what transpired and when, who was at fault and how. but right now with four u.s. marines killed, scores of others killed as well, dozenings injured, some seriously in light of these attacks, and now this isis-k movement circling the airport, that is the immediate focus here, and that is where i hope we can be of some value to you just trying to get a sense of what could come next. let's go to washington lead paris. he knows -- walid phares, knows the region well. fox news national security analyst. what is this isis-k group up to? if they were the ones behind this, and they are not owning up to it. we know the taliban is disavowing it. be that as it may and what stock you put in that, what do you

think they're planning right now? i'm talking about the isis k who, apparently, are fringe elements of the old taliban, dissatisfied with the old taliban, broken off. they've conducted attacks on the present taliban that now controls afghanistan in the past. so what are we looking at here? >> neil, let's unpack in this a little bit. so isis-k is, in fact, daish, a group that you mentioned about six years ago broke off from the taliban in communication with isis, mostly from central asia, afghanistan and neighborhood. and what they want really at the end of the day is exactly what the taliban want, but they want to be in charge instead of the taliban. to compare it to middle eastern issues, that would with the equivalent or comparable to hamas that controls gaza and palestinian islamic jihad, that is a little bit more exextremist. but at the end of the day, hamas controls gaza.

so what we have here in afghanistan is at the end of the day, taliban controls everything. and there are those groups and subgroups. some of these groups are actually guided by the taliban or close to the taliban like al-qaeda. isis-k, as they call it, is not that much guided by the taliban, but the taliban can deter them. let me give you one quick example if, i have been hearing this all day or the past five, six hours. the taliban said they control every single inch around the airport. they have multilayered system of security. so anybody coming from theoutside into the airport will be are checked by the taliban. [laughter] and we know that the taliban knows the other jihadists when they see them. they can run a lot of data on them. so this is, raise the question of are the taliban being penetrated by this isis-k, or did the taliban knew about these missions, suicide missions and let happen so that they can issue this press release and say, oh, we are the moderate

ones, this is not good, we will help. just when the americans will leave, everything is perfect. that betrayed what they were trying to say, and that, to me, is very, very serious to analyze. neil: you know, again, you know these groups far better than i, but it does presumely when the taliban essentially lump this on the americans because they're in charge of those checkpoints and gates when, in fact, the taliban controls who gets into that airport. and outside of three rescue missions with we've conducted at night, we don't go anywhere near those checkpoints. by design, it's orders, you know, you can argue whether that as a wise strategy, but the taliban is already lying about that. >> i would ask the spokesperson of the taliban who's so sophisticated, spent so many years in doha so we learned a lot about pr -- neil: right. >> -- so where would these suicide bombers bin? if they begin inside the base, so how did they get in?

if they begin outside that perimeter, it means the taliban allowed them to go in or they were penetrated. either way you have a problem with the taliban's statement, neil. neil: so these people, thousands thousands -- depending on the number, up to 250,000 -- have been told don't bother coming anywhere near the airport and days are ticking down, you know, five days away to when we promised to be out of there including our soldiers, what is their fate? >> the problem from the beginning, although i agree with you, we can't look back now, we have to solve this problem. but just a few days ago, couple weeks ago, the security perimeter that was established was too tight, and we had the ability when we were withdrawing to to tell the taliban, red line. we are heading 12 miles, we are having 25 -- we are having a safe area, and we were able before we shut down bagram to establishing this, and we could have spent all the time we needed. not a long time.

problem now is that the taliban are at the gate, and if they are at the gate, they are suffocating any process. the other mistake was to shut down other airfields in afghanistan. now we are with what we have, and what we have is really a strong, a very strong message not just to the taliban, i'm going to be very clear here. for those who are behind the taliban and those who are supporting them in the negotiations because those we can speak with, and i'm very career, it's to qatar -- clear here. it's to qatar. they have been funding them and supporting them at least in qatar, we've seen this, so let's use this ally. really they are our allies. neil: got it. walid thank you so much, my friend. i do appreciate that. again, this will be the question going forward, the fate of all of these afghan nationals who wanted to get out and have the paperwork. you often hear about these sivs, these special immigrant

visas, look at it as sort of a fast pass of the visa a process. if you're trying to get a visa or a passport very quickly, you pay a premium for that so that the state department rush you back that, but you want to get out of the country fast. these are those kinds of things on steroids, and it used to be we only submitted about 3,000 of them a year. i don't have a final count, but if you had that paperwork, manage oh, man, that gold. you just show that as a special stamp and then you are cleared to the front of the line. now, there has been a lot of controversy of late that even if you had those fads, the bottom line is the taliban would look at it and say, no, you're not getting through. since they control the entry point -- by the way, not americans, taliban, no matter what they're saying otherwise -- you're not getting through no matter what you have. if you have that paperwork -- people have had fistfights to steal such documents just to

have them to get through. so now you have thousands upon thousands of afghans who had this paperwork, right? and you're told it's not going if to do you much good because you can't get to the gate. you can't get to the abbey gate, can't get to the east gate, you can't get to any gate, so you might as well today home. and what really makes that kind of iffy for you and a bit of a security concern for you is that you know the taliban has separately been going from house to house, maybe your house, and saying do you know the former government, did you work with anyone in the former government, friendly to anyone in the u.s.? we understand you were an interpreter for u.s. soldiers. you know how that goes. and the one thing they would cling to are those little documents, and they'd cling to that and say i have that, i'm gold, i got it, i can get out. now they can't. days are ticking down, and their fate is up in the air. let's go to senator joe lieberman, the former connecticut senator, former

democratic vice president, candidate. senator, for those folks, this is about the most depressing development i can imagine. what do you think. >> well, absolutely. it's depressing, it's infuriating. i mean, it comes back to the point that you and i discussed last week, neil, which was that the decision to withdraw from afghanistan was not justified by the facts on the ground. the argument that this was our longest war was not truthful because we were not if at war anymore in afghanistan. we were performing, essentially, a counterterrorism mission and giving a kind of back-up moral support to the afghan government and military, particularly the threat of the use of american air power against the taliban. the tragic deaths of u.s. marines in afghanistan today at

the hand of terrorists would be the first deaths of any american troops in afghanistan for more than a year. and that a says it all. we hadn't lost a soldier in afghanistan for more than a year. now it's open season, and this isis-k is just the beginning of it. al-qaeda will come back, isis will come back. and, you know, no matter what pretty face the taliban is putting on today, they're a terrorist group. they've brutally killed civilians for years. they've raped women, they've taken women as wives, as basically sex slaves, and i don't see that they're going the change, but i certainly don't see affiliated like-minded, radical islamist terror the u.s. groups are just going to pour into afghanistan, use it as a face to scrape americans and other enemies of those groups. and if that's what our 2500

troops were stopped and why they never should have been removed from afghanistan. neil: for the timing being, we e double that within the compound of the airport. i think it was -- got close to 6,000, senator, and now it's down to 5400 level, a few hundred going every day. i don't know how that's been impacted by these late developments here, but i do wonder what we do. i mean, if people can't get to the airport and get out of the country and we've been seeing planes leaving every 35, 39, 40 minutes, and now stymied and then an italian jet that was attacked by gun fire, now we have to weigh the safety of the rescuers, right, and rescuing people out. so whether we extend the deadline or not, and it doesn't look like the president will. that could change.

what do these next few days look like to you? >> i'm afraid it's going to be chaos, heartbreak and perhaps more deaths. and in the end, though the evacuation has picked up a really significant number of people, it's hard to imagine by august 31st that every american who wants to leave will be out, and it's clear that tens of thousands of afghans who we ought to bring out because they helped us and who will become targets of the taliban after we leave totally are never going to make it out. and, i mean, here's the reality, the painful reality, taliban is in charge of the country. i don't think the biden administration wanted to stay after august 31st until the taliban said you not going -- you're not going to, and the biden administrationed said, okay, if that's what you want, we gotta get out. but the mission will not be completed.

and, again, this tragic day reminds us that without -- 2500. i know there's 6,000 now, but that's temporary for the evacuation. it was only a 2500 there on a permanent basis, but that was enough to stop terrorism there based against us and our allies and to give moral support to the afghans and to set the taliban back. why break that balance for no good reason will be? so we're paying, we're reaping the whirlwind right now, and it's going to be a deadly one, i'm afraid. neil: you know, it's all numbers now, senator, to your point. and i don't know whose numbers to believe, but the best you can go on is this estimate we have a 1500 americans till waiting to be evacuated, 500 of those we've not been able contact. i don't know if that's right or how it is we've been unable to contact them. be that as it may, the vast majority of the nearly 100,000

who have been evacuated since the taliban took over overwhelmingly were not americans at all. they were these afghan nationals and those that have helped in the cause. so what's to stop the administration from saying we didn't get everybody out, but we got most everybody out? i suspect if they don't move the deadline arguing and balancing that with safety, that a that is the pitch they're going to make. it's not a great way to leave the country, but it could have been a lot worse. and most got out. that's my gut saying that, and i could be very wrong, sir, but i'm wondering what you make of that. if that is the final argument, we leave the 31st, there's still some americans behind but not nearly as many, there are still foreigners who are able to go, not nearly as many, that that's how they're going to justify it. what do you think? >> yeah, i think you're very right in that expectation. i think that's exactly what the

administration will say. but the reality is it seems to me from what we've seen that there was very little significant planning for the evacuation. you know, members of congress saying months ago, they pleaded with the administration and representatives at hearings, if you're going to pull out, however we feel about that decision, you've got to start evacuating people and equipment now, but that didn't happen. and then a deadline was set for getting out, and it just very hard notwithstanding all the people they got out to get everybody out who you want to get out, then you want -- the president of the united states, the commander in chief of the most powerful country in the world wants to extend the deadline past august 31st, and the taliban, the leader of the taliban, a terrorist group, says, no way. and we say, okay, august 31st, it is. i mean, it's a terrible time for the u.s., and again i say the

decision to withdraw 2500 american troops from afghanistan was absolutely unjustified and unnecessary by the facts on the ground. and it's just going to be chaos for a long time as a result of that decision. a lot of people are going to suffer. neil: you know, senator, i'm just wondering about the message anyone if sends, a republican administration or democratic administration, when they don't talk about it or when they refuse to acknowledge the elephant in the room. in this case, the violent implosion of a country. every room that has a television around the world can see it playing out and yet focus on things that just seem by comparison kind of half-assed. you're talking about a $3.5 trillion human infrastructure package, fine but now's not the time. you're celebrating political victories under the best of conditions, fine. now's not the time. it just shows such a tin ear to

what's going on, and i understand, you know, the administration's point here, you know, we can walk and chew gum at the same time. i get that, but the disproportionate focus on stuff that, to a lot of people -- forget about in this country, around the world -- doesn't matter versus something like in that goes into living rooms, again, all over the globe that clearly does. it seems to be compounding the problem and the disconnect. and i'm wondering how that affects the u.s.' position going forward no matter what happens after the 31st. >> well, that's an excellent point. look, political leaders, when they're on the defensive, and honestly maybe even they themselves realize they made a mistake or a decision they made such as this one to withdraw, it's had consequences beyond what they imagined. there's a tendency to want to spin it.

i think we saw it in the last administration, we've seen it in this one now. but people can see with their own eyes as a result of modern telecommunications, social media. so we see the suffering. and now we've seen the deaths including the murder by terrorists of the u.s. marines which cries out for an american response. how we do it in this situation in a country now controlled by terrorists, taliban, i don't know. but you are right, neil. the best way to deal with this, honestly, even though you may think it's going to expose you if you're a leader to accountability, it's to tell the truth. based on what you should know the people are seeing every day on their tv sets or on social media. and in some ways, there's been a lag between the instincts of leaders who are on the defensive

and the omni presence of modern social media and telecommunications. and it's the leaders who suffer. in this case, it's the credibility of the president of the united states and, i'm afraid, of the united states itself. and when we lose our credibility, we lose our strength, we lose our security. and in the end, our lives and our freedom may be compromised. those are heavy prices to pay. so it's better to own up and tell the truth that people are seeing himselfs than to try to convince them that what they're seeing and hearing is not actually happening, which they know is not true. neil: yeah. it is wild stuff. senator, always good seeing you. i think my italian dad a had wisdom on this. if everyone else is talking about you, you might as well try to to get your two cents in. [laughter] >> he was a wise man. thank you. neil: he was.

as are you. joe lieberman, thank you for that. rob o'neil with us, former navy seal, the man who was responsible for leading the team that killed osama bin laden. rob, i'm reminded of a taliban press conference just a short time ago in which the taliban spokesman said there's really no proof that osama bin laden was even behind the 9/11 attacks. of course, the same group that now says americans were in charge of these checkpoints where these explosions happened, particularly the one at the abbey date, that it's on them -- gate, that it's on them, it's not on us. an organization that forged attacks on individuals and innocent citizens we'ring the incredible series -- weaving the incredible series of statements that at the very least bend inning credulity, what do you make of that? >> well, neil, long before the bin laden raid, we were in combat with these same groups of

people. one of my jobs was called the battlefield interrogator where we caught these weaklings, who they really are, and interrogated them. and what i learned and we're learning right now is they're going to lie to us. they don't need to tell us the truth because it's not a legitimate government. these are what we call terrorists. it's just a sad day. you could see last week on social media, you saw a lot of anger and frustration from veterans predicting what's going to happen. it was sadness and now it's shame. i was on an interview earlier today, and i told them they're going to bring -- because we allowed the that'll barnes a lot of them wearing our group morals, by the way -- uniforms, by the way, we allowed them so close, they're going to bring in someone close and the first responders are going to get shot. we're eye to eye with these guys, and they don't take us seriously anymore because we did everything exactly the wrong way. it's just sad to see. i'm a big believer, look, we can sit here and play the blame game all the time.

doesn't matter how we got here, we're here. here we are, what do we do now? it doesn't matter that it's second and 15. here we are, now let's do something. neil: very well put, rob. i'm curious, i'd love your thoughts on this isis-k group, this splinter, former taliban, pakistani taliban group that broke off and and now these reports that it might have been behind these attacks. they're certainly not claiming it. the taliban seems to be pointing the finger, but that as it may, we do know that hundreds of them are circling the airport as we speak. what are they up to? >> well, it's a matter of war lords really. these are the same people, just matters which flag they fly. the taliban has the biggest footprint there, and some of these isis-k guys are just guys who decided they want the take over the taliban, and they become warring factions in the same country. it's been like that since before we were a country. so they want the kill each

other, they want chaos, and they know they can kill taliban while they're getting to our troops. they're shooting at planes coming in and out, and we haven't even really given the marines authorization to shoot back. now that we've lost four marines, it's become very, very personal now, and it's more kind of a nudge-nudge til midterms -- wait till mid items going on in the beltway. this was the same administration that last week was threatening marines if you don't get the vaccine, we're going to kick you out. the same administration said if there's any attacks on our troops, there will be a violent response. well, let's do it. neil: yeah. well, this has been a violent attack, right? is we're waiting for that response here. i'm wondering about the next few days and what could happen. we've already anticipated or sent the strongest signals that we're leaving on the 31st. that could change, and i get that, rob. seems unlikely to me. you might know more. look, we're also hearing that the brits are not doing that.

boris johnson on the wires a short time ago indicating that his country's still going to try to ferret out and find its people, get them the hell out of there. don't know how to he plans or they plan to do that, but others have already folded up their rescue tent, turkey can, belgium, canada, denmark, germany, the netherlands saying we're packing up and leaving now. what do you make of all of this? >> well, i mean, it's up to us. we normally are the leader on the world stage, but we're pretty much proving now that we don't have the stomach to do it anymore. what we need to do is, i mean, it's difficult, but it's not really that hard to do. it's going to be dangerous. we need to reestablish and expand our footprint, what we're doing there, we need to really drop our stupid rules of engagement and pretty much let 'em know -- because it's chaos out there. it's not like a tsa line at dca, you know? it's chaos. we need to, you know, get the word out.

we need to be a little chaotic and let 'em though anyone if outside right now with a gun, we're going to kill you. the taliban and isis probably have our uniforms because we gave them so many uniforms, but it's time to move, time to kill people and time to rescue people. we're not going to get there negotiating with terrorists. i'm pit sure we used to -- pretty sure we used to say we don't negotiate with terrorists. now we have american blood on our hands. i mean, it's all of us. we need to get in the fight together. we have a common enemy, and just because we don't think we're at war with someone is doesn't mean they're not at war with us. they've proved it just right now. four wonderful marines were lost, and it's just shameful. neil: we do know it's galvanized the extreme on social media. we're told that the noise is such that it's galvanized and jazzed them to a group. and sometimes the groups are disparately different, even at war with one another, but that they now see this as a great

embarrassing moment for the great satan, the united states. this is me asking and taking the next leap here, what do you think their plans are now? >> well, i mean their plans are to continue with the chaos. this is not like the last attack that we've seen on our forces at bagram. we're going to see planes shot at, which we already have. we're to a point right now where some of the state department's ideas are to get with a lot of -- their radios out there, get on one of their airplanes. you know, there's, the caa's trying to -- cia's trying to work with civilians, trying to get helicopters. they see us as weak, which we are right now, we are not organized whatsoever. this is the time to attack and, unfortunately, this is not the last one. i hope they don't shoot an aircraft down. we still have ability to get in there and fight, but we're making this political talking points. we said we're going to get out,

we're going to get out. sometimes there's time to stop and fight. not even stop and fight, but move forward and fight. neil: all right. rob o'neill, very good seeing you. i'm sorry under these circumstances, rock, but a very good read on what's happening there. we're going to take a quick break here. this has had zero effect on the markets, i might point out. we can say that they did sort of fall off when we got word of this explosion, but right now they're thinking this is what it is. is it? after this. ♪ well, you can try using the buick's massaging seat. oh. yeah, that's nice. can i use apple carplay to put some music on? sure, it's wireless. what's your buick's wi-fi password? it's buick envision. that's a really tight spot. i used to hate parallel parking. me too! the all-new buick envision. built around you. all of you. pay no interest for 72 months plus current eligible buick owners get $500 purchase allowance on most 2021 buick suv models.

i'm greg, i'm 68 years old. i do motivational speaking buick owners get $500 purchase allowance in addition to the substitute teaching. i honestly feel that that's my calling-- to give back to younger people. i think most adults will start realizing that they don't recall things as quickly as they used to or they don't remember things as vividly as they once did. i've been taking prevagen for about three years now. people say to me periodically, "man, you've got a memory like an elephant." it's really, really helped me tremendously. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. what makes new salonpas arthritis gel so good for arthritis pain? salonpas contains the most prescribed topical pain relief ingredient. it's clinically proven, reduces inflammation and comes in original prescription strength. salonpas. it's good medicine.

neil: you know, up until told no u.s. service member had been killed or wounded in afghanistan this year. that stopped today amid reports that four marines were among those killed outside this abbey gate checkpoint that was target of an explosion. we don't know who was behind that explosion. of we've heard a great deal about it being an isis-k splinter group. the taliban is not taking responsibility for this, pointing the finger, ironically, at our hack of security at a -- lack of security at a point that they police. be that as it may, serious implications for the commander in chief and what he does to respond to this because remember the warning out of the white

house and particularly the president was that if you lay a finger on any u.s. soldier, there will be hell to pay. kind of paraphrasing there, but hillary vaughn at the white house right now, the briefing should be starting any minute. that that does put pressure now. the president has said that we will respond terrifically if any if u.s. soldier is harmed. now four are dead. are you hearing anything? >> it does put a lot of pressure on and a lot of eyes on on really what is the message from the president himself today. as you mentioned, it has been over a year since any u.s. military has been killed over in afghanistan, so with these four marines who have died today as a result of these attacks, definitely puts a spotlight on where the president goes next. we have been reaching out to the white house consistently up

until right before walking out for this live shot, and there have been no schedule updates on or any guidance given yet on if we will hear from the president. it's expected that at some point today he would be contacting the families of those four marines who were killed to give his condolences and at least speak with them especially considering how long it has been since any americans have lost their lives in afghanistan. but there is one interesting thing to point out here. we know that vice president harris is wheels up, she is on her way to hawaii where she will refuel coming back to the after her overseas trip. she's expected still at point to have an event with u.s. troops at the base there in pearl harbor. so it is possible, neil, that we may hear from the vice president herself before we hear from the if president himself. we are waiting for updates, but as far as we know at this point

that event that's scheduled has not been canceled. so our eyes are on that as well. we're also waiting to get updates to see when we will receive a briefing from the white house, when we will -- that was supposed to be scheduled hours ago. that has been indefinitely delayed. but i also want to point out the situation on the ground. the white house has consistently said up until yesterday that even after they pull out after august 31st, that any americans still in the country or any sivs or refugees trying to get out still be able to get out, that these evacuation efforts are not going to end. but that, there are questions now being asked about if it's not safe for people to go to the airport when there still is a u.s. military presence on the ground in afghanistan, what confidence account biden administration offer -- can the biden administration offer when

they leave when there is no military presence on the ground of afghanistan that people will still be able to get through the airport, get through the barricades that the talibans has set up and still somehow be able to evacuate and get out of the country? so there are a lot of questions that we are going to expect. press secretary jen psaki will face, but we also are hoping as i think every american is right now looking at the white house to hear from the president himself now that it is confirmed that four u.s. troops, four u.s. marines have died in afghanistan. that has not happened since february of last year. neil? neil: just incredible. hillary vaughn, thank you very, very much. is so what will our response be? will we extend that deadline? we've already gotten indications from a number of european countries that they are pulling out as we speak, but not in britain. boris johnson has indicated that the search will go on, we'll find people and get people out of the country. don't know how he's going to do all of that.

right now he'd be pretty much on his own. greg palkot has more from london what's the latest you're hearing there, greg? >> reporter: yeah. neil, the belief here, as it is in washington, is that the isis-k terror group could very well has been behind this. there has been a lot of intel in the haas 24 hours about this -- last 24 hours about this attack. and, yes, it is almost certainly pointing to that group which, of course, has done so much damage around the world. this is a local afghanistan affiliate, neil. we've been looking at some absolutely ugly, ugly, horrible amateur video to have scene, and it shows really what happened. apparently, a person wearing explosive suicide vest targeted one of the main gates in the airport. a second bomb hitting a staging area at a hotel around 200 yards away, gunshots were heard. we've been watching these casualties. the taliban initially claimed 13 dead, we're seeing reports of

much higher, dozens injured. we're seeing unconfirmed reports of many, many dozens injured. the marines, neil, we've been watching them bravely standing at that gate checking and screening desperate folks. it looks like more and more that's where this carnage happened. thousands were crammed in the area, jostling for space, fighting for their lives and, yes, as we've seen in this video, victims of terror. remember, neil, the state department saying at least 1500 americans remain in that country. we we know for a fact that tens of thousands of folks who have helped the u.s. also remain in that country. at least for now the u.s. embassy is saying stay well clear of that place. there's been no claims of responsibility. we just saw in the past hour the taliban condemning the attack saying that they're not responsible. again, isis-k, here in the u.k. as well as the u.s., seem to be behind this, and that's -- behind getting evacuations going.

while the attention, neil, is focusing on the aftermath of these attacks, yes, evacuations are sidelined, the u.k. would be wrapping up its evacuations by tomorrow. some european countries are wrapping up today. the big question is our deadline, august 31st, next tuesday for everybody to be out, what does this incident today, this terrible, terrible attack mean for that timeline? back to you, neil. neil: thank you very much, greg palkot, following that. back with walid phares, fox news national security analyst. i'll maybe get a sense of where you see it going if we don't extend when we go, when we announce that we're going to stick to that august 31st deadline. most people would be very surprised if the add information if went beyond that -- administration went beyond that anyway. what happens if we stick to that? >> let's first start by putting the perimeter of the airport as the focal point. we're still going to have a

problem, but it's better if we can extend. now, if we do so or not, it is better two moves, making two suggestions that many experts and people inside the fenced walls are aware of. number one is to widen the perimeter so our units should go through that thick perimeter of people around the airport and stand between them and the taliban. that way we are securitying this population, this group of -- securing this population, this group of people. it's going to take a lot of time to process them. the americans, the citizens and others, they can be flown immediately, but we have an issue, as we discussed before, vetting and so on and so forth. someone came up with the idea that we would have small planes that would take this population, group after group, and fly them to an area, guess what, it is not under taliban control. it's 100-200 miles north of kabul. it's controlled by afghan units. what we need to do is set up

command and control posts there and get the population as much as we can into that area while we are flying, first, citizens because we have to, and then do the processing there. that could help. because if we to not extend, the pressure will be big. even if we extend, we're going to still be under pressure, in my view. neil: that's very interesting, walid. want to go to camille meckler on that very issue that walid mentioned. camille, we always talk about ways to get paperwork and the documents that folks need who want to leave there. a good many of them have it, but they're not allowed to go to the airport to show it, so they have this prized paperwork, and >> we've been seeing, what has been absolutely dramatic. allies, vulnerable afghans are remaining trapped there. we've seen the administration trying to move them out, really herculean effort by civilians to

help get them to the airport and planes out. that as far as we're concerned doesn't end today or on ewing -- august 31st. we expect we'll go out there and expect our government to go out to insure passage of everybody who. neil: what if our government is not, camille? what if it is left to the you and private groups you talked to, americans and afghan nationals as well, if the government soldiers are not there to back you up, help you out because that is the order they have got from their commander what do you do? >> we've been doing it from the start. we started this evacuation to go alongside what the troops have been doing. we had the support from the government itself of course. civilians have led. this we're assessing looking what is happening on the ground. we're not ready to give up. we'll continue doing everything

we can to make sure not only that our allies and their families get to safety but to continue to call on the u.s. government to insure that is what happens. neil: the taliban is blaming us for this latest attack, that our security, our soldiers let folks down when in fact they controlled these checkpoints. they're already pointing fingers ironically at us. a lot of people are looking at this isis-k group. there is a lot of fingerpointing going on. that can't be constructive to getting people out? >> we're just keeping focused on our mission to get as many people out. letting that sort of play itself out. the situation is still extremely chaotic at the airport. we're still trying to sort out what happened, what the risks are moving forward but we remain focus what we know is important to us, to our veteran community, to our military community, to

our partners and allies around the world insuring we don't leave anyone behind who has been the ally throughout this effort. we can't let anything else distract us. it is too important and critical of a mission. neil: all right. keep us posted how that goes. camille mackler. a number of developments before i pass to charles payne. the latest update of the, what the president's thinking he promised if any harm came to american soldiers he would respond to that. people are waiting to hear if he makes good own that. saddest news of all, four marines in charge of protecting people getting themselves out of the country are victims of this carnage, in an attack that may not be over. talk after coordinated move on part of isis-k guerrillas, whatever you call them, circling the kabul airport, we don't know

their intentions, what they're up to, looking at financial markets they are as flummoxed as you are. they're looking a sad commentary on a sad situation that could have a sad ending and no one gets out. the bad guys take over. they're used to that. they're moving on from that i don't know about the rest of the world. here is charles? charles: certainly a sad day indeed, neil where we're reminded humanity is first and foremost. i'm charles payne, this is "making money." kabul rocked by multiple attacks. two explosions outside the cap bub airport killing four u.s. marines and others as they continue out of the taliban controlled afghanistan. one of those explosions occurred outside of the baron hotel which served as a gathering point for u.s. citizens. we yet to hear from president biden or the white house directly. joining us former militar