|
 |
CNN TALKBACK LIVE
America Speaks Out: Did Governor Gray Davis Do the Right Thing?
Aired November 2, 2001 - 15:00 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.
BOBBIE BATTISTA, HOST: Terror alert. Did Governor Gray Davis say too much?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. GRAY DAVIS (D), CALIFORNIA: We received information from three separate federal agencies indicating that there was a potential terrorist attack against suspension bridges on the West Coast.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BATTISTA: Also, ask what you can do for your country.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I want to follow-up by urging in the strongest terms possible every American to join us in tracking down those responsible for using anthrax to murder Americans.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BATTISTA: Aren't you doing that already?
And...
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STUDENTS (singing): America!
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BATTISTA: Can you be too patriotic?
(APPLAUSE)
BATTISTA: Hello, everybody. welcome to TALKBACK LIVE.
(CHEERING)
BATTISTA: We're just going to have to stop and start over. If you get me going like this, I'll never get through the hour. But thank you very much.
What is this now, TALKBACK LIVE? OK, right.
Traffic on West Coast bridges is a little lighter today than usual, following warnings that suspension bridges might be targeted by terrorists during rush hours. Because the warnings could not be confirmed, Governor Gray Davis is taking some heat for letting everyone in on the alert.
Are Americans better off knowing or is ignorance bliss? Let's meet our guests today. Merill Markoe is a comedy writer and a columnist in Los Angeles. She's a little late, but she'll be with us momentarily here. She's also a former head writer for "Late Night with David Letterman," and the author of several books, including a new one that's coming out in February.
Bob Tanenbaum is a former New York City assistant district attorney, and one-time chief of the homicide bureau. He has authored several books, including "Enemy Within."
Good to see you, Bob.
BOB TANENBAUM, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Good to see you.
BATTISTA: Sam Greenfield, a radio talk show host in New York. Sam, always good to see you.
SAM GREENFIELD, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Bobbie, I think you should know that I, too, am leaving CNN to form a consulting company with your husband.
(LAUGHTER)
BATTISTA: I'll call you.
Here in Atlanta, Ian Punnett, a radio talk show host about to start a new show in Minneapolis, we should say, and soon to complete his seminary training. I keep saying that, Punnett. When are you done with that?
IAN PUNNETT, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: It's coming. It's coming.
BATTISTA: All right. Well, the question is -- and I wanted to start with Merill, but she's not quite there yet, since this is happening in her state.
Even the Justice Department, Bob, was a little surprised by the governor's alert, and downplayed it a little bit. Do you think he went too far?
TANENBAUM: No, I think that we all have an emergency management plan in government, whether it's local, city or certainly for the state. The state of California is the largest state, by far, and it's continuing to grow geometrically. So I think what Governor Gray Davis did was correct. You have to take an inventory of your assets.
It's clear that we're dealing here with homicidal maniacs. There's a fifth column living here. It's as if the homicidal psycho ward at Bellevue Hospital, metaphorically, escaped and they're wandering around trying to kill people and blow up buildings.
So I think it's important for the governor, if he had any information, to share it with the people of California, so look, they would have some options. Maybe people don't want to use these bridges now. How would it have been if he had the information, something terrible had occurred, and a lot of people might not have otherwise used those thoroughfares in the ordinary course.
So I think sharing information is helpful, and we all have to be on the alert in any event, so that we can root out this fifth column.
BATTISTA: Of course, the downside of that, Sam, is media frenzy, possibly unnecessary panic. But I'd kind of want to know, wouldn't you?
GREENFIELD: Well, I think it's good to err on the side of caution. I think Bob is right. If you get these reports that there's going to be a bombing, or they think there's going to be a bombing and you do nothing about it, then something happens, just the toll on your conscience would be enough to kill most people.
But, you know, it's California, and I thought it was curious that the Justice Department is kind of saying, oh, is that what they heard? Oh, OK, we didn't. I thought there could have been language that would have been sounding a little more cooperative. They sounded like they were -- the threat was about Jeff Bridges, because somebody saw "K PAX" and didn't like it.
It seems to me that they should be a little more cooperative with them, and say, well, we haven't heard this, but you never know.
PUNNETT: I guess the question for me isn't whether or not he did the right thing or not. It's whether he's doing enough. And I have been searching through the story. I have yet to really see where this management of the situation is taking place. Just saying "hey, it could happen," doesn't really seem to be addressing the issue.
Are they stopping every car and looking for explosives? Have they have ratcheted up security? Somehow, the feeling is, other than checking boats that are going underneath it and making sure that there aren't any terrorists that have hijacked ships, and they're going to ram it into the pilings of the bridge. It's pretty much just a matter of saying, "hey, it could go at any minute. Just thought you'd want to know if you're going to be driving on that bridge.:
GREENFIELD: I don't think we are learning everything that they are doing to forestall this. I think there's a lot of information that doesn't go reported, about what they are doing to stem these things, because they're worried...
(CROSSTALK)
PUNNETT: Well, they're not stopping people from driving on the bridge.
GREENFIELD: ... because they're worried that people who might be in a position to do harm will find out. So I think that's important.
PUNNETT: From working behind the scenes and making sure that if they have information about terrorists, if they know somebody is going to do something, that they stop it. But if we're not actually doing anything to keep people from driving over the bridge with explosives once they get up to the ramp, well, then, what's the point? Then it's just a matter of ratcheting up the terror and saying: Can you make it over the bridge today?
BATTISTA: One of the things I think is hard, though, is when they call this a credible threat, it's almost like, you know, what does that mean? What level are we talking about? Is it a red alert? I mean, should we...
(CROSSTALK)
BATTISTA: That's right. But should it be a red alert and then a blue alert? We don't know what level.
GREENFIELD: The federal government did this last week. It said that we have it on report that there's going to be some kind of terrorist attack coming in the next week, and they certainly weren't specific with it. But with the amount of tragedy that's happened in the last couple of months, I'm willing to give them a little rope and say, OK, fine, if you know something and you're not telling me about it, then at least give me an idea of what part of the country it's going to be in. Just that.
PUNNETT: I think an incredible threat would be me coming to play for the Washington Wizards. I think that would be an incredible threat.
GREENFIELD: That was an outside shot. You have not seen them play, have you?
(LAUGHTER)
PUNNETT: But I do think...
BATTISTA: You haven't seen them standing up.
PUNNETT: Perhaps credible threat, here -- I am standing up, Bobbie, if you haven't noticed.
(LAUGHTER)
PUNNETT: The idea of a credible threat I think is actually at the middle of this difference between Governor Gray Davis and what the government considers -- what the federal government, what the federal investigators are considering to be a credible threat.
What is at the core of this? We don't know. It's secret information that says this might happen. Now, if the federal government was caught off guard from that, it's very likely not that they weren't coordinating with California, but rather that they saw the same information and they said that may not be as important. BATTISTA: Forgive me for interrupting just a moment here, but we have to cut away quickly. We'll be back. But Rudy Giuliani is speaking with reporters, I believe, in New York, so we'll drop in for just a minute.
(INTERRUPTED FOR LIVE EVENT)
BATTISTA: We will continue here talking about Governor Gray Davis' alert to the folks in California about a possible imminent attack on bridges in that state. Actually, it was bridges all along the West Coast.
Merill Markoe is with us now.
Get caught -- did you get caught on a bridge?
MERILL MARKOE, FORMER TV COMEDY WRITER: No.
BATTISTA: Was it a rush out of town on those bridges or something?
(CROSSTALK)
BATTISTA: How did you feel -- how did you feel when you heard that, though, last night?
MARKOE: About the bridges?
BATTISTA: Yes.
MARKOE: You know, the funny thing about living in California is that we've been on a constant state of alert for about the past six years. At First, it was El Nino, and they warned us about that every minute. And then they said, if you think El Nino is bad, wait until you see La Nina. And then there was nothing for any of that.
And then after La Nina it was Y2K, and we never stopped worrying about Y2K. And then last summer it was rolling blackouts, and there was not a Y2K problem or any rolling blackouts. So it's just a constant state of things you're supposed to be afraid of that never materialize in Los Angeles.
BATTISTA: Well, is that then the risk that officials take that they keep putting out these alerts and nothing happens, and then people just start ignoring them like they do earthquakes almost out there?
MARKOE: It's exactly like the earthquakes. I think they just want us all to be sobbing gently 24 hours a day, and that's the only way they'll ever be happy.
BATTISTA: Then again, would you be pretty upset, though, if something happened and the governor had not alerted you to something they knew?
MARKOE: Well, I think it's good that he alerted us. I don't know what you're supposed to do about it except I guess stock more canned goods. That's all I ever do in the face of any of it. I keep going out and buying canned chili and putting it in the basement and that's about it.
BATTISTA: All right. Let me ask some more California folks. Jason's on the phone with us from California. Jason, go ahead.
JASON: Hey, how are you doing?
BATTISTA: Good.
JASON: I personally think Gray Davis did make the right decision. You know, before the September 11 attacks, people said that the government let people know, (UNINTELLIGIBLE) if they knew more. I think he's just trying to take that and be more informative for his constituents and his state. And you know, I (UNINTELLIGIBLE) him more for it.
BATTISTA: All right, Jason, thank you.
Shirley, you're from California. What do you think?
SHIRLEY: I think it's a good idea that he warned us, but just as she said, I don't know what I can do about it except maybe be more alert. Sometimes that helps if you know that there's a threat out there to look to your right and to your left, and aware of what's around you.
BATTISTA: Let me do a quick e-mail before I take a break. Walter in New York says: "The information given by the governor of California was warranted. It placed citizens on alert and enabled them to be cautious. It may be argued that such a warning may have been counterproductive, creating unnecessary fear in citizens, but we are in a post-9/11 world and any fear of terror is rightfully justified."
We'll take a break and be back right after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BATTISTA: Welcome back. Homeland security chief Tom Ridge and FBI Director Robert Mueller today challenged Americans to help track those responsible for unleashing anthrax on the nation.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROBERT MUELLER, FBI DIRECTOR: We ask you throughout the country to report any suspicious behavior that involves the United States mails or individuals or individuals knowledgeable about anthrax.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BATTISTA: Bob, now, I certainly -- I really appreciate what the FBI director is doing. But what concerns me a little bit is this kind of an indication that they're going nowhere on this investigation? TANENBAUM: Yeah. What very much can we do about finding out where anthrax is? It's not as though we're looking around in a subway car, somewhere on a bus that someone looks suspicious.
This whole issue is terribly troublesome to the point of view who's responsible and how many people are out there doing it. Is it indigenous to the country? Is this the terrorist "fifth column" that's doing it here? Apparently, some people are from Trenton, New Jersey, (UNINTELLIGIBLE) would have been traces of letters being mailed.
That kind of information from Mr. Mueller and from homeland security people is an indication to me of people who aren't on the job doing what they ought to be doing and trying to get the kind of information that we should be getting. After all, we have the talent, we have the know-how, and we have the commitment from people, from Americans to get this job done properly.
And we expect nothing less from people in official government to be on top of the job 7-24 and give us the right information, not asking people to go into laboratories, speak to scientists and start snooping around biochemical plants to see who's sending this stuff out.
GREENFIELD: This is kind of amazing to me that he would make this kind of pitch. Does he think that my next-door neighbor, I'm going to hear my next-door neighbor say, "Tonight, I'm infecting the whole neighborhood with anthrax," and I'm going to keep it to myself?
Well, I heard the guy was going to do this, but I said, you know, I don't want to mix in.
Between him and Tommy Thompson a couple of weeks ago saying, everything is fine, there is no threat, everything is wonderful, seriously I really could grab two people out of your audience and do a more effective job. What does he think...
BATTISTA: Well, I agree with you, Sam, in the sense that I would have thought that anybody who had any information about that would have already gone to the FBI at this point.
GREENFIELD: Yeah. Why is he asking?
BATTISTA: I don't know.
PUNNETT: Might it be that their conclusion is by some information we have -- and we were having part of this conversation earlier based on secret information that the government might have. Is it possible that they have information that this sort of stuff is out there, and it is their thought that maybe somebody might know and they aren't saying anything? Which is not to defend the fact that it doesn't sound odd to come out and say, hey, oh, by the way -- this is like "double-secret probation" or something. You know, all the things we already told you before to be worried about, well, be really, really worried about them. However, could it just be that there might be 10, 20, 100 people out there that might not otherwise have thought about calling that might now when they see a direct appeal from the FBI?
BATTISTA: And I guess they...
GREENFIELD: I wasn't going to talk about an imminent death of 50,000 people, but now that Johnny Shoreham (ph) has spoken up, I'm going to jump on the phone and hit 911. It's insane.
(CROSSTALK)
GREENFIELD: That's not what he's asking for. That's not what he's asking for. I mean, I appreciate (UNINTELLIGIBLE), but that's not what he's asking for.
All he's saying is, if you know somebody who has knowledge, somebody who's standing around -- maybe it's the guy at the end of the bar who was talking about, you know, when I was in the military, this is what we did, and he starts bragging about all he knows about anthrax. I'm not saying that everybody like that should be ratted on, but it's to say be aware, pay more attention maybe to somebody domestic that may be doing that.
I think there's a subtext to that, that doesn't say, hey, if you know there's going to be a terrorist attack, call. Of course, anybody would do that. But rather...
(CROSSTALK)
GREENFIELD: I think everybody should be ratted on who sits at a bar and talks about his knowledge of anthrax. I don't think anybody should be taken lightly.
You know, there's a sign at the Seattle airport that's been there for years that says, "Jokes made about hijacking will be taken seriously." And that should be the mindset of the whole country now.
Some drunk at the end of the bar saying, I know about anthrax, well, tell it to the cops. Absolutely.
PUNNETT: Well, and I think that's what he's asking for. That's exactly what he's asking for.
GREENFIELD: Well, great, but why should -- do we have to be told this?
TANENBAUM: Look, there about -- look, there are about 1,028 people have been detained by the FBI.
GREENFIELD: Good.
TANENBAUM: One would hope that some of those people would be giving some information that is meaningful instead of asking people to be sitting around in a bar, as has been suggested hypothetically...
GREENFIELD: I agree.
TANENBAUM: I'll tell you why. Joe the bartender is pretty savvy. He doesn't have to wait for Mueller to get on TV and tell him to report it. And if anybody has to wait for Mueller who's been in America since 9/11, then that's a pretty sorry state of affairs. And one's credibility would be highly suspect who had to wait for Mueller to go on TV and tell them, gee whiz, if you have information, you better give it to us...
MARKOE: Don't forget...
BATTISTA: Let me Merill in here. Go ahead.
MARKOE: I was just going to say, don't forget that Ted Kaczynski was finally upended by his own brother, and it took his own brother however long it took him to figure out that that's who was doing it.
TANENBAUM: It's a substantially different set of facts with a family member...
PUNNETT: Well, I think the difference here is the paradigm shift that we're going through to thinking that maybe this is domestic, and I think the subtext to this is maybe it's domestic, the anthrax is domestic. And that's what they're trying to lean toward, which is don't think about whether somebody's from the Middle East and call, but rather do you know somebody who's been talking a lot about it and...
GREENFIELD: But the guys who destroyed the World Trade Center were from the Middle East, but they lived in this country. It doesn't have to be domestic for me to have an a alarm go off in my head. The guy can be here, but it doesn't mean it's a domestic terror.
(CROSSTALK)
BATTISTA: Let me go to the audience here. Chris, what do you think?
CHRIS: Hi. I think the government should definitely be getting people involved, because when you're doing something important, and the government says, ask you to do something, you have less time to be concerned.
And also, you've got to realize that the government has a limited number of people, and to have everyone in the United States looking out, that's a lot bigger of a base to be working from.
(APPLAUSE)
BATTISTA: Allison.
ALLISON: I think that by asking us to convict other people, it's going to start a mass hysteria, like the communist witch-hunt back in the '50s that ruined hundreds of people's lives. And I just -- I think this could be another hysteria that could spread and just ruin more people. BATTISTA: Well, that's the -- that's the downside, Bob. Right?
TANENBAUM: Well, of course. No one -- no one questions but that we want people involved. And we are involved. After all, we know that we have these terrorists living amongst us. However, what is somewhat disappointing about Mr. Mueller going on TV asking Americans now to say, "gee, you know anybody who has information about anthrax call."
Well, I mean, my God, what have we been doing? Don't you think that we are on alert to do that? What we are saying as Americans, what are you doing? Where is your professionalism? How about the 1,028 people who are in custody? Let's get some information out of them and get to the bottom of this so that we can clean out America and continue to clean up the rest of the world and get rid of the terrorist threat that jeopardizes our entire way of life and the freedoms we cherish.
GREENFIELD: And about what the young lady said about a communist witch-hunt, one of the vast differences between that and what is going on now is if you call the police and say, "my next-door neighbor said something about anthrax," and it turns out to be not true, you are going to jail. That has been made very clear by the attorney-general on down. If you say, "oh, I was just kidding," you are going to jail. That's a huge difference between that and a communist witch-hunt.
PUNNETT: I'm getting a little suspicious of the agenda here, in the sense that, how was Gray Davis right in a million-to-one chance of saying, hey, look, the bridge might get blown up. Why is that erring on the side of caution? But the FBI coming out and saying, "by the way, if you know anybody who has been talking a lot about anthrax" -- why is he being criticized for that? Why is the governor OK and the FBI is an idiot?
(CROSSTALK)
GREENFIELD: No one called him an idiot, I'm just saying...
(CROSSTALK)
PUNNETT: ... you would know this! And one minute, you praise Governor Davis, and the next you slam the FBI!
(CROSSTALK)
GREENFIELD: ... after September 11, if you have to be told to report a lunatic in your neighborhood, that -- Bob's right, that's...
(CROSSTALK)
PUNNETT: ... not talking about lunatics! You keep inserting this stuff. He's not talking about lunatics...
GREENFIELD: Oh, so he's talking about the rational guys spreading anthrax around?
PUNNETT: He's talking about anthrax. That's all he's saying. And...
(CROSSTALK)
BATTISTA: I got to break this up, you guys...
(CROSSTALK)
GREENFIELD: ... lunatic named Osama bin Laden, we ignored him for three years, didn't we?
BATTISTA: We got to break this up. Lisa, I'll get your comment when we come back from the break real quickly here, because I'm pushing it. And after Lisa's comment, we'll talk about American journalists. Should they put America first? We will be back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BATTISTA: The big question, reporting the war. Are American journalists Americans first, or do you expect them to be impartial? Ian, are they -- are journalists Americans first, and why do they have to choose?
PUNNETT: I don't why we've seen this situation over and over again where it seems like journalists feel like they have to choose. Just because you are a journalist, doesn't mean you lose your sense of right and wrong and of decency, and it seems to me odd that so often the question has been asked from the beginning, did we somehow as a nation deserve this when journalists would never show up at the scene of a murder on the street and go, "well, we don't know whether the victim deserved it, so we are not going to pass judgment on the killer."
The victim is still dead, the killer is still a killer. You should work from that position first instead of getting too political about who is right or who's wrong in the international world.
BATTISTA: Bob, what do you think?
TANENBAUM: Well, Bobbie, first let me take this moment we talk about journalists to thank you for all that you've done, because you have served the most cherished principles of...
(CROSSTALK)
TANENBAUM: ... of anybody who has been on the air. You've been honest, prepared, straightforward and accurate.
BATTISTA: Sounds like a girl scout.
TANENBAUM: You are all those things, and -- when Edward R. Murrow -- and you're serving in the tradition of Edward R. Murrow. When Edward R. Murrow was reporting live from London when London was being bombed by the Nazis, he wasn't trying to give equal time to Hitler. He was trying to report -- and not to make Americans or anyone else try to understand the Nazis, bug what he was doing was reporting about the horrors of the atrocities that were occurring in London, the courage of Americans who were fighting. And that's what made Edward R. Murrow the standard bearer for journalism.
So, I'm hoping that all Americans, whatever their profession, that after love of family they understand that the greatest thing they can say to themselves and to other people in the world is that I'm an American, and I'm damn proud of it.
BATTISTA: Sam, was that a sigh that I heard coming from your corner?
GREENFIELD: No, that was not a sigh at all. I truly believe that this is a very unusual war in that I don't care why the people who committed these atrocities committed them. They committed them, and they should be sought out and punished to the ultimate extent.
But having said that, the thing that makes this country great is that when Edward R. Murrow was over in England trashing Hitler, he then came back to this country and took on Joe McCarthy, who was trying to abrogate people's rights. Sometimes you have to buck the trend.
I'm not saying anybody should defend what's going on over there. What went on over there is despicable, but the thing that makes this country great is that you can -- you are allowed to disagree, you are allowed to say things that make the other guy angry, and God bless America for allowing that. I'm not saying it should be the standard or the norm, but I'm saying in this country when we lose the right to say, "you might be wrong," that is very dangerous.
(CROSSTALK)
TANENBAUM: I'm not saying for one moment that we shouldn't tolerate dissent, that's not the issue. And don't confuse Edward R. Murrow with that issue. The issue that I'm trying to focus on that Murrow focused on was, in order for us to have dissent, in order for us to have every freedom we want, we have to defend it. And then, once we defend it, we go back to where we were. And that's what this effort is all about. And if anybody doubts it, go to ground zero by Broadway and Fulton Street and John Street and understand what the threat to America is today.
And even with that, we are still strong enough to encourage and tolerate dissent, but that's different from journalists having the mentality of wanting to give the so-called Hitler equal time concept. That's not serving journalists...
(CROSSTALK)
BATTISTA: Hold on just a second, let me get Merrill in here quickly.
MARKOE: I think the thing that makes America great, among other things, is that we are the country where you are allowed to see the full perspective on everything. I like seeing all sides of it and then picking my own opinion, and I -- to me, that's the real beautiful part of America. You are not living in (UNINTELLIGIBLE) and you only hear just this much of the story; you get to hear the whole picture. BATTISTA: Let me to the audience on this, because we just happened to have former CNN correspondent Ralph Begleiter in the audience. Ralph used to cover international affairs for us, so no one is better than he in answering the question.
RALPH BEGLEITER, FORMER CNN CORRESPONDENT: Bobbie, this is not about equal time for the bad guys. This is about educating Americans about what they need to know about the problems around the world. And they need to hear Osama bin Laden, they need to hear every word he says, because nothing was more apparent in this particular crisis than how ignorant most Americans were about a guy that people knew about for more than a decade that he had been involved with terrorist activities. So this is about getting it on the air so that Americans can be fully informed about what they need to be informed about.
(APPLAUSE)
BATTISTA: Even at the expense of possibly hurting U.S. efforts?
BEGLEITER: There's no expense involved. Journalists are not out to undermine U.S. efforts. The U.S. government puts out a lot of information, as well.
The American people need to know what's going on, not only in the United States but also what's going on all around the world. That's a very important point that has been driven home in the aftermath of the attacks of September 11.
PUNNETT: You know, I think he makes a good point...
TANENBAUM: Don't confuse -- please don't confuse the notion of understanding what's going on in the world...
PUNNETT: ... but I think that we have -- there is still a security issue.
TANENBAUM: ... with the notion of this equal time for bin Laden. That that -- that is in now way, no way serves the purposes of the open, the marketplace of ideas that we cherish in this country.
MARKOE: If this were World War II, wouldn't we be broadcasting Hitler?
BEGLEITER: This is not about equal time. Absolutely. Of course we would be. And we should be. Americans ought to have known. They might have gotten involved in World War II a little sooner had the United States been more aware of what was going on.
GREENFIELD: That's right. Should we know nothing about Osama bin Laden?
BEGLEITER: We should know everything.
GREENFIELD: That's right. We should know as much as we can know, as much as we can humanly know about this evil, horrible human being. No one's saying...
TANENBAUM: It's fine to know. It's another thing...
GREENFIELD: ... he's a saint.
TANENBAUM: ... to give him the dignity and time of an interview. That, in my judgment, is a mistake.
GREENFIELD: It's not -- no one is talking about dignifying him. No one's talking about -- you know, I saw an interview with Charles Manson. I didn't come away from it thinking, well, you know, he's got a point. I wanted to know how crazy that guy was.
TANENBAUM: Charles Manson was -- Charles Manson at that...
GREENFIELD: And I found out.
TANENBAUM: At that time Charles Manson was convicted of murder. Let me just tell you one thing. There are two questions that should be...
(CROSSTALK)
GREENFIELD: As is bin Laden.
TANENBAUM: There are questions -- he hasn't been convicted yet. He's a vicious, depraved murderer. But the two questions that should be asked of Mr. bin Laden are simply, "Where are you?" and "Can you repeat that a little bit louder?"
(LAUGHTER)
BATTISTA: Let me take Jeff on the phone in Texas. Jeff, go ahead.
JEFF: Yes, this is a war like in World War II where we were attacked. We did not go over there and stick our nose in somebody else's business. We're not going over there and trying to force our will on Osama bin. He wants us dead for being Americans.
I mean, we've got to be on the side of America. You all can go back to hating America after the war is done.
GREENFIELD: No one's talking about hating America, Johnny Flag. Calm down.
(CROSSTALK)
BATTISTA: Let me go to the audience. Cindy Lou.
CINDY LOU: Hi. I think there are two things going on here. There's integrity in journalistic reporting and then there's sensationalism. Every one of us here was sick of the Bill Clinton story, and it was beaten like a dead horse. The anthrax issue, I asked my students on the way here, is this bothering you? Are they overdoing it? Everyone one of them said they're overdoing it. Statistically, it is not a threat to them specifically, and they said. So we're hearing too much about some things and not enough about other things.
BATTISTA: All right. This is an argument that's going to go on for quite a while, I know, and I'm not going to be part of it for at least the foreseeable future.
We are out of time. Our thanks to Merill Markoe and Robert Tanenbaum, Sam Greenfield, Ian Punnett. Thank you all very much.
GREENFIELD: You left it better than you found it, Bobbie. Thanks for your time.
MARKOE: Thank you. Good luck.
BATTISTA: Thank you. And in case you're wondering what they're talking about, as many of you know, this is my last day with CNN after 20 years. And I have to say it's been a heck of a ride. I'll miss...
(APPLAUSE)
I'll miss you all very much.
(APPLAUSE)
Yes, you as the audience have always been very kind and very generous to me. So I'm not good at goodbyes. Thank you all.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
|
|
|
|
|
