Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Talkback Live

America Speaks Out: Are there any Bounty Hunters After the Big Reward on Osama bin Laden's Head?

Aired November 21, 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.
JOIE CHEN, HOST: Today here on "TALKBACK LIVE: AMERICA SPEAKS OUT": bounty hunters. Are any of them after that big reward on Osama bin Laden's head? Meet a man that trains military and civilian commandos. "TALKBACK LIVE: AMERICA SPEAKS OUT," with your questions, right after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Wanted, dead or alive.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

JOIE CHEN, HOST: Could soldiers of fortune hit paydirt in Afghanistan?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: I have the authority, which I will use, to authorize an award of up to $25 million for the capture of Osama bin Laden.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: Our hope is that substantial monetary rewards will incentivize the large number of people to begin crawling through those tunnels and caves, looking for the bad folks.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHEN: Is it enough to intrigue the bounty hunters? Soldiers of fortune, on the prowl. Who are they and how will find, capture and deliver the $25 million wanted man?

(APPLAUSE)

The secretary of defense says "incentive." We'll see how that goes. Welcome, good afternoon. This is TALKBACK LIVE: "America Speaks Out." I'm Joie Chen. Thanks for being with us.

Those bounty hunters, what do they have to do with the war in Afghanistan? Are there any over there now, going from cave to cave, hoping to bag the $25 million reward for bin Laden?

Meet today J. Kelly McCann, a special forces trainer, and president and CEO of a company called Crucible. Kelly, thanks for being with us. We want to get right away to the notion of what people are trained to do, and how difficult a task it would to be track down somebody like Osama bin Laden. You have this sort of training in your own background. Can you give us the breakdown of how difficult it is? We've heard a lot about this cave business, but how difficult?

J. KELLY MCCANN, PRESIDENT & CEO, CRUCIBLE: Well, it's very difficult and very technical, Joie. There's a couple of things that we have to look at first. I'll go through it quickly.

The first part of the decision tree is that the president's own order was to go after global terrorism. Underneath global terrorism, a part of that would be al Qaeda. Involved with al Qaeda will be the protectors of al Qaeda, or the Taliban. And then part of the al Qaeda network would be its leadership.

So it's really not until about the third or fourth tier that you get to bin Laden, the man, although a lot of people want to vilify this and make him directly responsible. In a large part, he could be. But the bigger issue, of course, is to make less able cells to do damage to us, domestically and abroad.

Once you have identified that, and you say, OK, then let's consider going after him, the next question is: capture or kill. Once you have decided we want to capture or kill him, then you've got to decide who do you want to capture or kill him? Would that be the U.S. forces? Would it be Northern Alliance soldiers that we support? Or would it be tribal chieftain leaders, or warlords, that will have to live in Afghanistan after we're gone, and could be incentivized to bring their tribe to bear on such a problem?

CHEN: Well, you know, talking about that -- I mean, there have been a number of reports. We aren't just pulling this out of the map, but there have been a number of reports that there could be mercenaries, some sort of bounty hunters, who might say: "Hey, look, I'm not from Afghanistan, but maybe I have some experience. Maybe I have military training, maybe I have a background in this kind of operation. I'm going to use it to go after that $25 million."

What sort of training would you need to get into a situation like that, Kelly?

MCCANN: First of all, you've got to look like, act like, smell like, and I'd suggest to you that if they don't look Afghan, and if they are not convincing in the way they speak, they're not going to last very long in that area, because they're very, very small neighborhood-like people, and if you don't fit in, you simply don't fit in. But the kinds of training necessary to go after people are, of course, a recon and surveillance capability, that usually requires some kind of technical sophistication, to fix in place the target of your operation. If you can't fix them, then the battlefield is too large, and obviously you wouldn't be able to mass enough combat power to go after him.

Once you have done that, then you've got to task organize to go get the guy, and you've got to be able to get, load and lift, in order to move enough people and equipment in that area to go after him. Once you've done that, you have to make sure you've got the right weapons, tactics, techniques and procedures, to actually go into a confined space and be able to discern the threat, discriminate between combatants and non-combatants, and then engage the adversary by capturing or killing him.

So it's kind of technical and it's very difficult.

CHEN: Kelly, we've got folks in our audience here who have some questions for you. Canalle (ph) is from Louisiana. He has a question.

CANALLE: I was wondering whether the people of Afghanistan and neighboring countries, like India and Pakistan, do these people know about this reward that you've put on him? Because those are the kind of people who are living near Afghanistan and can merge within the terrorist group and possibly get some information about him, rather than an American going all the way from here to Afghanistan, and trying to hunt him down.

CHEN: I think that's what Kelly was saying, "looks like, smells like, has to be part of action."

MCCANN: Absolutely. And I would suggest to you that we've just opened up an information warfare center, or an ability to get to the Muslim nations worldwide, and kind of give our side of the story. This is a little bit late coming, but they just opened it this month. And I would suggest to you, that yes, in fact, I'm sure that's being widely published.

CHEN: We've got here an e-mail to TALKBACK, from Marge in British Columbia. Hey, Marge. Here is her comment: "I don't think Osama bin Laden will ever be found, dead or alive. If I were an American, I'd be more worried about why there's so much security around the White House and your leader."

I wonder how that plays into this, this notion of security. Maybe we're pointing ourselves in the wrong direction. You sort of seemed to allude to this at the beginning, Kelly, that maybe the priority isn't getting Osama bin Laden, himself, it's the bigger picture.

MCCANN: Joie, you hit the nail on the head. Here's the thing: if we vilify one man -- and it is arguable whether we will be able to capture or kill one man, and then confirm that it was him -- in the eyes of one-point-some-odd billion Muslim people worldwide, if you don't do that, then you've failed. And there is no equivocation, you have failed.

So I think that the more important issue is the al Qaeda network, and the ability for people to hurt expatriate Americans working abroad, and also, us domestically.

CHEN: What about the idea of a $25 million reward, Kelly? I mean, in a certain way, maybe the most likely people to turn Osama bin Laden and any top leaders in al Qaeda in would be folks within the organization. On the other hand, you give them $25 million, what are they going to do with it after?

MCCANN: Well, there's life after this. And the thing is, is that the West tries very hard to understand the tribal nature of the Afghan people. It's neither right nor wrong, it's just that we have a hard time understanding it.

As a result of that, we understand that a warlord has his own private army, his own space, and that's been the way it's been for a long, long time. So if he can see the benefit of getting that $25 million and having that for his people, that he'll then make sure are fed and kept warm, and are in a better position, it very well could work.

CHEN: Question here from one of the vets in our audience today. This is Paul. He's from New Jersey, has question for you, Kelly.

PAUL: Yes, I'm an ex-military, and I think it would be best off for the military to bin Laden. They have experience. They have experience and knowledge and technology. Now, years ago there used to be mercenary killers that used to be paid to find some bad and evil people, and I believe they have faded out. So I don't know if you're going to get a bounty hunter over there to find him. I think it's best off with the military.

MCCANN: I agree with you, Paul. And the thing is, I've said, that the notion of bounty hunters, true bounty hunters, like there were in the Wild West, it's kind of a farcical notion. It just wouldn't play out, in this scenario, especially. And although the military would certainly love to do this operation, there is a lot at risk -- and that is, a military failure, a diplomatic failure, and a political failure.

And I can only speak with expertise about the military failure, but if you hang your hat on a capability, a national asset capability, to find one man, and then go reach out and touch and get that one man, you better do it. And I think that the fabulous four, the president, his vice president, Secretary Rumsfeld and Secretary Powell, are just on top of this and making the right decisions. So they're not going to let us falter.

CHEN: Kelly, we've got a question now from the audience...

(APPLAUSE)

CHEN: Want to go with Kelly on that. OK.

Kelly, we've got Nick on the telephone line. He's in Pennsylvania for us. Nick, what's your question?

CALLER: Joie, the agenda is going to be five to 10 years before they find bin Laden. Why would they want to find him now? Then the war is over. President Bush already said five to 10 years. They know where he is at. They don't want to get him yet.

This is not about terrorism. This is about oil and Israel. And it will prove that the war is for that reason only.

CHEN: Strong comment.

MCCANN: I appreciate your opinion, but if you know where he's at, then please tell us, because we've been be looking for that guy a little bit. The bottom line is I'm not sure that we know exactly where he is. I know we have an idea of two places where he might be, and I couldn't agree more with you. I mean, there's a real wisdom to sitting outside a rabbit's hole waiting for him to poke his head out.

And personally, I'm not that much a proponent of trying to go in, at the risk of American lives, and ferret him out. He's sitting in a cave that's undoubtedly soon going to be cold. HE's got no communications capability. HE's got less friends than he ever had before in his life. I'm fine with that.

CHEN: You know, though, I have read some reports in recent days that, at least in the last few days, there have been some indications that U.S. intelligence did have a pretty good idea. There was some suggestion that maybe things didn't happen because chain of command didn't move fast enough.

In a certain sense, I know you think that the notion of bounty hunter or mercenary is pretty far-fetched. But in a certain sense, I mean, after all, there is no chain of command, really, if you're a mercenary. There's no paperwork, there's no government. There's none of this stuff. If you put somebody to work doing that, and they can take care of it, the why not?

MCCANN: Because of blowback. I mean, blowback is something that's been around for a million years, and it's the -- what happens when a supposedly covert operation breaks apart, and you end up with a lot of egg on your face. Nobody wants that to happen. In large part, Joie, the idea of people running globally to be mercenaries -- think about this. The people who would be mercenaries would normally work for the losing side. So who pays you?

And then you are everybody's worst enemy, because you give up your own citizenship to fight for another country. So that whole idea -- at one time, Mad Mike in the Congo, there was a pretty illustrious history of these kind of professional soldiers that went about doing that. But anymore -- this is too big. It would be too hard for a couple of individuals to do it, unless they were Afghan.

CHEN: In the modern age. Kelly McCann, we're going to ask you to stand by here, take a little break. There will be more questions from our audience, and from you as well, on the telephone lines and by e-mail. Stand by and join us for more TALKBACK LIVE. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHEN: Welcome back. Thanks for being with us this afternoon on TALKBACK LIVE: "America Speaks Out." With us this afternoon, Kelly McCann's company is called Crucible Security. And there are folks in our audience, Kelly, who have other questions for you about the operation of security, and what goes on and how other players, people might want to collect on $25 million, could make a difference.

We want to get out in the audience, here. June is here from New Jersey with a question -- June.

JUNE: I'm concerned that the $25 million could be used for terrorism against us, if it falls in the wrong hands, if someone gets it, an Afghan that may be a friend of bin Laden.

CHEN: Right, or somebody who has some other motive for doing that. June, it was very brave to speak out. It took a lot out of her. Yes, audience, go with June.

(APPLAUSE)

CHEN: Thank you, June.

Kelly, more on that notion of, you know, the inherent risk in offering a reward.

MCCANN: Sure, and, June, that is a great question. The thing is, these operations work in funny ways -- ways that, as the president said, a lot of the things that will take to fight this war will be known, and lot of things won't be known. Paying people money for turning in some -- somebody else is not a new concept.

I was just sitting here speaking with the next guest, and in fact, you know, there's been a reward on bin Laden, through the Rewards for Heroes program, with the diplomatic security service, with state, for over the many years since the bombings in Africa. So it's not like it's a new thing. It's more money.

And I would also suggest to you, June, that I think we'll monitor people that we would provide this money to a little bit better than we may have in the past. In other words, we know where all the players are now. We kind of own the battle space there, and I don't think that we're going to distribute funds that could ultimately be turned around against us. But it's a great question and it is a good concern.

CHEN: Is there also international risk, Kelly, to -- I mean, the United States does have certain responsibilities, U.N. Charter, Geneva Convention, all these sort of treaties. If you have said, OK, look, I'm going on give Steve here $25 million to carry out the job -- I mean, hasn't he become an agent of my government then, and don't I run some risk of violating some international convention, if I essentially hire him for that kind of work?

MCCANN: If you gave Steve $25 million, he'd become an agent of mine first, Joie.

(LAUGHTER)

CHEN: You're want a commission, Kelly, now, too?

(LAUGHTER)

MCCANN: Second thing is, is that he does. But there is not clear lines, you know, of legalities. It is a legal thing to offer a cash reward for information that lead to the conviction of criminals. Municipalities do that nationwide here in the United States. When you start talking about killing someone for a reward, you start to fuzz the lines.

And I'm not sure that it's quite clear whether that money is paid for a dead man, or whether it's paid for, you know, a live person. What are the conditions of that money? I'd be almost willing to bet you that if locals did take it on board and said we want to do this for 25 million, that you would probably get back for that a dead Osama bin Laden, which wouldn't cause anyone to cry too much.

But the bottom line is, people would be fearful that he might say some things that we could use to gather more intelligence against al Qaeda, et cetera, and also maybe uncover some relationships that people don't think would be too palatable. So there's a lot of interesting things here. And treachery and strategy has always been big in that region. That's how people live their lives.

CHEN: We have an e-mail to us from Bernadetta in New York: "Bin Laden has too many people who want to help him. He won't be found. More attention should be paid to national security and finding the terror cells that are now dormant inside the United States."

This is interesting to me, Kelly, because it's the second e-mail we've had that really seems to say, hey, the focus is in the wrong place.

MCCANN: You know, I tell you, Joie, that's very, very true. I mean, truthfully, from a strategic standpoint, killing or catching Osama bin Laden really won't do anything to make us safer. If you were an al Qaeda commander right now -- you, Joie Chen, and you were in Afghanistan, would you be able to hurt anyone here in the United States? Of course not.

But who can? Those are the cells that are operating in the third and emerging fourth world, and also domestically. Those are the people right now that are empowered to hurt us directly. Afghanistan, although it's a problem right now, is kind of sewn up. We own the battle space.

We do not own those people that are operating through porous borders, moving, potentially, weapons of mass destruction that could be used here domestically. And that is the bigger problem.

CHEN: Yes, Kelly, and I don't think many people would find me very threatening or lethal, to begin with. All right, we've got a caller on the line now. Is this Rob? Ron? John. John, sorry. John in Colorado.

CALLER: Hi, there.

CHEN: Hi. Your comment?

CALLER: My comment to the guest is, don't you think the blowback would be a whole lot less that if a bounty hunter went and got this gentleman, Osama bin Laden, than if a certain country did?

MCCANN: Not necessarily. I mean -- because, John, it's so hard of a task. If the military was going to do this operation, I mean, you need a rescue effort, you need people who are recovering force, that basically create a safe envelope for the assault team to come inside of. You need numbers of people, equipment, material. You need human support -- I mean, I don't think that it is doable by a small team of, say, TV kind of bounty hunters.

You know, I could be wrong, but I really don't see -- knowing what I'm privy to knowing, about the way these operations run -- that it could be done. So I think blowback would be more significant if you had four or five kind of cowboy outfits running around there, making the Americans look like, well, why would we ever have trusted them to go do this?

CHEN: Kelly, question here from Edward in our audience. Edward is from Nebraska.

EDWARD: By informing on bin Laden, wouldn't somebody be putting a bounty on their own head, by say, the al Qaeda, or something like that? Isn't that a fear of someone? Hasn't there been some informants that have been killed that way, one by one, after a trial over in the Philippines, or something, I think I heard on the news?

MCCANN: Oh, you would be definitely at risk. I mean, if you were an interloper, if you were from outside the community, you would definitely be at risk by those same people that I just described, who are unchecked, globally, and also domestically. So, absolutely.

I think that a person that was Afghan, or an Afghan force could do it, because they are their own protection. That's their neighborhood. So again, when you really look at the facts, you say, how could this be done? There are a lot of elements that you can click off and say, well, it couldn't be done that way, it couldn't be done that way, it couldn't be done that way. But you bet, if John Doe was to do it, John Doe should start wearing a mask from now on.

CHEN: Let me ask you this, Edward. If you were in charge, if you were running both Department of Defense in the country, what would be your decision? How would you get Osama bin Laden. Or would you make him your priority?

EDWARD: I don't think I'd make him my priority. I think it's al Qaeda and the terrorists in general I'd be after. It probably was a good thing when the president originally put it on bin Laden, because we had get somebody to put it on, so we knew where we were going to go from there. And then it, I think, escalated into the al Qaeda, and then went into the Taliban. I think that's kind of where it should be right now.

CHEN: I think Kelly agrees with you on that, right?

MCCANN: I absolutely do. I mean, everybody, domestically here, is seeing that in order for us to feel safe, it's people who are in power to hurt us. And they are not in Afghanistan right now. I think that the president was pretty clear that, while he identified Osama bin Laden as integral to this, he was very much more clear about the objective of this whole operation is global terror, period. And he's been unequivocal about that.

CHEN: Kelly McCann, we appreciate your being with us, and your insight this afternoon. Thanks for being here today. And thanks to our audience for questions for Kelly.

Joining us -- up next: Is that $25 million bounty the closest thing Afghanistan has to offer to a lottery? Our next guest will tell us how it might be tempting the tribal chiefs. Also, the man behind "Soldier of Fortune" magazine right after this news break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHEN: Welcome back. Joining us now is Bob Brown. He is the editor and publisher of "Soldier of Fortune" magazine. Also with us today form Denver is Omar Samad. He is executive director of the Afghanistan Information Center and executive producer of Azadi Afghan Radio. And then we're going to be joined later on by an additional guest as well.

But let's start with these two gentlemen and get the conversation here going. Appreciate your being with us.

You have heard some of the discussion that we have had earlier in the hour. Bob, we'll begin with you here talk a little bit about what you have heard earlier in the hour about the notion of using an outside mercenary to go after Osama Bin Laden or others that might be wanted in Afghanistan. Make any sense to you?

BOB BROWN, "SOLDIER OF FORTUNE" MAGAZINE: No. None whatsoever. It's -- it's total fantasy. It's good bar talk, sitting around with a couple of double shooters.

But as far as practicality goes, there's no way you can infiltrate into a country with that type of a culture that is so alien to -- and so closed and operate effectively.

And furthermore, you can bet your bippie that the U.S. government, the U.S. military, is not going to share intelligence with any free -- free booters, if you will. Not going to happen. It's far beyond the capabilities.

There was one individual out on the West Coast who was putting out publicity saying he was retained by some billionaires from Wall Street that were going to put up millions of dollars, that he'd put together teams that had gone in and done all this stuff. Fantasy. Either he was a total fraud or the people that were speaking to him simply took advantage of his ignorance and stupidity.

CHEN: We do have question from Kamal about this notion of using somebody from the outside. It is possible, you think, with the right sort of inside help?

KAMAL: Well, you could work out a way that the bounty hunters could work together with the U.S. forces the same way as the U.S. forces have been working together with the Taliban forces. So we can have -- if we can have a tie-up or some kind of understanding between the bounty hunters and the U.S. forces, that would be a good force to hunt down Osama Bin Laden.

CHEN: Maybe like nod nod, wink wink. OK, look, he's over there. We're going to keep our backs turned until you take care of it?

KAMAL: Not exactly that way. But an insider, maybe from Afghanistan, give information to the U.S. forces who have the right experience to get in and get him out and take care of him, rather than an individual bounty hunter doing it all by himself.

CHEN: You know, there is beyond the bar talk -- because we don't have a bar, Bob, here available to take care of that element of the thing -- but there -- there are some -- for example, we mentioned earlier -- political implications if you, for example, have U.S. special forces in the operation. Wouldn't that be a risk to, say, international treaties, U.N. Charter, something like that?

BROWN: Well, I think what we can see here and that is essentially developing a snitch among the Afghan populace. What I envision seeing potentially happening is you have got special forces operators in with all the major resistance groups throughout Afghanistan.

And I would guess -- and this is a pure guess, because I'm not on the ground -- but this is technically special forces strategy. They would be in liaison with the tribal leaders. They are going to be providing them with equipment, with arms, with money, with guidance, with advice, with training, as well as with the capability of bringing in immediate airstrikes.

And it is very possible -- since the Afghan culture, the tribal relationships and loyalties are very shallow-- that you are going to be able to elicit some tribal chief to essentially turn Bin Laden in.

CHEN: I am interested in talking to Omar about that, that relationship and the cultural imperatives, Omar, of using money to try to get information, to try to find a snitch as Bob described. Will that work, do you think?

OMAR SAMAD, AFGHAN INFORMATION CENTER: Well, Joie, bounty hunting is really not part of Afghan culture. You know, we do not have a history of bounty hunters in the country whether it's internal or from the external coming in and going after people.

But as was mentioned earlier, it's interesting that this price on Bin Laden's head has been around for the past three years -- almost three years, since 1998 when the embassies were blown up in Africa.

It started out with $5 million and then over time grow to $25 million now. And there haven't been too many people -- as far as we know -- that seem to have shown any interest. I am sure that doesn't mean that there are no people that would like to get a hold of $25 million in Afghanistan.

But the tribal and the cultural context obviously is an impediment. At the same time, I think that there are tribal leaders, there are local chieftains, there are militia groups that -- in Afghanistan that may want to go after Bin Laden for their own reasons. As you know, the Afghans themselves would like to get their hands on Bin Laden for various other reasons, one of which is that they -- that the al Qaeda group has taken Afghanistan and its people hostage.

CHEN: You know, I wonder even how many folks on the ground in Afghanistan know there is a reward. $5 million, $25 million, $100 million. Maybe the amount doesn't matter, but how many people on the ground actually know that there is a reward available? And if they did know, how many of them actually know where Osama Bin Laden is?

BROWN: Well, we know that they've making airdrops of leaflets advising the Afghans of the fact there is this reward. Now how widespread this is, I don't know. I would suggest the bulk of those leaflets are going down into southeastern Afghanistan around the Kandahar area simply because that is where they suspect that he is.

CHEN: And Omar, I mean, the literacy rate in Afghanistan is something like 28 percent. So even if you drop the leaflets, you don't know that anybody is getting them that can read them.

SAMAD: It's -- it's not just the leaflets. Obviously the leaflets can be read in Dari, in Pashtun -- the two main languages -- by some of the people, as you mentioned.

But the radio broadcasts are also very important. Not only do you have U.S. military radio planes going around broadcasting through Afghan radio waves but also you also have the BBC and VOA -- the two main sources of information for Afghan people -- getting the message across about the bounty hunting, the money and Bin Laden and the fact that the whole world, the international community, the coalition would like to get their hands on Osama Bin Laden. So the Afghans are aware of what is going on.

CHEN: All right. On the subject of the international community and other participants, allied forces as well, on the telephone line with us is retired British Army Colonel Bob Stewart. He was the U.N. commander in Bosnia in 1992 and in 1993.

Colonel, we appreciate your being with us. Can you talk to us about this notion of some -- sending somebody after the -- the wanted man, as it were? After all, this was also a priority in the Balkans and it became quite a difficult one to reach some of those key fixtures.

COLONEL BOB STEWART, BRITISH ARMY (RET.): I think, to be honest, we are doing everything we can to get Bin Laden. And I think in the end he will be located. It's just a matter of time. Whether in fact he's...

CHEN: Located by who?

STEWART: He'd be located, I believe, by American forces or British forces or the Northern Alliance. Someone is going to find him. I don't think the bounty is going work necessarily.

CHEN: What do you think would make a difference for those forces.

STEWART: As much intelligence as possible and the local people turning more and more towards us and telling us what is going on.

After all, at the moment we know that special forces of the United States certainly -- and possibly the United Kingdom, but they never say that -- are combing the hills in southern Afghanistan and investigating and talking to people, which is probably where we are going to get the best intelligence.

Intelligence from satellite, as I know, is great. But it doesn't actually identify people.

CHEN: Omar you are -- you are in agreement with the colonel on this?

SAMAD: Yes, to a certain point I am. You see, what is happening is that the Northern Alliance, for one, is not very influential in the southern, southeastern parts of Afghanistan. As you know, they are mostly in the northern parts of the Hindu Kush Mountains.

So there may be some Northern Alliance forces in the -- in the region and they would love to get their hands on Bin Laden, who is their archenemy.

That -- I believe that the U.S. and British in the region obviously are doing everything they can, and I am somewhat surprised that they have not actually yet been able to get closer to Bin Laden and -- and his people.

I think that the Afghans on the field and the tribal leaders who are in the region of Kandahar, and Oruzgan and Helman are going to help. I think over time you see this shift away from the Taliban and this will open the doors to more Afghan cooperation on the ground.

STEWART: Can I just say something? I think we might also being -- be being sold a lemon. And I hope very much that our intelligence sources know much more than we are hearing. I -- I believe that that is possible. I believe also that we -- we -- they may know where Mr. Bin Laden is.

It may well be that actually they are allowing circumstances to develop. One of the circumstances that must develop is it would difficult under the Geneva Conventions for British or American soldiers just to shoot a man that is surrendering. And if this guy suddenly decides to surrender to a British or a -- an American soldier, that soldier is in a dreadful dilemma, because he knows the Geneva Convention.

In a way, it would be much better if they didn't have that problem. And what I mean by that is that someone else dealt -- dealt with the matter. But I believe that Mr. Bin Laden, having convinced so many young men to kill themselves for a futile cause, should actually have the bravery to do it themselves. That would be the best deal for all of us.

CHEN: Well, Colonel, that leads me back to this whole notion of hiring a mercenary or --- or at least leaving the money dangling for somebody from the private military sector, if that's what you call it, to come in and do the job. And after all, that relieves anyone from any consideration of -- of treaties or charters or anything else, anything in the international legal community, doesn't it?

STEWART: Yes, it does. I mean, leave no stone unturned. I'm not saying don't leave the -- I'm saying get -- get this man by any possible means. Do not actually say we can't do this, we can't do that.

Let's just put out as many hooks as we can. Let's get the guy. It's vitally important that this man is brought in quickly. And just actually his organization remains in being. It's not just him. His organization. We want him. It will be preferable for everyone in the world if this man was extinguished.

CHEN: Colonel, you did -- as you hear -- get quite a round of applause from that. And I want to back that up -- yeah, audience, you can back up the colonel on that.

A couple of e-mails here that sort of are on this point. "The reason the United States is concentrating on Bin Laden and the reason special forces will capture or kill him is because of the worldwide psychological effect on the al Qaeda operatives if Bin Laden is done in at the hands of the United States." That's from Lou in Massachusetts.

Also, "Bin Laden as an individual is not a major priority right now. Leaving him free would be the kernel that would attempt to rebuild for the purpose of instigating future world terror. We should continue to pursue Bin Laden and his gang until they are killed or captured. We can't afford not to." That is from Pike out in Alabama. And agreement here in the audience.

We are going to take a break here and continue our conversation right after this. Please stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHEN: Back here on the TALKBACK LIVE set, a lot of enthusiasm for the idea of a reward and how that might work. A notion from Eric here in our audience. Comment on that.

ERIC: I think this isn't -- isn't even about hiring bounty hunters. It's about gaining as much information as possible. And we're -- I think the United States government is just utilizing every resource possible. You know, there's no problem with having it out there. Why not? That's like tapping into this giant information resource. And there's people -- you know, if there is somebody around him that is willing to give us information, why not?

CHEN: $25 million worth the investment here. But Joe also had an interesting notion about this $25 million, and particularly, Omar, your comment that maybe $25 million isn't going to get anybody very far anyway in terms of getting -- eliciting. Joe, your comment on the $25 million.

JOE: I was just thinking that, you know, it is my opinion that we should probably look at what monetary monies we can bring into the States here and basically offer a reward in, you know, I don't know, $25 million or some cash amount that basically -- let's look at our homeland security.

Absolutely. Root them out at home and focus. Because I think we would agree that the danger -- and from what I've heard today, the danger is more the United States -- and I think we can put away the concern so much, you know, the reward over there.

CHEN: Is that the better use of the money, Omar?

SAMAD: Well, obviously to spend the money here in the United States makes sense. I think that it does not mean that you can -- should not go after the parent company, al Qaeda, which is based in Afghanistan today.

But I will tell you that the Afghans themselves would like to get their hands on this guy and on his co -- coworkers who are also -- all alleged and all accused of having killed Afghans. So eventually this will lead to a -- in my opinion -- a conclusion that will be acceptable and will -- will satisfy everyone. Eventually Bin Laden cannot hide forever.

CHEN: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) here in our audience has question for you.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: My point is that probably are a number of people in -- in and around Afghanistan who have some idea of where Bin Laden or his allies are, but they may be worried that, is this information too trivial to put my neck in the noose? Or how do we address this issue of ensuring protection or encouraging them to come forward?

CHEN: If it's not money...

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It may not be -- it may not be directly, exactly where he is. But they -- they may have some information but they may be afraid to come out with that.

CHEN: Yeah, Omar, how do you get that additional information out if there -- if it is out there? SAMAD: I believe that Bin Laden is distancing himself from the Afghans and even from the Taliban, except for the hard-core Taliban. I -- I believe that there is -- there are incentives for going after him within Afghanistan. I don't think that Bin Laden can hide forever and that the situation on the ground is changing very fast. So eventually there will be a groundswell against Bin Laden and they eventually will get him.

CHEN: Bob, there are some folks here in our audience that have some questions for you about the whole notion of a mercenary. Jeff is here from Georgia with a question about that.

JEFF: Yeah, was wondering who it is that hires somebody like that?

CHEN: Right. If you -- if you said to us that maybe this is not a job for outside mercenaries, Bob, maybe you'd have to...

BROWN: (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

CHEN: I thought that mercenary does do for a living.

BROWN: No, no. As I said earlier, the idea of individuals going in under private auspices, if you will, a private operation is -- is total fantasy. It cannot be done. It simply cannot be done. It can only be done in cheap...

CHEN: Bob, let me just interrupt you for one second, because our viewers are seeing on the air the president and the first lady coming off the plane at Andrews Air Force Base. As you know, earlier in the day they were out in Kentucky at Fort Campbell to cheer on the troops and of course this going into the Thanksgiving holiday, offering thanks as well to those folks who are serving the nation there.

Sorry, Bob, didn't want to interrupt your thought, but we did explain what the president was doing.

BROWN: Well, I will let -- I'll let the president interrupt me anytime he wants.

CHEN: That's a good idea.

BROWN: He's a pretty hard act to follow, frankly.

CHEN: That's a pretty good idea, Bob.

BROWN: But -- but what I would like to point out is that -- and certainly, I defer to Omar. I am no expert on the Afghan culture. I have been to -- been in Afghanistan a number of times, I have been with the Afghans on combat operations, I certainly don't put myself as an expert.

However, it's quite -- there is one factor I think that the American public is not too aware of. And that is that the Taliban did not achieve their victories, control of the country, simply by force of arms. Quite the contrary. They bought their way in. They cut deals with these warlords in Afghanistan.

With all due respect to Omar, loyalty is relatively shallow. And we have seen how loyalties have shifted back and forth, back and forth, back and forth. I maintain certainly this whole concept of trying to utilize rewards to eliminate this cancer, which must be rooted out and totally destroyed. And the head of the cancer is this man Bin Laden.

I think the type of -- of effort that is we are putting forth, psychological warfare, if you will, as well as making these offers, I think we may be able to get some Afghans to turn him. Now, maybe it won't happen, but it's certainly worth the efforts.

CHEN: All right. I need to get to the other Colonel Bob before we run out of time. Our colonel on the phone. Just a last word sir.

There have been places where mercenary forces have been effective. I even read of one case where some journalists went into Bosnia looking for -- went into the Balkans looking for Radovan Karadic, thinking they were going to get some money. Last word from you on when it can be effective and if it might be time.

Bob: When are we going to get Bin Laden?

CHEN: Yes, sir.

STEWART: We are going to get Bin Laden very soon now. He is going to hopefully decide that the game is up. He is going to surrender to the wrong people, in his point of view, probably the Northern Alliance. And I hope they quickly -- this scourge will be off this earth.

CHEN: All right, sir. We will -- we will see how quickly that is. Thank you very much. We are out of time for today. We appreciate all of guests joining us as well as you at home. We will see you on Friday. Tomorrow is a day off for the Thanksgiving holiday. Enjoy it.

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