Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Talkback Live

How Important Is It to Find Osama bin Laden?; Could Your Cell Phone Be Deadly Weapon?

Aired February 05, 2002 - 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.
FREDERICKA WHITFIELD, HOST: Months of bombing and tempting rewards, yet the trail of America's most wanted seems cold.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CONDOLEEZZA RICE, NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: It's not an easy place to find somebody and if somebody wants not to be found, it's particularly hard.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: Did Osama bin Laden get away? And how important is it to find him?

Also, could your cell phone be a deadly weapon? Some lawmakers want you to hang it up before you talk yourself or someone else to death.

(APPLAUSE)

Hello and welcome to TALKBACK LIVE: "America Speaks Out". I'm Fredricka Whitfield. Later this hour, a surprise guest. It's going to be my pleasure to introduce you to the person who will soon become your permanent host here on TALKBACK LIVE.

And first though, we are going to get to the top of our topics. Guess who wants a get out of jail card? Attorneys for John Walker Lindh say the American isn't a threat, isn't a risk and should be free on bond. And, of course, the folks in here in our audience are very anxious to weigh in on this. But so are our guests. Terry Jeffrey, editor of "Human Events" magazine; and Bill Press, co-host of CNN's "CROSSFIRE". His new book is called "Spin This".

And before either one of you gentlemen get in a word on this, CNN correspondent Jonathan Aiken will fill us in on the details. Hi there, Jonathan.

JONATHAN AIKEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Fredericka. I feel like I'm cutting in to the top of the line here. The judges for John Walker Lindh filed a 15-page memorandum in federal court today. And basically what they're saying to the judge is, look, here is a guy that doesn't have a criminal record. This is a guy that has shown no propensity toward violence within the community, meaning here in the United States. And he is not going to be a flight risk.

What they want to do is they want to get bail or bond so that he can get out and spend some time with his family and also so that they can sit down away from the courthouse and work up some kind of logical defense. And that's really the reason why these papers were filed today in advance of this hearing that is taking place tomorrow morning.

WHITFIELD: Tomorrow, the hearing that was scheduled to take place would be a bond hearing. But at the same time, it's likely that the prosecutors will make their argument that he should be staying in jail, at least until the grand jury weighs in on whether he should be indicted, correct?

AIKEN: Yes. I mean, the government, at this point, if it doesn't show any reason to hold him, which means that they have evidence that there is probable cause to the crime, could be committed or a crime may have been committed, then they have a reason to hold him even longer. And what the attorneys for Walker Lindh are saying, look, none of that exists. The argument that you have presented to the court so far, the argument that is the basis for the charges against Walker Lindh don't really have anything concrete or specific behind them other than some hearsay evidence. An FBI agent talked to Walker Lindh at Camp Rhino in Kandahar. That conversation was never -- the documents of that conversation were never formally presented in court. And what you have, just underlying the government complaint, is hearsay. One FBI agent heard from another FBI agent what Walker Lindh may have said to him. So what the lawyers are saying is, look, put it up, let's see it. If it's enough, then OK. But if not, we want our guy out of jail because we want be able to work a defense and he wants to be with his family.

WHITFIELD: Now what about John Walker Lindh's parents? It had been a complaint by the parents that initially, they hadn't had a chance to see their son. They hadn't seen him in two years. Since he has been detained awaiting these next court motions, have the parents finally had a chance to see their son?

AIKEN: Oh, they sure have. In fact, they saw him the day after he arrived. The night he came into Washington and was brought by helicopter to the city detention center in Alexandria, Virginia, they were turned away from the courthouse and from the jail by federal marshals. The next morning before this first appearance in federal court, they had about a 45-minute meeting with their son, but it was a conversation only. There was an officer of the court, as how it was described, it was probably an FBI agent or maybe a marshal who was in the room with Walker Lindh and his family. And they were not allowed to touch. There was a metal screen that separated the two of them.

The defense has been saying, actually they have been saying for some time that the federal government has been a little too stringent on the question of visitation, that there had been restrictions placed on the Walker family, restrictions that are not faced by other federal inmates facing charges related to the war on terrorism. At the very least, Fredericka, what they want to do tomorrow is be able to get to a government witness, to get to somebody on the stand, and be able to say, look, explain to us why this man is not able to spend a lot of time with his family, explain why this family can't spend a lot of time with their son. And, you know, once that happens, then the doors open for other questions to come down the road. But at the very least, they want to pry open the door for the family and possibly even get their client out on bond.

WHITFIELD: All right. Well, we'll all be watching. Thanks very much, Jonathan Aiken, for that update on the John Walker Lindh case.

Now let's bring in our guests who are just chomping at the bit, can't wait to talk about exactly whether or not Jonathan Walker Lindh needs to be released before the trial. So what do you say Bill Press of "CROSSFIRE" and Terry Jeffrey. Bill, let's begin with you.

BILL PRESS, CO-HOST, CNN'S "CROSSFIRE": Well, I have never been a member of the Johnny Walker fan club. I have to say this is a guy who betrayed his country. I think he should be put on trial. I think he should serve some time in prison. Whether or not he is released out of prison pending trial, I guess, depends, as Jonathan said, on the argument that the defense attorneys can make to the judge. He does not have any previous criminal record. There may be some argument for letting him go stay with his family.

But I would have to add that I don't think this guy is going to be very popular if he walks into the McDonald's, you know, next door. He may be better off and safer in prison and maybe that's where he ought to stay for his own sake.

WHITFIELD: Terry, your thoughts. Why would this benefit the defense's case?

TERRY JEFFREY, EDITOR, "HUMAN EVENTS": Well, actually, I think that Walker's lawyers' filing is ludicrous on its face. This is a guy who admitted to the FBI that he joined al Qaeda at a time that he knew al Qaeda was interested in attacking Americans. He stayed with al Qaeda after September 11 even though he knew al Qaeda was responsible for the September 11 attack. You've all see him on videotape, not only refusing to answer the questions of a CIA agent in a time of battle, but telling this network, CNN, that he wanted to join the Taliban, that his heart was with them. So I think it's ludicrous to say there isn't probable cause that this guy was a traitor and committed crimes in pursuit of treason against this country.

WHITFIELD: OK. We've got some questions and comments right here in the audience. Let's get to them. Adella (ph)?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Adella (ph) is a lawyer in Pakistan.

ADELLA: Hi.

WHITFIELD: All right. Adella, do you have a question or comment for our guests, Bill or Terry?

ADELLA: I just have a comment that I made earlier, that the onus of proof always lies on the plaintiff, the one who is making the complaint. So therefore, it -- Johnny Walker has to be proven that he is guilty. I do fear that because the general atmosphere, the consensus of the American public is that he has betrayed his country, therefore he might not be safe to be out on bond. And I don't know how safe he would be to the American public either, but he definitely needs a chance to be heard. Otherwise, everyone would be found to be guilty.

WHITFIELD: Well, Terry, she seems to be chiming in with what you said. You said you really wouldn't want to see what happens if he were to go to a McDonald's.

PRESS: Actually, I'm the one who said that.

WHITFIELD: Oh, sorry, Bill.

PRESS: And I just wanted to comment on what she said. I think the attorney is absolutely right. The whole thing depends on the strength of the federal case against John Walker. Clearly, he is a kid who was caught behind enemy lines, wrong place at the wrong time. Can the government prove that he went behind enemy lines, stayed behind enemy lines, with the intent to the shoot and to kill Americans? From what I have seen, I think they have a weak case built on an FBI statement, a statement that John Walker made to the FBI when he was probably under morphine or from some stupid statements that he made on CNN. And if we could all be sent to jail for life for stupid statements we made on CNN, I'm afraid American jails would be overcrowded.

JEFFREY: Well, listen, this guy didn't get caught behind enemy lines. He went behind enemy lines of his own free will. What he's told the FBI after waiving his right to an attorney, said he wanted to join the Taliban. The Taliban redirected him to al Qaeda. He knew he was joining al Qaeda. He personally met Osama bin Laden. He knew they wanted to attack America. He knew they were responsible for the September 11 attacks. He stayed with them, and I reiterate, we have all seen the videotape, where he refused to answer questions of a CIA officer at that prison in Mazar-e Sharif. Couple of hours later, that CIA officer was dead because of Johnny Walker's al Qaeda colleagues. This guy actually committed treason. He is being charged with a lesser crime.

WHITFIELD: We have got Mike on the phone from Florida. Let's here what he has to say. Hi there, Mike.

MIKE: Hi. I believe Johnny Walker is an American citizen and I believe he should enjoy the right of our U.S. Constitution and he should enjoy the freedom of bail. The man -- obviously there is a weak case there. There is nothing there at all. And he has a constitutional right as well as the rest of us. And as the man said, there's just -- is he going to put all of us in prison? No, that's not right. We all must enjoy our constitutional rights and if they don't allow us to enjoy our constitutional rights, they are nothing more than a threat to our Constitution than the terrorists themselves.

WHITFIELD: All right. Bo here in the audience says no bond, no way. BO: I listened to your caller just now and that's probably a real good point. When he was an American -- being an American. But also, when this man waltzed over there to join the Taliban, there should no longer be a price for him to come back and enjoy the things that Americans enjoy.

He offered to kill Americans. Well, you are out. That's not even a three-strike law. You go over there, you kill Americans, you die. It's a real simple process. You bomb our country, we will come over there and we bomb yours. And I'm sure that when they are talking about Mr. Walker coming back here and being tried as an American, and that's fine. And I believe in all the rights and I spent 20 years in the military to cover our rights. But when you walk over there to kill Americans and you join forces to kill Americans, you are out. That's my comment.

WHITFIELD: All right. Thanks very much, Bo. All right, well, let's move on from John Walker Lindh to Osama bin Laden, the disappearing terrorist. The world's most wanted man has managed to elude capture and there have been alleged sightings here and there. An intelligence agent in the USA -- of course, in "USA Today" today described those as Elvis sightings and no one seems to know where bin Laden is or even if he is anywhere to be found.

So let's find out from our audience here, is it your belief that this is a failed U.S. military operation because there is no Osama bin Laden in our grasp? Do you agree with that, anyone?

All right. Well, let's go on to our guest there. Terry or Bill, since our audience seems to have a bashful factor going on here, what do you believe? Is it fair to say at this point that there are critics who say the U.S. military is a failed operation because there's no Osama bin Laden in hand?

JEFFREY: Well, you know, Fredericka, Osama bin Laden might have been blown into 15 million pieces by one of those Daisy Cutter bombs dropped on Tora Bora and we may never find his body. The real test of success of this Afghan war is whether agents of al Qaeda come back and succeed in new acts of terrorism against the United States. If six months from now, a year from now, there has not been another act like September 11, I think it is clearly a success. And at a certain point, we're going to have to know that Osama in fact did die, even if we don't find his corpse.

PRESS: Fredericka, let me put this -- first of all, I would not say that we have had a failed military adventure or experience in Afghanistan. I think the military there, our military, did an extraordinarily good job and we should all be proud of them.

But let's be honest with ourselves. When this war started, it was a war against the al Qaeda network led by Osama bin Laden. When President Bush was at Camp David with his five advisers and they said, what are we going to do? What are we going to tell the American people? They had a picture of Osama bin Laden in a circle with a slash through it. The goal was to get Osama bin Laden, not to overthrow the Taliban. Now we succeeded in overthrowing the Taliban, but Osama bin Laden is missing.

So I'd have to say let's be honest. Our No. 1 target, our No. 1 goal was not achieved. What I would like to know as an American is why don't we know where this guy is? There was a failure of American intelligence before 9/11 that resulted in those terrorist attacks, and why doesn't the CIA know where Osama bin Laden is today? I think it's outrageous and we ought to demand better service.

WHITFIELD: All right. Bill and Terry, we are going to continue this conversation and we've got some callers on the line who also have some thoughts and questions about this. But we will be right back after this break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(APPLAUSE)

Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE: "America Speaks Out." We are talking about where is Osama bin Laden. A "USA Today" and CNN/Gallup poll says that half polled believe that war is not successful if bin Laden is still on the run; 44 percent say it would be a success.

And joining us to carry on this conversation is Bill Press of "CROSSFIRE" and Terry Jeffrey, editor of the "Human Events" magazine. All right, gentlemen, do you agree with those Gallup polls there?

Let's begin with you Terry. Can you hear me?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Fredericka...

WHITFIELD: Yes.

All right. Let's go to one of our callers. It looks like we are having an audio problem. Gwen, do you have a question or comment?

GWEN: Hi.

WHITFIELD: Hi.

GWEN: I really truly think that capturing Osama bin Laden and whether or not the war was a success is irrelevant right now. We have had like American men and women dying and flying into mountains unnecessarily. America needs to concentrate on their diplomacy and on their foreign policy.

WHITFIELD: All right. Anybody in our audience agree with that?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Well, I really feel that capturing Osama bin Laden is pivotal, considering the region we are directing at and the al Qaeda -- how he represents it. He's a symbolic head. He's a physical head, and it's because of him and the enigma that he attracts that people go towards him. If he was not there, then the al Qaeda would collapse, basically.

WHITFIELD: All right. Well, Assad (ph), you have been listening in on this and you've been weighing in mentally. What are you thinking about?

ASSAD (ph): Otherwise, I mean, capturing him, yes, would be the best thing to do. But I think, I mean, when they say al Qaeda, they also throw in the word network too. And it's a network that, I mean, in "USA Today" this morning -- or yesterday, as I said, it's a network that's gone into Lebanon. It's gone into other places and maybe even here in the states.

So, I mean, it's a network. And those people, I mean -- he has taught them, he's told them, you know, here, this is how you go through with these kind of things and this is what you do. So I think there is an idea that he's just spread all over the place.

WHITFIELD: Amanda, is it your belief that the U.S. military perhaps should have gone for the leader of the al Qaeda network, Osama bin Laden, first or should they have carried on exactly what they did, which was try to wipe out the al Qaeda network first, bomb Afghanistan, and then go after the leader?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I don't think that the leadership should be the sole focus of it. I think that the network is so strong and so widespread throughout the world that they are operating as best as they can to quell the possible disturbances all over the place. So I think that while it might be perceived as a victory if we do capture him, find him, that's don't solve the problem and it doesn't get at the root.

(APPLAUSE)

WHITFIELD: OK. Well, let's now go to one of our callers who has a question or comment. What are your thoughts?

All right, Linda.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Linda has got a comment. Linda, go ahead.

LINDA: I agree with the lady right in the front row here. The fact that we as a nation did not know that much about the Taliban or the al Qaeda network, and now we -- that we know how large it indeed is, that, yes, it is important that we get him I think eventually in the end. I kind of changed my mind on that.

At first, I didn't think it was as important, but now I think it is. And I also think as huge as this network has become, if we don't get to all of it and get to the root of it, that he certainly can rise again, so to speak, and, you know, continue on with the destruction of innocent people.

WHITFIELD: All right. Well, Laura, you have been real quiet back here. Something tells me you've got something percolating.

LAURA: I feel that Osama bin Laden very much is a major part of course to this. But we also have learned that it is a large cancer all over the world. We as Americans were very naive and blind to it. When this happened, we woke up, but you know, when the man with the explosives in his shoe on the plane, I'm saying to myself, if they have Osama or not, this would have happened, and if they get Osama, others like this man may erupt all over the country and all over the world.

WHITFIELD: Let's talk about whether you even believe whether Osama bin Laden is still alive or if you believe he was killed in the American bombing of Afghanistan.

Whose thoughts -- who is willing to share their thoughts on whether he is alive indeed, and some intelligence sources have said that because they have heard in their interception of telephone calls and radio calls, that it doesn't appear that any members of the al Qaeda network have been talking about Osama bin Laden in past tense, so that therefore he may be alive. What are your thoughts?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think the people over there want to us think he dead and he is probably just in hiding. It's kind of like the whole thing is like a war a drugs. You know...

WHITFIELD: Let's go to one of our callers. Kyle is on the line.

CALLER: Yes, I was just wonder, if we are offering the people in Afghanistan $25 million to give him up and no one does, do we have to think about offering other incentives for these countries to be giving up these people?

WHITFIELD: Bill Press and Terry Jeffrey, thanks for joining us again. We had a technical problem. You have had a chance to hear some of the folks here who aren't necessarily -- we are not getting a definitive poll here on whether anybody believes Osama bin Laden is indeed alive, or whether he was killed in the bombing.

Terry, let's begin with you. What are your thoughts? Do you think he really is still alive?

JEFFREY: I don't know, but I think some people made shrewd observations that we do need to get him because I think one of the things we have learned since September 11 is that there wasn't a major state sponsor like Iraq behind this. If you look at tape of Osama bin Laden taking credit for it, it is clear that al Qaeda is a tight-knit organization. He was at the top of it. He was the mastermind of this organization. If he is still out there he is the No. 1 danger. If we take him, if we decapitated al Qaeda, it is degraded as a threat to the United States significantly. So, getting him is important. Whether we can confirm that readily I think is big question.

PRESS: My opinion this is, that I believe that we should focus on our No. 1 goal which is to destroy the al Qaeda network and to get its leader, Osama bin Laden. I believe he is out there, I believe he is still alive, and if he is, as long as he is alive wherever he is, he is capable of doing evil.

And I would suggest that rather than talk about war against Iraq or war against Iran, or was against North Korea we should find out what country is harboring Osama bin Laden. It is Yemen, is it Somalia, is it Saudi Arabia? And that country should be our next target. WHITFIELD: All right, Terry Jeffrey, and Bill Press, thanks very much for both of you joining us today. Up next you are going to be meeting a mother who says a cell phone contributed to the death of her only child. Find out what her demands are now. We will be right back.

ANNOUNCER: Coming up on TALKBACK LIVE...

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(PHONE RINGING)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There have been a lot of allegations across the country that cell phones have been involved with crashes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ANNOUNCER: Driving under the influence of cell phones. Are hand held cell phones a distraction? What about all that other stuff you do in the car?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I have stopped many myself, reading the newspaper, watching TV, eating, shaving, make up, name it. We see it every day.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ANNOUNCER: Should there be laws to prohibit it all?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE: "America Speaks Out." For the first time the National Transportation Safety Board has singled out the use of a cell phone as possibly being connected to a deadly auto accident. Last Friday, five people died near Washington, D.C. when a driver believed to be on a cell phone lost control then hit oncoming traffic. The driver along with four Canadian tourists were killed.

Avoiding accidents like this is why drivers are already banned from using hand held cell phones in New York, and there is growing pressure to ban them in other states, and here to talk about it, Patty Pena. Her two-year-old daughter Morgan Lee was killed by a driver who was on a cell phone. She is the founder of Advocates for Cell Phone Safety, which is merging with a partnership for safe driving. Thanks, Patty, for joining is.

PATRICIA PENA, PARTNERSHIP FOR SAFE DRIVING: Thank you for having me.

WHITFIELD: Describe exactly what happened. What is your understanding of the events that took place.

PENA: Um, well, um, it was Tuesday November 2, 1999. It was my second full day at home as a stay-at-home mom. I just resigned from my job to be with Morgan full-time. So it was just a regular Tuesday and we were returning from a visit at my sister's home, and were just driving down the road and Morgan was in her car seat, everything was fine, and there was no traffic signal for a while, so we were just proceeding straight down the road when all of a sudden my car was broadsided by another vehicle and we were just spinning and crashing and eventually came to a stop and I turned around to check on Morgan she was not breathing and there was blood trickling down her head and I just started screaming.

WHITFIELD: And when you were convinced that it was indeed a cell phone that was involved in this accident, did you immediately begin this campaign to try and get other states or any state to try and impose some sort of legislation to restrict the handheld cell phone use?

PENA: Well, first what I did was to begin research. I read everything I could get my hands on. I called anybody who would listen or speck to me about their research, I called my legislative officials, and I started a process of educating myself, and truly could not believe what I found. And the most basic of all things was when I went to my own owner's manual of my cell phone, because I too had a cell phone and used it prior to the accident while driving -- had no idea of the risks I was taking with my baby in the car, and turned to the cell phone manual. And here on page one, it said rather clearly: Do not use a handheld phone while driving. Park the vehicle first.

I had never heard that before. So I knew I had to tell everybody what I had just learned, because I knew the cellular industry was not certainly telling you that. They were selling you this product. And all I had ever heard was just to use your phone safely while driving, never that you are not supposed to use their products while driving.

WHITFIELD: And even with that warning, it seems that most people agree that cell phones can be a distraction, but, still, not everyone is ready to have them banned.

And joining us now is Adam Thierer, director of telecommunications with the Cato Institute.

Adam, why is it that this seems to be a uphill battle for those who are advocating some sort of legislation in most states to try and ban or restrict certain cell phone usages?

ADAM THIERER, CATO INSTITUTE: Well, it is an unfortunate reality of life that, every day, there are a lot of accidents on our roads and highways in America, many of them caused by distracted driving.

However, on the list of distracted driving, the causes of distracted driving, using a cell phone is pretty far down that list. In fact, we know that things like eating and drinking at the wheel, or smoking, or reading papers, or conversing with other passengers, or arguing with passengers, or yelling at your kids, those have proven to be far more distracting activities. However, we have not tried to ban all of those activities or any other technologies. We have singled out cell phones all of a sudden because of a handful of tragic cases. And they really are tragic, but we need to put things in perspective and base public policy on facts and not a handful of anecdotal cases.

WHITFIELD: And, in fact, Adam, there are limited studies, as you mentioned, on whether cell phones are indeed a legitimate distraction. According to a AAA study, apparently only 1.5 percent of the time of the recorded cases that they have can be blamed on cell phone usage.

So, Patty, is it your opinion that perhaps people are not reporting the fact that they are using the cell phones and that is why the numbers are so low? Or do you see that this study is skewed in some way?

PENA: Well, frankly, there are many studies. The University of Utah just came out with a very informative study with their simulator. Dr. David Strayer just found that cell-phone-using drivers are twice as likely to miss a traffic signal. Their reaction times are slowed. Judgment is impaired, longer breaking times, degraded steering performance.

I mean, this is -- you can't negate these studies. There is a long list of them. And they are getting more frequent and better.

WHITFIELD: Patty, we are going to continue this conversation in a moment, but we have got to take a break. In fact, we have got some callers who also have some questions or comments for you.

So we'll be right back after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE: "America Speaks Out." We are talking about cell phone use while behind the wheel. Should there be more state restrictions restricting the use of those handheld cell phones? Here in Atlanta, Georgia lawmakers are considering a proposal today. New York is the first state to have already imposed such restrictions.

Now let's go to some of our callers.

Alan in California is on the phone -- Alan.

CALLER: Yes, hello.

WHITFIELD: Hi, there.

CALLER: Can you hear me?

WHITFIELD: Yes, I can hear you just fine.

CALLER: Very good.

I live in California, obviously, Los Angeles. And I drive defensively from morning until night. Why? Because people are coming at me from every which direction. It's not because they've got hamburgers, coffee, or mascara. It is because they have cell phones in their hands. So I think it is a rather specious argument from Adam from Cato to make the argument that it has anything to do with anything other than cell phones.

If I may make a secondary point, and that is that it has nothing to do whether it's hands on or hands off. It has to do with the absorption, the concentration of the phone call. One cannot do two things well in a car, especially if one is required. It behooves one to concentrate on the road at all times. I am tired of it. They have got to come out of the car, and now. I implore you. Really, I do.

WHITFIELD: All right. Thanks very much, Alan.

Well, Adam, how do you respond to that?

THIERER: Well, that is basically an argument for banning almost any form of conversation within the cabin of our vehicles.

It is very distracting when you argue with a fellow passenger or in a heated conversation or yelling at your kids. But if we can get rid of the actual devices that we hold in our hands and just have a conversation through hands-free devices or onboard communications technologies that are preintegrated into our cars, well then we have got a far different problem on our hands. We are going to have to basically ban all forms of conversing in our vehicles. And I don't think that is a very good public policy solution.

WHITFIELD: All right, Adam, Karen from Illinois is on the phone. We would like to hear what she has to say.

Hi there, Karen.

CALLER: Hi. I would like to respond.

First, I apologize for the woman who lost her child. However, we just cannot legislate everything. I agree with the young man that driving while putting on your makeup, while putting a CD in, is just as dangerous as using a cell phone. It is not my fault, and nor should I be punished that someone cannot chew gum and walk at the same time. We just can't legislate everything.

You know, for those who talk on cell phones and have accidents, who is to say that they would not have had the accident without the cell phone? I drive. I talk on my phone. I need to talk on my phone. I have yet to be in an accident. The person who hit me did not have a cell phone. They were just stupid. Are we going to legislate: Don't drive while being stupid?

WHITFIELD: All right, thanks very much, Karen.

Well, Patty, what do you say? I mean, cell phones, it's become a way of life. And that's her argument.

PENA: Cell phones are wonderful safety tools. There's no doubt. But we have found from the research they are simply too dangerous to use while driving. We are not looking to ban everything, but there is this particular item that has made itself stand out from the rest. There is 135 million cell phones in use, 40,000 new subscribers a day, 85 percent of people who admit to using them while driving.

It is that cognitive distraction that will take you far away from your car. That increases your response time. And it is extremely different from talking to the person next to you. Your passenger in the car, they have a very vital interest in your driving habits. They are too looking out for their own safety. The person on the other end of the phone may not even know you are driving.

WHITFIELD: So, Patty, do you argue that, even with a headset on that cell phone, it still a distraction, that that really still is not going to make it any safer to be able to operate a vehicle and a telephone?

PENA: Absolutely. Absolutely. And this is not my opinion. This is not Patty Pena's opinion. This is what I have learned from the researchers and this is what they have told me, that it is not where your hands on; it is where your head is. It's that all- important cognitive distraction.

And the Cato Institute is a libertarian think tank that gets billions of dollars in money to perpetuate the rhetoric of the ignorant who don't even support the speed limit, for goodness' sake.

THIERER: I'm sorry, we don't get billions of dollars from anybody in this industry. And, rather, we are basing this on rational facts and not

(CROSSTALK)

PENA: Not from this industry.

And, sir, I would like for to provide me with those studies that say that all of those other distractions are more distracting than cell phones. That is completely not true.

(CROSSTALK)

WHITFIELD: Patty and Adam, I have got a young lady here in the audience.

Christy, do you have a cell phone?

CHRISTY: I do.

WHITFIELD: And do you use your cell phone sometimes while driving?

CHRISTY: I have to say that I do.

WHITFIELD: Do you use a headset?

CHRISTY: No, I use a handheld.

WHITFIELD: And when you do drive and you are using your cell phone, are you cognizant that your driving is impaired? Do you feel like you are driving just with as much command as if you had your hands free of a cell phone?

CHRISTY: I really don't think that my driving is impaired when I am using a cell phone. I do definitely try to dial when I am not in traffic, maybe at a stoplight or a stop sign. But I am a responsible driver. And I feel like I should be allowed to responsibly use a cell phone while I'm in the car.

WHITFIELD: Well, Keith, when you are on the road, do you -- can you tell when a driver seems to be distracted by a cell phone, a driver in front of you or alongside you?

KEITH: Not really. I mean, I don't see them any more distracted than trying to reach down and change the radio station. In fact, I had a friend who was hit while a person was trying to turn the radio station. So I don't see cell phones as any bigger distraction.

WHITFIELD: So, what is the solution? Should -- if it is not a distraction for you, do you still believe that there need to be some sort of legislation across the board that would affect every drive in every state?

KEITH: No, it is not going to solve the problem. Legislation is not going to solve the problem at all. You have to enforce better driving schools, maybe, like make them go to the DMV for better driving schools. And that will help them be better drivers all around, even if they are distracted. I mean, I don't know.

WHITFIELD: OK, well, Adam, is that a solution perhaps, without...

THIERER: Yes, education is a big part of this.

WHITFIELD: Yes, instead of legislation, education.

THIERER: There is no absolutely substitute for good old- fashioned common horse sense that our high school driving instructors told us of 10:00 and 2:00. Keep both hands on the wheel and your eyes pointed straight ahead.

Luckily, technology is solving a problem it has created here with onboard communications devices and hands-free devices. But let's face it. People are going to continue to talk while they're in their cars, whether to other passengers or on phones, hopefully not with their hands on the phone at the time. But, again, if we have a ban on all conversations, and even the hands-free ones, how in the world are police officers going to begin to enforce that?

We already have a public policy solution on the books, by the way. It's called reckless and negligent driving standards. If, for any reason, someone is posing a threat other others on the road, police officers in local communities can pull over and ticket them for that infraction. That is the better solution instead of trying to ban different activities and technologies in our car.

WHITFIELD: All right, thanks, Adam.

PENA: That's hogwash, because the gentleman who killed my child received two tickets and a $50 fine. Please don't tell me about effective current traffic safety laws on the books. They are not there. They don't exist.

WHITFIELD: All right, Patty and Adam, Dick from Pennsylvania is on the phone. And we would like to hear what he has to say.

Hi, there, Dick.

CALLER: Hi.

My comment is aimed more to Andrew than anybody. I am 63-plus. I have driven trucks, buses, cars for a living all of my life. And out of all of these people, I have seen people eating a bowl of soup. I have seen people reading newspapers and books. I've never felt more threatened in my life driving than these jerks trying to drive with a cell phone, because it's the only place their attention is located. That's it. It stinks. They have got to get them out of cars.

WHITFIELD: All right, thanks very much, Dick.

Now, how about you, Robert, here in the audience? Do you agree with Dick, who says he feels a lot more uncomfortable being on the road these days knowing that people are on the cell phones quite frequently?

ROBERT: Yes, I feel uncomfortable. I use a cell phone quite often in my business and for personal things, too. But I have had a couple of close calls myself, so I have decided I think it is best just to pull off the road or wait and call someone back. You know, you have the I.D. on the phones, so you can pull off and call them back. I think it needs to be just good judgment on it that don't do it while you are driving.

WHITFIELD: All right, thanks very much.

(APPLAUSE)

WHITFIELD: Natalie.

NATALIE: We multi-task at work and we do it while we are driving. We are looking at traffic signals. We are watching other drivers. We are looking at pedestrians. We are looking for the law. I mean, if a cell phone is in the equation or not, you are multitasking. We are intelligent people. If you can get a driver's license from whatever state you are in, you should be responsible enough to know if you are comfortable driving with a cell phone or not. And if you are not, then pull off. If you are, then move on.

(APPLAUSE)

WHITFIELD: All right, thanks very much, Natalie. And thanks to all of our guests here who have participated in the questions and the comments as well. And thank you, Patty Pena and Adam Thierer. Thanks for joining us.

And up next: Meet the new host of TALKBACK LIVE.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: Well, welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE: "America Speaks Out."

I have got company here now.

ARTHEL NEVILLE, NEW HOST, TALKBACK LIVE: Yes, you do.

WHITFIELD: Joining me is the new host of TALKBACK LIVE: Arthel Neville.

Thanks very much for being here.

(APPLAUSE)

WHITFIELD: And being introduced to the crowd here. They are so excited to have you on board.

NEVILLE: Thank you for introducing me.

And I got to tell you something. You have been doing a fantastic job, because today was of one those days. Murphy's law was all over the place, but you handled it.

WHITFIELD: It happens. It happens. Yes, well, we are so excited you are here and you have joined the CNN family.

NEVILLE: And I have to say, I feel like I have been a part of the family for a while now, because everybody has been wonderful and just wide-open arms. So it has been nice.

WHITFIELD: That's right.

And you are a familiar face. You're a longtime reporter. You've been in the entertainment field as well. Folks will know who you are already.

NEVILLE: And I am looking forward to meeting new people as well.

WHITFIELD: That's right. So, I guess the toughest part in this move, though, has got to be from moving from California moving to the East Coast.

NEVILLE: From L.A. to Atlanta. Yes, that is going to be a little tricky, but I think some people are helping out. So it won't be so bad.

WHITFIELD: I hope so. NEVILLE: But, yes, just learning my way around Atlanta. I have visited Atlanta a couple of times. But if I get lost a couple times, I am sure some nice people will help me out.

WHITFIELD: Yes, what are you most excited about? How do you prepare for this gig?

NEVILLE: I like to talking to people. I like to know what is on people's minds. I love too talk so much that I am known to talk to myself often. So, please, help me out, people. Do not let me talk to myself, OK? I am going to need to have conversations at all times.

But I think it is interesting to be able to hear, to be interactive with the people at home as well, to hear what is on their minds and e-mails and gadgets. Look, e-mail me anytime you want to while I'm on air. We will chat.

WHITFIELD: That's right. You are going to get e-mails. You are going to faxes. You will have folks calling in. And, as you heard, you get a great variety of comments. And sometimes the questions that you are thinking, why did I think of that?

(CROSSTALK)

NEVILLE: The art of conversation.

WHITFIELD: That's right. So, now you are back in Atlanta. This is going to be your home away from home. But you are still not far from your true home of New Orleans.

NEVILLE: That's the real deal here. You see, I'm trying to get closer to home up the road to New Orleans. And I am told that it takes 6 1/2 hours door to door. So I am happy, if I drive -- an hour flight. And my mom's gumbo is always there waiting for me. So I am always ready for that.

WHITFIELD: Oh, well, you're at home. Well, that is great.

NEVILLE: Absolutely.

WHITFIELD: That is great.

So you have had a chance to kind of figure out this maze of a place. The CNN Center, its huge.

(CROSSTALK)

NEVILLE: It is huge. I am lost, because you have been, what, a couple of weeks now, a week.

WHITFIELD: I've been here all of a week and a half.

NEVILLE: OK, so it will be the blind leading the blind here.

WHITFIELD: Right. That's right. You do not want to get any kind of directions from me. NEVILLE: Directions from you.

WHITFIELD: No way.

Well, you know what, do our audience members have any questions for our new host here?

NEVILLE: Any questions over here. Anybody here? Now, you know what I told you. I need you to talk.

I am sitting here looking at you, Keith, with this fancy little tie you have on. So, you have any questions for me, any advice for me, I would say?

KEITH: Well, where did you come from in California or what did you do out there?

NEVILLE: Well, I was last seen on the Fox News Channel, yes, with Bill O'Reilly. You know that guy? Anyway, hey, hey, hey, none of that over there. I heard something over there. Anyway. And I have done Extra and E! and things like that. So I have been around for a while.

I started when I was 12. So I have been 17 1/2 years in the business. But, you know, I am still young, what can I say. Anyway, just kidding with you about the age part.

Anybody else, any other questions over here?

STAFF: Yes, Arthel. Aaron has a question for you.

AARON: Yes, I was just wondering, what is your favorite thing you have hosted?

NEVILLE: I have to tell you that, when I was at E! Entertainment Television, I had my own celebrity interview show. It was a half- hour, one-on-one celebrity interview show. And it was really nice to have a chance to chat with these guys on deeper levels other than, "So, tell me about your latest movie." So I really enjoyed that.

You have a follow-up?

AARON: So who would be your favorite actor or actress?

NEVILLE: I will tell you this. Some of my favorite interviews, I would say Bill Cosby, Sharon Stone, Luther Vandross. Those are some of my favorites.

And I have got to come to talk to this gentleman, not to blow you off.

WHITFIELD: We've got about 20 seconds left. So make it quick.

NEVILLE: Twenty seconds?

All I have to say is, you just go in this outfit. Just check out this outfit. That's all I had to point out. There you go.

WHITFIELD: All right, very good. And it's no coincidence. Some of the folks are too bashful to ask. They're like "Neville"? Does that mean the Neville family? And the answer, of course, is yes.

NEVILLE: Neville brothers, Art, Aaron, Charles, Cyril and Doris (ph), my mom. She fits in there, too.

WHITFIELD: And so I am sure you will be able to get them on board here if you wanted to.

NEVILLE: I think I can persuade them.

WHITFIELD: Not a problem. All right, well, Arthel, we're really glad to have you here. It's going to be great to have you hosting TALKBACK LIVE.

Audience, everybody, show you are your appreciation for your new host here.

(APPLAUSE)

NEVILLE: Thank you. I'm looking forward to it. Thank you very much. Thank you.

WHITFIELD: And we appreciate you for joining us today on TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Fredricka Whitfield. You can catch me on CNN Saturday and Sunday. Until then, have a great day.

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