Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Talkback Live

Inside the Mind of Terror: Understanding Al Qaeda

Aired October 10, 2001 - 15:06   ET

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

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
TAVIS SMILEY, GUEST HOST: Could Al Qaeda's taped statements have an ulterior motive? The possibility of coded messages and White House concerns. Plus, the role of Al Jazeera. How does the Arabic news channel get these taped statements from bin Laden and his men?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HAFEZ AL-MIRAZI, AL JAZEERA WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF: It happened that we were in the right place at the right time.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BERNARD HAYKEL, NEW YORK UNIVERSITY: And I'm sure there's a lot of pressure now on Jazeera television in Qatar to prevent these kinds of statements from coming out.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMILEY: The question: are bin Laden's words propaganda or news?

Welcome to TALKBACK LIVE: "America Speaks Out." I'm Tavis Smiley, in for Bobbie Battista. Thanks for joining us. Today, a new concern: could Osama bin Laden and other members of the Al Qaeda organization use television to send secret messages, secret signals?

The White House raised a red flag after the statement from an Al Qaeda member yesterday. The fear that it could contain some message or a code telling terrorists in the U.S. -- or for that matter, anyplace in the world -- to take action. National Security Adviser Dr. Condoleezza Rice spoke with network executives about those concerns earlier today.

With us now, CNN national security correspondent David Ensor and Yosri Fouda. He is the deputy executive director of Al Jazeera, the network that first obtained these tapes.

David, how you are, sir?

DAVID ENSOR, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Very well, Tavis. And what I can tell you is that as you mentioned, Dr. Rice had a discussion with television network executives, raising concerns the White House has. Not asking or requiring anything, but concerns, certainly, about these tapes. You explained why.

Here is how the spokesman at the White House put it, Ari Fleischer.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ARI FLEISCHER, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: At best, Osama bin Laden's messages are propaganda calling on people to kill Americans. At worst, he could be issuing orders to his follow others to initiate such attacks.

Dr. Rice asked the networks to exercise judgment about how these prerecorded, pretaped message will air. She stressed that she was making a request and that editorial decisions can only be made by the media.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ENSOR: Now, CNN has a policy on this, which I'll just will quickly read. "CNN will not air statements from Al Qaeda live and will review them first before deciding how to handle them. CNN's policy is to avoid airing any material that we believe would directly facilitate any terrorist acts. In deciding what to air, CNN will consider guidance from appropriate authorities."

Now, knowledgeable U.S. officials say that one of their concerns is simply that when a tape comes out, when you see Osama bin Laden on tape, or one of his cohorts, that in itself could be a message. And so not much that the media can do to stop that.

But there is also concern -- over time, over history, these tapes -- messages have been sent one way or another in coded form. It's open-source coding, as what it's called. During the war, for example, on the radio, Tokyo Rose would send messages to the Japanese while speaking in propaganda terms to American sailors and servicemen.

Same thing -- the Nazis did the same thing. The U.S. has from time to time sent messages over the years to its agents in the former Soviet Union, using Voice of America. So it's a well-known tool and the question is whether or not Osama bin Laden is using it.

Now, on the other side of the coin, network executives know that there's a powerful propaganda side to what these messages are about. And in fact, Arabic-speaking former intelligence officials I've spoken to say the message is very effective as propaganda. And it may in part that the White House doesn't want such good propaganda so widely dispersed.

So in a First Amendment country, in a country that believes that the media should -- let the public decide, let the public see what the messages are from all sides, network executives have some difficult decisions on their hands. And it is going to be done on a case to case basis, at least at this time -- Tavis.

SMILEY: I'll ask you about those networks in just a moment, David. But first I want to follow up with a question that came from one of the members of our audience, who, of course, we will hear from over the next hour on this program. But do we have any knowledge, at this point, as to what kinds of codes we think they are sending, what forms those codes are taking?

Are we talking about something that a spokesperson is wearing? These aren't baseball signals, obviously. I mean, what kind of coded messages are we talking about, and how are they allegedly being transmitted through the TV airwaves?

ENSOR: Well, clearly the concern would be if a message was actually being sent to a terrorist sleeper cell, you know, go ahead and attack such-and-such a target. It's not clear whether they're doing that, and if they did it would be in some coded language or address, or simply the appearance. And officials in U.S. intelligence community simply do not know.

However, when you see, for example, a spokesman dressed all in white, that is the color of martyrdom in the Muslim world, and so that in itself sends a message, Tavis.

SMILEY: So it could be language, it could be dress. We're just trying to get some idea for the audience, here, in helping us understand better what these coded messages might be, and what form they might take.

You mentioned earlier, you know, that we live in a country, obviously, where, of all rights we have, one of the most sacred of those rights, of course, is the right to free speech. I wonder, what we've talked about, what this network, what CNN is doing. Do we have any information at this point as to how the other television networks are responding, following that conversation with Condoleezza Rice earlier today?

ENSOR: I don't honestly know. They will have heard this morning, as you mentioned, from Dr. Rice and they're probably considering their options. It's a very difficult decision to make, and you may see different decisions being made by different networks, because there are a lot of different considerations that they have to take in account.

You know, you were talking about the different ways people communicate. Maybe some people in the audience may remember that during the Vietnam War, a prisoner of war, an American prisoner of war, Jeremiah Denton, who later became a U.S. senator, blinked his eyelids on camera, and he blinked morose code for torture, which was a way of sending, obviously, a clear message about how he was being treated to the United States. So there are lots of ways of doing it.

SMILEY: Point well taken. CNN's national security correspondent David Ensor. David, thank you for joining us this afternoon. I appreciate it.

Dr. Fouda, Mr. Fouda, thank you for being with us.

YOSRI FOUDA, AL JAZEERA: Let me start by asking you up front whether or not the White House, after discussing this, has the White House contacted your network and asked you in any way to consider not airing these tapes, or to use your own judgment in the airing of these tapes? Have you heard from the White House? Has your network heard from the White House?]

Well, let me first, on behalf of myself and on behalf of my colleagues at Al Jazeera extend our deepest sympathies to the American people for the outrageous events of September the 11th.

Secondly, I'm not personally aware of any official requests put to us, either through the White House or any institution inside the U.S. or anywhere, indeed, in the world. I do understand, however, that a spokesman of the White House did raise some concern about the broadcasts of (UNINTELLIGIBLE) of bin Laden.

But let me reassure the American people, first of all, that the Al Jazeera is the only independent TV channel in the Middle East, and we have some of the best journalists, who were trained in the BBC in the West, and who understand exactly what journalism is all about.

I do understand, however, that being the only news organization allowed to beam signal out of Afghanistan puts an added responsibility on our shoulders to try and scrutinize every piece of information that's thrown at us. When we go...

(CROSSTALK)

SMILEY: I'm sorry, I didn't mean to cut you off.

FOUDA: Go ahead?

SMILEY: Yes, I want to talk about that responsibility in just a moment. My apologies for stepping on you, but before we get too far into this, let me, again, as a follow-up, if I might. You said that you do not have any independent knowledge that the White House has specifically contacted your network, as they did U.S. television networks earlier today.

But if, in fact, the White House were to contact your network, Al Jazeera, would you in fact consider not running these tapes?

FOUDA: I'm sure that American society, in general, which is based at its heart at principles like the freedom of speech and the freedom of information, I don't think that the American people or the American administration would for a second try or suggest censoring any media outlet of any sort.

I'm also aware that during the statement made by the U.S. spokesman, he also praised Al Jazeera for its credibility and professionalism, and I also do know that the U.S. secretary of state, Mr. Colin Powell, actually chose Al Jazeera for an exclusive interview to get the message through to the Muslim world and to the Arab world, and to explain to them that this attack is not directed at Islam. It's only directed at those terrorists.

(CROSSTALK) SMILEY: Mr. Fouda, that is true, that the U.S. secretary of state Colin Powell did in fact do an exclusive interview at one point in time on your network, but it is also true that since the attack of September 11th, he has called your network coverage "inflammatory." That's a word directly attributable to the U.S. secretary of state.

How do you respond to that particular statement by Mr. Powell?

FOUDA: Well, I mean -- I'll response to this with a few facts, if you give me a chance. To mention some examples: the statement that was faxed to us, to our correspondent in Peshawar, we didn't just broadcast it. Our colleagues and our editors looked at the statement and compared it to previous statements that we received from the same source before September the 11th. And it was deemed to be 99.9 percent true, that it's coming from bin Laden.

The tape that arrived at our office -- of course, you do understand, and I think you would agree with me, that a telephone number or a fax number or indeed address of any news organization are not meant to be secret, so anyone can stop at your office and hand- deliver you a prerecorded message. But what matters really is your editorial decision.

What happened with the first tape we got, is that our correspondent received this tape, viewed it, called our editors in Doha, briefed them on the contents of the tape, and our editors took the decision based on a few principles. First of all, that it contained a very journalistic value, not only for our viewers, because we know that whole world would be watching us.

It was, for the very first time, the whole world gets to see the face of bin Laden after September the 11th, gets to see bin Laden commenting on this. Although he didn't acknowledge that him or his organization did it. he praised those people who did it, and that, in itself, is telling.

SMILEY: Mr. Fouda, I have to bring in some other guests. So much more to talk to you about, so we're going to ask you to stand by because we want to get back to you. And our audience certainly has a litany of questions they want to ask, and I want to give them a chance to do that.

Now though, let's bring in Akbar Ahmed. He is an Islamic scholar and professor at American University. And Marc Ginsberg, former U.S. ambassador to Morocco. We're delighted to have both of them with us.

Mr. Ahmed, let me start with you. Do we know anything about who this man is, in the latest Al Qaeda tape that we've been seeing here for the last 24 hours or so?

AKBAR AHMED, AMERICAN UNIVERSITY: Yes. He's a lieutenant of Osama bin Laden, and I don't think we should be so jumpy and defensive about this particularly tape. For instance, whoever is interpreting knows little of the anthropology of Islam.

White is a dress, it's a pious dress and color for Islam, but black has similar significance for the Shi'a. So we can't say that every time a Shi'a is wearing black robes, he's out for martyrdom. Green, in fact, is a very significant color in Islam. It's the color of the holy prophet.

So we need to be careful, here. We need to value that this is the only window we have into the mind of bin Laden. That is of great significance. We know, for instance, what his strategy is going to be, who he is appealing to, what he thinks are the main hot buttons that he has to press for the Muslim world. He is shifting the argument to the Middle East, for instance. He is sitting in Afghanistan, he knows a storm is coming to Afghanistan, and he's not acknowledging the havoc that's about to be wreaked in that area. I find all this very interesting.

SMILEY: How likely is it, though, that you think Al Qaeda is using these television opportunities to send coded messages to Muslims or others around the world? How likely is that for you?

AHMED: I don't think that's very likely, in the day and age of e-mail and telephones and people visiting and moving around so much. You don't have to have this complicated second World War kind of scenario.

What is significant is that this is part of the clash that we are seeing taking place -- bin Laden deliberately moves this into the idea of a clash of civilizations. He is repeating this is a war between Islam and the West. President Bush and Tony Blair and so on are trying to pinpoint the objective: it is a war against terrorism. That is the clash, and I think that is the real message that commentators are overlooking.

SMILEY: I want to come back to that. I don't want to overlook it, as a commentator here on CNN, so I promise you we'll come back to talking about that clash.

First, though, before we go to break right quick, Mr. Ginsberg, can you tell me whether or not you think that it is possible, or likely, I should say, that Mr. bin Laden is sending coded messages to supporters vis a vis these videotapes?

MARC GINSBERG, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO MOROCCO: I think it's certainly likely that he is, and I can't take anything for granted. The United States can't take anything for granted. That fact that he's put on a military uniform, the fact that he's sending so many tapes out at once, the fact that his spokesmen are on the air -- we have to assume the worst and presume that the worst may happen from this.

SMILEY: Thank you, sir. Who is bin Laden's audience and who is he trying to reach? We'll ask our guests after this break, and so much more. You're watching TALKBACK LIVE on CNN. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SMILEY: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. A couple of your e-mail. First, from Bruce in British Columbia: "I'd like to know why Al Jazeera continues to provide air time to self-confessed terrorists and criminals designed specifically to incite. Does not airing these extremist diatribes only contribute to the unrest that grips the planet and, in doing so, promote the cause of these genocidal mad men?"

And then from Humphrey in South Carolina: "Al Jazeera should be recognized for the bold, independent reporting that they are committed to. Even if there is a possibility of coded messages, their dual, even-handed coverage of both the United States and various responses out of Afghanistan should be applauded. There is an enormous benefit gained by the free world as the result of their dedication."

Let me go back to a representative from Al Jazeera, and ask whether or not your networking intends to run the picture of the most- wanted list of terrorists that President Bush exposed earlier today. Might that be something that this network would air as well, along with the coverage?

FOUDA: Only if it contains any journalistic value of any sort. To give you an evident, and also to calm the American people down now regarding this, is -- what happened yesterday, for instance. We got another of those prerecorded tapes, exactly the same happened. The tape was delivered, our correspondent viewed it. Called our headquarters in Doha, Qatar. Briefed our editors on the contents of the tape, and it was decided not to play it because it didn't contain much journalistic value.

In this tape, he was asked to feed it through. We edited the rhetoric and the rubbish out, and we it in our main evening news, after which we immediately crossed to Washington, where we interviewed Mr. Edward Walker, who was the former assistant to U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who is very familiar with the Middle East -- actually, a regular envoy to the Middle East. And he refuted what the official spokesman of Al Qaeda organization said.

At the same time, we go to a very moderate Arab cleric from Kuwait. And why from Kuwait? Because spokesman of Al Qaeda is originally from Kuwait -- and this moderate cleric actually said all this Islamic reference made by the Al Qaeda spokesman are completely wrong. And he quoted the real Islam, saying that Islam is completely, utterly against the killing of the children, women, elderly, and even at war -- even against unarmed men.

So I think there is something good about this, and I referring to the last e-mail that you just referred to. And let's not -- I do understand that it's wise to be cautious, especially after the outrageous events of September 11th. I don't blame the America people or the American administration for being overcautious about things. But we are dealing with a kind of people who think, who are capable of committing the likes of the actions of September the 11th.

And we do need to really gather our thoughts and to think. That's why I was glad when President Bush announced that we are planning to track down the financial transactions, we are planning to reintroduce tighter security measures. I do think that this is the way to combat such activities. SMILEY: Let me jump in and ask Mr. Ahmed. Since you raised this issue earlier, Mr. Ahmed, about how bin Laden and his forces are trying to pitch this fight, Muslims against the rest of the world, and most of us, I think, are not buying that. But be that as it may, I wonder whether or not you think his message is resonating only with extremists, or with a large audience of Muslims and others around the globe?

AHMED: Now, this is a very important question because, you see, what is he pitching in this speech of his? He's talking about three issues: the Palestinians, the plight of the civilians in Iraq and the stationing of troops in Saudi Arabia.

Now, whether you like it or don't like it, in many parts of the Muslim world, in Cairo, in Karachi, in Kuala Lumpur -- and we can check this with Ambassador Ginsberg sitting next to me -- ordinary people, in the bazaars, in the shanty towns, will be saying there's a lot of truth in what this man is saying. They will not agree with what happened on 11 September. They may be horrified with that, but will agree with what he is saying, by and large. So the governments may be taking one position, the ordinary people are taking another position.

Secondly, he is talking about the threat to the peace in America. He is very deliberately saying, "I'm going to disturb your peace." And I believe if you are overjumpy in America, we don't want to spoil what we know as the American way of life. Because if we upset that equilibrium, the harmony that exists in society, then he would have succeeded. I know, for instance, many Muslims in America, citizens, are feeling for the first time that they are second-class citizens overnight.

SMILEY: Mr. Ambassador, I'm up against a break once again. I apologize for this right quick. But let me ask you, given what Mr. Ahmed just articulated, if we look down the road and see that governments perhaps are going to take one position and that the people of those countries might take another position -- how does to play out long term?

Are we going to lose some of allies because the powers that be that run those countries find that they are being overrun, out of step with public opinion in their countries, forces them -- Pakistan, for example -- to do something different than what they are doing right now, which is being an ally of the U.S.?

GINSBURG: Tavis, we have some immediate short-term objectives while the bombs fall in Afghanistan. We have not only a battle of the bombs, we also have a battle of the minds in the Middle East. It's very crucial that we get to the root cause of why this hostility has bred this terrorism and to try to being dealing with it.

I am convinced that unless we begin doing certain overt actions by the United States -- for example, I've called for the creation of U.S.-Muslim policy engagement commission in the Middle East -- to begin dealing with the seminarians and the clerics and others that are promoting the hatred of our values and our system. Or indeed we will not be able to succeed in this war a terrorism.

It's crucial that if we want to hold the coalition together, we do what it necessary to calm the situation down between the Arabs and the Israelis, but begin thinking about dealing with the support network that Bin Laden has that is not necessarily the Al Qaeda network, but the network of clerics, journalists and university students and unemployed youth in the Arab world that provide him the support network that he relies on.

SMILEY: We have to take another break. When we come back, we will get the audience involved in this conversation. You're watching TALKBACK LIVE. We're back after this break. Stay with us.

Still ahead: Moving forward in the battle against terrorism.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: The next phase is most likely the insertion and extraction of ground troops.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SMILEY: We're going to ask a military expert about the possible strategy on the ground in Afghanistan. That's ahead on TALKBACK LIVE: AMERICA SPEAKS OUT.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SMILEY: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. With us today: Yosri Fouda, of Al-Jazeera Television, Islamic scholar Akbar Ahmed and the former U.S. Ambassador to Morocco, Mark Ginsburg. To the audience we go, but first a couple of e-mails. Joel in Las Vegas. "Any chance that the Al Qaeda tapes are sending..."

I am told we are going to toss back to Judy Woodruff. Judy, take it away.

(INTERRUPTED FOR LIVE EVENT)

SMILEY: Thank you, Judy. Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. When I last saw you, I was trying to read to you an e-mail from Joel in Las Vegas. "Any chance that the Al Qaeda tapes are sending coded messages is enough reason to not have them publicly aired. We are at war and national security must take priority."

And then from Jeannie in Jacksonville, Florida: "I think statements from Bin Laden and his terrorists should not be televised. Why should we give them free air time to threaten us? Let the government handle Bin Laden's television performances."

Jeannie and Joel, we thank you. Now to the audience. Chris, who do you have over here?

CHRIS: This is Singh, from India. Singh, go ahead.

SINGH: Hi. Mr. Yosri Fouda, as a Sikh and an American, I am very curious to find out how the reaction has been of people at your end since you aired the video, what the reaction of people have been down at (UNINTELLIGIBLE). Has it pro-Bin Laden or have people been scared to show their emotions. What are your thoughts?

FOUDA: We do have many phone-in programs on our screen. And we do get the whole of the spectrum of different opinions in the Arab world. But let me assure that the mainstream Muslims have completely, utterly condemned what happened on the events of September 11.

As to the tapes of Bin Laden, I do think that it's going to take some time to assess this. But we do get some phone calls regarding the tapes of Bin Laden. What I would like to say is that fanatics will always be fanatics, but they are a very tiny minority. We are talking now about the moderate, mainstream Muslims and Arabs, which I would like, and I don't wish at any point to play in the hands of terrorists and further alienate people into becoming fanatics at any point.

SMILEY: Let me get a comment from Mark in Massachusetts.

MARK: Before the terrorist attacks I myself -- I know most Americans didn't know who Bin Laden and Al Qaeda were, and so it is good to hear this, because we've listened to a bunch of experts here for the last 45 minutes who can't agree on what it is this message is. And I think I am capable -- and most Americans are capable -- of weeding out the propaganda and hearing what the real story is. So I think that is important.

SMILEY: All right. Who else do we have?

CHRIS: This is Gloria.

GLORIA: I don't think it should be shown. I don't think we ought to give them the air time. If they are sending coded messages, that would be crazy on our part to let it be seen. And it's pretaped. How much -- how far was it pretaped? Was it actually -- was it this had all been planned before September 11. Pretaped?

SMILEY: Mr. Ahmed, we just saw live in Washington Secretary Powell and the head of NATO talking in a press conference there. I wonder whether or not you think NATO is making mistakes. If there are any glaring mistakes that you think we're making from your perspective right now in trying to go after bin lade and Al Qaeda, what might that or those mistakes be, as you see it?

AHMED: I wouldn't use the word mistake, because there is a military war and you have to give the generals the first priority in that. But I would say we need to very carefully look at the cultural fallout. For instance, in my country, in Pakistan. Already you have severe ethnic tensions in two provinces adjoining Afghanistan. You have millions of refugees poised to cross into Pakistan, already a very shaky, fragile structure there.

And Punjab, which is the most populated province -- and the Pakistani army largely comes from the Punjab -- has not yet seen an eruption of processions and riots and so on. If that happens we have to watch Friday -- when the Friday prayer takes place. Religious leaders have promised to bring the processions out. That will really increase the pressure on government intensely.

SMILEY: We've got to take a break. More after this break, including the results of our poll. You are watching TALKBACK LIVE. We are back in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SMILEY: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. John from Canada. What do you have to say, John?

JOHN: I think what we're all forgetting is that if we air Al Qaeda's statements, all we are doing is helping our cause, because Osama Bin Laden, all the spokesmen of the organization air nothing but hatred and idiocy. All this does is help the recruitment in the West and consolidate public opinion in favor of fighting this man.

SMILEY: Mr. Ambassador, do you think this might have the effect as John suggested that somewhere down the road, in the next few months, a year, we might see military service in this country go up because of patriotism thanks to Mr. Bin Laden?

GINSBURG: I do believe that Mr. Bin Laden is certainly causing Americans to want to enlist and engage. But let me add that one of the most important aspects of this struggle -- and I disagree with my colleague from Al-Jazeera who said that moderate Muslims have been expressing overt support and concern and sympathy for this Americans.

While that may be true, let me assure you that on Al-Jazeera as well as in the Arab world, there is still a great deal of criticism and support for Bin Laden. And Al-Jazeera has been airing a great many programs that generate support of the point of view that he has expressed. This suggests to us that we have a long and important struggle in the Arab world to reach that audience that goes below the government; the civil societies and elsewhere.

I don't know if you realize it and our audience realizes, but the vast number of people who have been killed by Islamic fundamentalist terrorists have been Arabs: Arabs in Algeria, Arabs in Egypt and elsewhere by people like Bin Laden. And so the support that he generates there requires us to understand the complexity of the struggle before us and to take the actions that we so for have not been willing to take, such as engaging more directly.

We need our own American-Arab satellite system. We should not be relying on Al-Jazeera. We have to be spending more money to reach out to those Arabs who are disaffected with U.S. foreign policy. There are many reasons why they feel that way.

SMILEY: Mr. Ambassador, given the earlier part of your statement, I can only assume that you perhaps were a little disappointed earlier when I asked whether Al-Jazeera had intended to run the pictures of these terrorists -- these 22 that the U.S. government put out for us to see earlier today. Given that they are the only network over there, were you disappointed by that? GINSBURG: I was very disappointed to hear, because he avoided the question. He should be basically reporting what the president of the United States is doing in this struggle. If they want to model themselves after the network that all of us admire, CNN, then they have to report the news. They are reporting selectively what they believe their audience in the Arab world may want to hear.

SMILEY: I'm almost out of time. Mr. Fouda, I have got about 45 seconds for a quick response. It would be unfair not to let you respond right quick.

FOUDA: I don't think that we try to remodel ourselves according to any news organization. What I would like to really underline here is that we are no mouthpiece for anyone, and we do try and make a very clear distinction between facts -- getting our facts right -- and trying to -- believing that it's our own obligation toward our viewers to have as comprehensive coverage as possible of both sides of the story.

SMILEY: Mr. Fouda, I hate to cut you off. Thank you for coming on to Yosri Fouda. Akbar Ahmed, I thank you and Mark Ginsburg, former ambassador to Morocco. We thank you all for joining us.

A quick look at the results of our online viewer vote. The question today: should videotaped statements from Osama Bin Laden's organization be televised. 25 percent of you said yes, 75 percent of you said no. And as always, we thank you for your participation in our viewer vote.

That is it for the program today. I'm Tavis Smiley, in all week for Bobbie Battista. Join us again tomorrow for another edition of TALKBACK LIVE. Thanks for watching.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com