Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Talkback Live

Operation TIPS Raises Privacy Concerns; New Proposals for World Trade Center Site Revealed

Aired July 16, 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.
(APPLAUSE)

CAROL COSTELLO, CNN ANCHOR: Oh, another great audience. Hello, everyone. Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Carol Costello. Arthel Neville is on assignment with "AMERICAN MORNING."

A million government informants could be on the job next month, keeping tabs and taking notes on every day Americans as they go about their business. The informant could be your mail carrier, your meter reader, even the guy who installs your cable. Yes, the cable guy -- anyone whose job allows them to enter your home.

It is called terrorism information and prevention system, which is also known as Operation TIPS. I know you will want to comment on this one, so call me at 1-800-310-4CNN, or email talkback@cnn.com

Right now let's find out more information about Operation TIPS from CNN Justice correspondent Kelli Arena. Kelli, who came up with this idea?

KELLI ARENA, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, this is a Justice Department program which is supposed to use ordinary U.S. citizens to help in the fight against terrorism. The government says that the pilot program will include about 1 million workers from industries such as trucking -- they'll use train conductors, ship captains, and, as you said, mail carriers and utility workers, people who have regular routines that follow routes in the course of doing their daily jobs that will be best positioned, according to the government, to notice if something is out of the ordinary.

Those workers are supposed to call an 800-number set up by the government. If they do notice suspicious activity, that information will then be entered into a database, which will be shared with the appropriate state and local law enforcement authorities.

The program will not be launched, we are told, until the end of summer, the beginning of fall, but there's not a whole lot of information that is available. There are some government Web sites with a few paragraphs sort of generally outlining the program, but there are a lot of questions that critics are asking that there just are no answers for at this time. And that's causing a great deal of concern. COSTELLO: Oh, you're not kidding. In fact, we did a little preshow with our audience, and they're very concerned about this. Who has access, exactly, to this database?

ARENA: That is one of the questions that the Justice Department has not provided a thorough answer to, but it is supposed to be a database that's available to law enforcement.

We are -- I have posed the question, is this a secure database? Is this a database that will be available nationally to anyone in law enforcement who chooses to browse it or will it only be sent to a very limited number of people? These are questions that the Justice Department has to answer. Of course, Justice officials say this all in the works right now.

This is a program whose pilot is not supposed to be launched, as I said, until late August, early September. They'll get back to us as they iron out all of these issues and more...

COSTELLO: But Kelli, there's -- Kelli, there's already...

ARENA: Go ahead.

COSTELLO: ...a Web site set up. They're already asking for volunteers. Shouldn't they have all this stuff worked out already?

ARENA: One would think so. You are -- the government says look, we are dealing at this point with various industries, we are talking to people, getting feedback, finding out exactly how we can use workers, what they'll be able to do, what they won't be able to do, and at the end of the day we'll come up with a plan that will address the efficiency of the program, make sure that civil rights aren't violated -- this according to the government -- make sure that things can run smoothly, that the information is put in a prompt and efficient manner and that these leads can be either shot down very quickly or followed up on if there really is something to it.

COSTELLO: Oh, well. Don't you all feel better about that now? They're saying "No, we don't!"

Kelli Arena, thank you for filling us in on Operation TIPS. Now here to talk about this government plan are James Hirsen, a corporate attorney and editor at newsmax.com. He's a talk show host on the American Freedom Network and author of "The Coming Collision: Global Law Vs. U.S. Liberties and Government By Decree" -- whoo, that's a mouth full.

Also with us, Rachel King, the legislative council for the American Civil Liberties Union.

Welcome to you both.

JAMES HIRSEN, TALK SHOW HOST: Good to be with you, Carol.

COSTELLO: James, I'm going to start with you. On the Web site it says this Operation TIPS is an effort to harness the power of the American people. Is that what it is?

HIRSEN: Well, I think that is what it is. I think it really furthers a policy that is already in place. Because since 9/11, it has been realized that on the domestic side one of the greatest resources are the American people themselves, too deputize them, to have them become the eyes and ears of -- because law enforcement can't see in places where American people are all the time.

Just like so many other proposals in the war on terror, there tends to be a reaction and a concern about abuse, and I agree there are some unanswered questions here, but overall this can be conducted in a benign manner, consistent with the Constitution, and be a very important part of our domestic war against terror.

You know the fear of this is much less than what should be the fear of a recent report telling us that there are 5,000 sleeper al Qaeda living among us in our communities down the street. So...

COSTELLO: I think -- I think we definitely understand that, and I think the thing that rubs people the wrong way is like the cable guy can go inside your house, look around. If he sees anything suspicious, then he calls this hotline, and who knows where the information goes from there?

HIRSEN: Well, that's true, and there has been a hotline in place since 9/11. This has been the policy, and I don't know, I saw the move "The Cable Guy." I am not that afraid of my cable guy, but on a serious side, I mean, I do think that the fact that there are people placed in position -- for example, I have neighbors that live near water treatment plants. Now I would want them to report suspicious activity near water treatment plants, especially since we have documentary evidence showing that al Qaeda wants to compromise our drinking water...

COSTELLO: I understand that.

Rachel from the ACLU, please weigh in on this. Aren't we already doing that? Don't we already have the American people out in force, reporting any suspicious activity? Do we really need a database set up by the government?

RACHEL KING, ACLU: You are absolutely right. Citizens can already report suspicious activity to the government, and we are afraid that this program will be ineffective and it will be an end run around the Constitution. It will allow the government to get into the homes of Americans when they couldn't do it because they don't have a warrant.

COSTELLO: Are you concerned that there are so many questions unanswered about this, like what is suspicious activity, what is suspicious things in one's home?

KING: Absolutely, all of the questions posed earlier by Kelli are very disconcerting, especially since this program is supposed to go on-line next month with a million volunteers in ten cities -- that is, one out of every 24 American citizens is supposed to be recruited for this program.

COSTELLO: The other thing that is a concern is once that is in the database -- and I want to explain this right, because I was thinking about this earlier -- once the information is in the database and they call the proper authorities, can your local police somehow get a warrant to search your home then?

I mean, James, isn't that a concern?

HIRSEN: Well, certainly it is a concern. The databases are already as part of the U.S.A. Patriot Act, and the concern that some of the provisions of that legislation has are separate and distinct from this idea of volunteerism. You know, this ideas of recruiting, there is no one recruiting -- this is a voluntary program. I mean, are we going to be afraid of the volunteer firemen? Are we going to be afraid of neighborhood watch, a program that's been in effect for years?

COSTELLO: Oh, James, I have to disagree with you. This is recruiting. They have a Web site. They're asking you to be a volunteer. They're asking postal workers and cable workers.

HIRSEN: But Carol, for people to be able to help this domestic war on terror, they have to know who to call, they have to have some kind of information.

I mean, the idea of communicating with the American people is a good idea. That is one of the reasons we have this color coded warning system. I mean, the whole concept is voluntary, and you know, we had a voluntary program like this at the birth of our nation. It was called minute-men.

COSTELLO: I think Victoria (ph) in our audience has something to say about this. Victoria, you were very pointed in your remarks earlier.

VICTORIA: Yes, I was. Mr. Hirsen, I do not agree with this at all, because it basically becomes a witch-hunt on the behalf of the government, to come into your house, if you are a cable guy, the cable guy can come into your house or utility worker -- the guy who is installing your phone line can come in and snoop around and if he sees something that he deems suspicious, he can go back and tell the government.

And quite frankly, I feel that have a right to privacy in my own home. I do not want someone snooping on me in my home.

HIRSEN: Well, Victoria...

(APPLAUSE)

HIRSEN: Victoria, we have laws on the books. Victoria, we have laws on the books already to prevent people from invading privacy. They can be sued in civil courts, we have criminal statutes, we have the whole criminal system. The idea of this is not to create government snoops, it is that we are a nation at war. You know, I wrote an article on Newsmax describing this concept that we are in called "war denial." We want to somehow put the events of September 11 behind us and think that there are not extraordinary measures necessary.

Remember, the same kind of criticisms came up about the prisoners of Guantanamo, about the military tribunals -- oh, they were going to be an end run around the Constitution, and that did not happen. So I believe that it depends -- we have to watch this, it is a good thing to scrutinize it but not to condemn it before it is even really completely disclosed.

COSTELLO: All right, James. Rachel King, I'm sure, has an answer to that, from the ACLU, but we're going to take a break now.

I'm looking for your emails too. Please email us or call us. We'll be right back. This is TALKBACK LIVE.

(APPLAUSE)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(APPLAUSE)

COSTELLO: Oh, welcome back, everyone. We are talking about a government security plan to have everyday Americans serve as organized government informants.

In other words, if you go into someone's house and you look around, you see something suspicious, you are supposed to call Operation TIPS. It's a government hotline, and if that information is suspicious, it will go in a database that's set up by the Justice Department, and a lot of people have a lot of things to say about this.

Let's go to the phones first, shall we? Tony (ph) from Alabama, are you there?

TONY: Yes, I am here.

COSTELLO: What do you think about this?

TONY: I am madder than hell. All these people talking about our rights -- my first right is to stay alive. My government is just defending me. You know, who cares if the mailman or anybody else helps them. I ain't got nothing to hide. The woman from the ACLU -- she needs to shut up and go home. When the terrorists kill her family, then she is going to change her attitude.

COSTELLO: Rachel, I think you have to respond to that one.

KING: Well, I think I wanted to respond to the comment that was made before the break about us being at war. I think it's really important that we not be at war with each other. And it's important to know that usually citizen informants are used by non-democratic societies, and the reporter that actually broke this story about TIPS is from former East Germany, and he said, "You know, to me this sounds an awful lot like the Stazi police force, where you had neighbors turning in neighbors," and this isn't the America I want to live in.

COSTELLO: And that system didn't really work in East Germany, did it?

KING: It was totally ineffective. That's the problem. You're going to have people that are not trained, so they are not going to be trained observers, and they may have grudges or they may have prejudices, so the FBI is going to be chasing around after all of these millions of tipsters, and they are not going to be really looking for the real terrorists.

COSTELLO: And another problem, too, you're getting so much information from so many different places in this database, or these hotline people, won't there be so much information that you can's really sift through it, James?

HIRSEN: Well, there is always a lot of information. Intelligence is -- always has the problem of too much information, but we can't be concerned about that, because we are going to shut off all of the 800 numbers, we are going to shut off all the informants, and informants are very, very valuable. I mean, it was an informant that led us to Jose Padilla, where we found out there were plans to set off a dirty nuclear bomb in our midst.

COSTELLO: Yes, but you can say that, James, but we didn't have Operation TIPS then.

HIRSEN: Well, that is true, so the idea is to make it better. And yes, we are engaged in a war, and this analogy with East Germany is ludicrous. That was a communist totalitarian regime that had paid, essentially, informants. There is no pay, there is no privilege, there is no detriment, this is purely voluntary.

It's a furtherance of the exact same program, so it is a situation where there are very extraordinary measures, and by itself this generalized kind of exaggerated language saying that it's an end run around the Constitution -- that's a detriment to the discussion at this time. We have to...

COSTELLO: Well, let's discuss some more. We want to get some comments from our audience at this time, because they feel exactly the way you just described. Go ahead, Allen (ph).

ALLEN: Yes, I agree with you completely. I think it's just a formalization of a program that's already in place. Let's put some system there so people know who to call and where to call.

I can think of a few instances where it might have helped out. Maybe the guy that sold Tim McVeigh all the nitrogen that blew up in Oklahoma, maybe back in July or August, if some people turned in some information, maybe if one of the terrorists' cable guys, you say, would have turned in something, we may not be where we are right now. COSTELLO: Let me ask you this question, Allen. Let me ask you this question. If someone went into your home and noticed something suspicious -- let's say you had a copy of the Koran lying on your table and they looked in the corner and there was like a gun rack, and they thought that was suspicious enough to enter into this database, and the police came out and checked your home, how would you feel?

ALLEN: I wouldn't have any problem with it. I have nothing to hide. Most law-abiding citizens have nothing to hide. I don't have a problem with it. I think it is a good deal. Give people some credit.

HIRSEN: Carol, for the police to do that, they would need a warrant, there would be judicial scrutiny, the Constitution would be in effect -- all of these things would act as checks and balances to the informant, just as it does today.

COSTELLO: OK, so Rachel, what is the problem with that? Is what he is saying reasonable?

KING: Well, the problem -- the problem is that you don't always even know when a violation of your privacy has occurred, and that's one of the key problems is that we don't know how this information is going to be shared, so let's say somebody that somebody who doesn't like the gentlemen who just spoke, who has a grudge against him, calls up and gives false information, and then that's reported, and sure enough he is in fact not a terrorist, but where does this information then go?

Perhaps he applies for a security clearance later on and can't get it, or perhaps this is distributed someplace else and goes into a permanent file. We don't know what's going to happen with that information, even if it's completely inaccurate. There's no showing that it's going to be destroyed by the government.

COSTELLO: Understood.

We have some more audience comments here.

Martha (ph), what do you have to say? You're a parole officer.

MARTHA: I'm a probation and parole officer. And I go in people's homes and do searches quite often.

And we do find -- I found a hand grenade, I found a homemade bomb in a cigarette pack; I found, of course, weapons and knives and things like that.

And in relation to my job, I know what I have to do. And...

COSTELLO: Now, by law are you allowed to go in and search their home?

MARTHA: Yes ma'am. When they're on probation or parole, we do not need a search warrant.

COSTELLO: How do you feel about this program? MARTHA: Well, I think it's something that we should all be doing anyway, as citizens of the United States, in order to protect our nation.

COSTELLO: So do you think we need a government database to keep information?

MARTHA: Well, I think there's some central place that we need to know that we can call to provide information for someone who can take the appropriate action about what's going on or what we see or what we suspect.

COSTELLO: Gotcha.

OK, we want to go to the phones right now.

Nelson (ph) from South Carolina has been waiting an awfully long time.

What do you have to say?

CALLER: This whole program makes me extremely uncomfortable. I order a great many things from catalogs. As a consequence, those catalogs sell my name and address to other companies. I get catalogs with explicit sexual material, that are selling weapons of every kind.

I throw them in the trash, but in the meantime, my mailman, the mail sorter, the person who handles them from wherever has seen them. And it's like ah-ha, we have this person who's buying guns or whatever.

COSTELLO: A good point. Thank you Nelson (ph).

We've got to go to break right now, but don't worry, we're not done with this topic just yet.

We're going to take that break, we'll be right back.

And later this hour we're going to look at "TV Guide's" list of the 50 worst television shows ever. Which show do you think leads the pack? Is it "Baywatch," "The Jerry Springer Show" or "The Flying Nun"? Remember that show?

You guess, we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(APPLAUSE)

COSTELLO: Well, we've got a feisty audience today because we're talking about a very controversial topic.

Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE.

We're talking about a plan to have mail carriers, the cable guy, anybody that comes into your home on a normal basis be kind of like an informant.

The government is asking for volunteers to call a tip line if they notice any suspicious activity in someone's home to call this hotline, and then the workers at the hotline will decide if that is suspicious activity, they'll enter it in a database which is run by the Justice Department.

A lot of people have very interesting comments about this story.

Let's go to John (ph), because you work for a utility company.

JOHN: Yes, I do.

COSTELLO: And what is your concern about this?

JOHN: Well, I'm concerned because they should have named it Operation Trojan Horse because the federal government and local government usually pass taxes or try to pass taxes for one idea, then use it for another.

And also people -- there a lot of people that are not trained to do a certain job. And there is a limitation. Where do the limitations stops? How far can a utility worker, how far can a mail carrier go? Can he go through your belongings and check it and look through it?

COSTELLO: I don't think so. But then again, it's not spelled out very well on the government's Web site.

I think it's totally volunteer. And if you happen to see anything suspicious, you're supposed to call this tip line.

So James, but that is a concern. You really don't know how far these people will go to find something that is suspicious.

HIRSEN: Well, these are the unanswered questions. And I am gratified to see so many people have a healthy suspicion about government. That's a good thing. And that's a conservative view, so that's good.

But the fact is, I'm more afraid of these enemies among us; I'm more afraid of the idea of inaction than the idea of a good ideal like this. So I think what we have to do is wait and see and watch, and scrutinize this thing and make sure it's not abused.

COSTELLO: I wanted to talk to -- I don't know how to pronounce your name...

SHIRA: Shira (ph).

COSTELLO: Shira (ph), what is your concern about this?

SHIRA: I can understand the reason for heightened security, but at the same time I think this program is going to be a source for religious and racial profiling. I'm a Muslim-American. I live in America. And this country is a democracy. It's a country where you're suppose to be able to be free and believe when you believe.

I don't want to be afraid that just because I'm Muslim, that I carry a Koran, or that I, perhaps, look of Arab descent that someone is going to report me.

COSTELLO: Are you afraid that if, like, a mail carrier comes into your house, he'd be more apt to look for something suspicious?

SHIRA: Yes, because we have Korans, we have Scriptures (ph) paintings on our walls. And my dad goes to the mosque on Fridays. I don't want to have to be afraid that when he goes to the mosque, that someone is going to be there, and just because he's praying that they're going to put him in the database. That doesn't make any sense to me.

COSTELLO: Rachel, is that one of the ACLU's concerns?

KING: Absolutely. We're very concerned that particular racial and ethnic groups will be targeted because of this. And right now there is quite a bit of fear about people from the Middle East. And they're the likely people that will be -- bear the brunt, or Muslims or Arab-Americans.

I just wanted to say something else, too, about the whole idea of effectiveness, and what's the best use of our resources. And even if people think this is a good idea, we should ask, is this the best idea? Is this the best way we can be fighting terrorism?

Because the audience should know that the current administration has defunded the COPS program that was designed to put 100,000 new police officers on the street. And this $560 million is, instead, going into Citizen Corps.

And perhaps we should question: Is (sic) a million citizen volunteers a better use of money than 100,000 police officers on the street?

COSTELLO: Point taken.

James, you have the last word because we're about out of time for this segment.

HIRSEN: Well, that's a no-brainer, you know, because cops work for the government, citizens are a private and individual.

And it wasn't government that came up with the slogan for our domestic war on terror. It wasn't government that was able to get Flight 93 to crash and not hit a building. It was an individual who came up with the words "let's roll."

And it's individuals that will be empowered and informed to help us be victorious in the domestic war on terror.

COSTELLO: All right, James Hirsen and Rachel King, thank you both for joining us today.

Coming up next on TALKBACK LIVE, we'll talk about building on hallowed ground. Stick around.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: While it is too early to say what will one day rise from the World Trade Center site, we are certain of one thing. What we create together will be a testament to and consistent with the principle that came under attack on September 11: democracy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COSTELLO: Six proposals for rebuilding the World Trade Center site are on the table. We will look at the rough drafts and you can choose your favorite. Do any of them do justice to what many call hallowed ground?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COSTELLO: And welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Carol Costello, in for Arthel Neville, who is on assignment to "AMERICAN MORNING."

A day after the search for the remains of those killed in the World Trade Center attacks is ended, plans for rebuilding the site are released. There are six of them, all calling for memorials and none of them suggesting the mammoth towers be are recreated. The ideas could be mixed and matched. And, according to the chairman of the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation, public input will be welcomed.

We will get a look at those plans in just a minute, but we want to meet our guests first.

Former New York City Mayor Ed Koch, welcome. And New York Congressman Pete King -- welcome, Congressman King.

Let's start with you. What do the victims' families want to see?

REP. PETER KING (R), NEW YORK: I think it depend on which families you speak to.

Some want it to be entirely a memorial. Others want it to be a modified memorial. My own belief is, from talking to many people -- and also my own gut feeling -- is that, whatever the final product is, it should not be dominated by the concept of a memorial. To me, the best memorial we can show to the brave men and women who died on September 11 is something which symbolizes the fighting spirit, the vibrancy, the revival that the city has made.

So, I would like to, while we certainly have an area designated as a very fitting memorial, have that site be as productive, as lively as can be, whether it includes office space, restaurants, housing. Use this as an opportunity from a terrible tragedy to really reconstruct the spirit of what those men and women demonstrated on September 11, and not make it where the memorial concept predominates, but rather have it be a living, vibrant memorial to those who died and fought so hard.

COSTELLO: Mayor Koch, do you agree with that?

ED KOCH (D), FORMER NEW YORK MAYOR: I agree with Pete King. He and I generally agree. We are old friends, even though we are in opposite parties.

I also believe that we can take a leaf out of the book of the Irish memorial that was just created right across the street in Battery Park in that same area. And it uses half-an-acre. Now, there are about 20 acres that the two towers and the plaza -- the two towers that were there before the destruction -- used. And I believe an appropriate, sensitive, magnificent memorial can be created side by side with facilities that will allow the 50,000 or more people who used to work there, that their counterparts and they themselves who survived would continue to work there.

I do not believe that the area should become a cemetery. What it should become is, as Pete said, vibrant, but also an inspiring memorial side by side.

COSTELLO: Reflecting the great economic center it once was.

KOCH: Yes.

COSTELLO: Gotcha.

We want to go to Jason Carroll now, who is in New York. He's got those six plans to show you.

Jason, tell us what they are.

JASON CARROLL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, it's going to be really interesting to hear, Carol, from the public's point of view in terms of what they think of these particular plans. But we've already seen them. So now I want you to see them as well.

Plan No. 1, proposal No. 1, is called Memorial Plaza. It has a building there 79 stories tall. It also will have two symbolic square footprints that mark the site of the Twin Towers. Version No. 2, proposal No. 2 is called Memorial Square. It will have an 80-story circular type of skyscraper, a few smaller buildings surrounding that one. And, again, we will see the symbolic footprints there as well in a square pool.

Version No. 3 is called Memorial Triangle. That actually has the tallest building proposed at 85 stories. Just to give you some perspective, the Twin Towers were 110 stories tall. The next one, again: Memorial Garden. That one, we've got a building at about 80 stories high, four smaller buildings surrounding that one. Again we'll have those symbolic squares that we were talking about.

The next one is called Memorial Park. That will have two buildings 72 stories tall, and then three small buildings surrounding it at 45 stories tall. And instead of the symbolic squares, in that one what you will have is a symbolic sort of sculpted column, a single column that will stand for the Twin Towers. Version No. 6, the final version, is called Memorial Promenade. That will again have two buildings 63 stories tall and, again, some sort of a singular column to mark the spot where the Twin Towers once stood.

All of these different proposals will have varying degrees of open space. They also have some other similarities as well. All of the proposals include restoring 11 million square feet of office space that was lost during the terrorist attack, as well as 600,000 square feet of retail space. So there's a similarity there as well.

(CROSSTALK)

CARROLL: Just a bit of a timeline for you very quickly: By September, they hope to have the six narrowed down to three, and then, by December, the three narrowed down to one -- Carol.

COSTELLO: Gotcha. But this is not over yet.

So, audience, you saw those proposals. Did any of them rock your world? Were you inspired?

By applause, were you inspired?

There's two people clapping. That's it.

Jason, I noticed that none of the buildings proposed are 110 stories, like the original Twin Towers.

CARROLL: That is true, Carol. And that's because some of the architects involved in all this basically said: "Look, our plan here, our idea here, motivation, was not to rebuild the Twin Towers." They also said that it just would not be marketable to build towers that height. That is why they are going for towers that are -- or buildings that are just a little bit smaller.

But your audience reaction was pretty interesting, wasn't it, there, Carol? And to raise another point, the people who are involved in putting together these proposals, they want to hear from people out there in the audience. They want to hear from New Yorkers. They want to hear from people across country. They want to get their input.

Nothing that we have here is set in stone, according to the architects. They are willing to listen and willing to change based on what they hear.

COSTELLO: So, this is sort just a start?

CARROLL: That's exactly what it is. And, in fact, that is what New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg said. He said it is, in fact, just a start. But they've got something now on paper. They have got models that are made. They have a jumping-off point. So, from this point on, they can get public input. They can decide what works and what doesn't work and make decisions based upon that.

COSTELLO: All right, Jason Carroll, thank you very much.

Congressman King, let me ask you. Were you inspired by any of those plans?

P. KING: No, I think these are just a first start. And Ed Koch, who was the mayor of New York, no one has a better feel for the spirit of the people. So, he is probably better equipped to answer this than I am.

But I would say what is missing is, they seem to be somewhat sterile and arid. I would like to find a way to make this, as they said, 24/7, where it would be a real lively experience all the time, to have, for instance, apartment houses put in there of some type, to have more restaurants or clubs, to make it -- and also to do more with the sidewalks and overpasses to make it more of a lively community, and also, of course, to have the commercial center, to make it, again, the hub of the commercial center.

COSTELLO: Right.

P. KING: But getting back to what Ed Koch was saying before about how important it is that this be a symbol of life, I think if the -- and he mentioned the Irish memorial and others, which can show that sometimes something can be small, but yet very, very significant.

If we turn this into a large cemetery, that is going to be a defeat on our part. That is going to show that bin Laden won. To me, the message of September 11 was: They gave us our best shot and the people of New York fought back harder than ever. We can't give any evidence of defeat. It has to be victory.

COSTELLO: Mayor Koch, let me ask you this.

The architectural firms that were involved with this task force to come up with these six different plans, they only had seven weeks to work on them. Isn't that too short a time to come up with something really spectacular?

KOCH: It may be. It is really unfair to the people who submitted the six versions to make an evaluation based on what we have seen, because you can't get an appreciation from those simple visuals that were just displayed.

Now, I will agree with the audience. I was not moved to applaud by what I saw.

(LAUGHTER)

KOCH: But I would want a closer examination and a telling of what it is supposed to do.

I want to tell you, the most...

COSTELLO: Pause for just a second, Mayor. I'm sorry to interrupt.

KOCH: It's OK.

COSTELLO: But we do have to take a break.

What do you think should be built at ground zero? We will take your suggestions next. TALKBACK LIVE will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COSTELLO: And welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE.

We are talking about the World Trade Center site. Six plans have been come up with by this task force. And they have those six plans. And none of our audience members were very inspired by those plans.

I want to ask Congressman King this question.

I know they are asking for input from people about what should be put on the site. Does that include the entire country or just people from New York?

P. KING: I believe it involves the entire country, but I would think probably the people who would have the most influence would be those from New York City itself and also the New York metropolitan area.

And I would hope that when the input is given and the public hearings are held, that it try to be done in as nonemotional a way as possible. I know that it is very difficult to ask when so many people lost friends and neighbors. In my case, probably more than 150 friends, neighbors and constituents were killed there that I knew. And that is probably true of almost everybody in New York.

So, there is great emotional feeling. But, at the same time, I think if we can try to find a way to step back a bit and really see what personified the daring of all the men and women, the cops, the firemen, the bond traders, almost everyone who died in that World Trade Center had an unusual sense of daring and bravery. And that is what I want this new site to show.

COSTELLO: Oh, and I think everybody wants that to show.

Mayor Koch, let me ask you this. The task force that came up with these six plans, are there many architectural firms represented or just one?

KOCH: Oh, there are many represented, so far as I know.

But let me say this. What we really saw there, the way it was presented to us on the station, are the commercial activities. I am pleased that they are going to be restoring 11 million square feet of commercial space. What they put there, on the ground floor in particular, that should be the subject of additional discussion.

But I have not seen anything that I would consider a sensitive memorial to the dead. Now, the best memorial is always the simplest. The greatest memorial that this country has to date is the Vietnam War Memorial in Washington.

COSTELLO: And it's interesting you should say that, Mayor Koch, because Cindy in our audience made that very point a short time ago to me.

What are your thoughts on the memorial?

CINDY: I was just going to say or going to comment on the fact that these different versions that have been brought up have been brought up by a corporation, whereas this event affected the whole nation. It should be more of a collaborative effort. It should not be such a sterile version. These versions should not be so sterile. There should be more movement, more emotion involved.

COSTELLO: And you brought up the Vietnam War Memorial specifically, because that was a nationwide contest.

Might that not be better, Congressman, that it's open to a nationwide competition? Might we not come up with something creative and moving and all of that, other than limiting it to a certain segment?

P. KING: I think we should certainly look around the country, but, ultimately, even though this was a national tragedy, ultimately, this was a New York City, a New York area tragedy. The whole world was affected by it, but it was really the people of New York who suffered the most. I think they should be given the predominance.

But, again, we should not rule anyone out. Obviously, we want the very, very best to commemorate what happened there and to commemorate the spirit. So, I am not ruling anything out. But, obviously, it is the people of New York or the governments of New York who will have the final say and the most to say about it.

COSTELLO: All right, Ed Koch and Congressman King, thank you both for joining us...

P. KING: Thank you.

COSTELLO: ... today on TALKBACK LIVE.

Up next: the worst TV of all time.

Up next: What are the worst TV shows of all time? "TV Guide" picks the top or, should I say, bottom 50. Everyone from Jerry Springer to Barney was fair game. Maybe there is a few shows you would like to add to the list. We will do our own picking right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COSTELLO: And welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE.

And now: the worst-ever television shows, according to "TV Guide." And don't you just hate it when your favorite show turns up on a list like this one? Just look at this week's cover of "TV Guide": "Howard Stern" in the company of "The Flying Nun" and "The Brady Bunch"? Can it be?

Joining us: Lisa Bernhard, who is deputy editor of "TV Guide."

Thanks for joining us.

LISA BERNHARD, DEPUTY EDITOR, "TV GUIDE": Thanks for having me.

COSTELLO: Why did you guys come up with this list?

BERNHARD: Oh, it was just too much fun. We just could resist.

It's the 50th anniversary of "TV Guide" this year. And we have been doing a lot of lists. We did the 50 best shows. So, we figured we might as well do the 50 worst shows. So, we had a big meeting. And we all came armed with our favorite worst shows. And it was a pretty heated debate. It can actually get pretty ugly, uglier than we think it's possible of getting. But we just -- we had a great time with it.

COSTELLO: So, what is the worst?

BERNHARD: Well, at No. 1 is "Jerry Springer." We named poor Jerry...

(APPLAUSE)

COSTELLO: You know, everybody claps because the worst show is "Jerry Springer," but he is he still on the air after many years. And a lot of people watch him.

BERNHARD: A lot of people watch him. He's been on since '91, very successful. It's a little bit of that car-wreck kind of syndrome. You don't feel great about yourself watching it, but you can't help it. It is just so theatrical.

COSTELLO: Oh, yes.

Hey, somebody said yes. Who watches "Jerry Springer" here? Our favorite.

Tell us why. Let me come up there. I'm going to get around the photographer here.

Victoria, you watch "Jerry Springer." Why?

VICTORIA: I love "Jerry Springer." It is just like she said. It's like watching a car wreck. You never see those kind of people in everyday life.

COSTELLO: So, are you insulted that it's the worst show?

VICTORIA: I am not insulted. It is sort of -- even I watch it as a guilty pleasure. I know it is horrible. And I am not insulted. It is more like a recognition of how bad it is.

COSTELLO: Oh, yes. That is a good way to put it, don't you think?

OK, what's No. 2, 3 and 4?

BERNHARD: Well, No. 2, we have "My Mother the Car," which I think this is -- just the title alone I think qualifies it to be No. 2. It's a guy. It was Jerry Van Dyke, Dick Van Dyke's brother. And his mother was reincarnated as a 1928 Porter, an animated car. So, we really thought that that was pretty high-ranking.

COSTELLO: Oh, yes, the XFL...

BERNHARD: The XFL.

COSTELLO: ... a sad experiment.

BERNHARD: I know. That was about a $100 million fiasco, the XFL. You have Vince McMahon from the WWF, teams up with NBC. And they thought it was going to be a huge hit. But it turned out that sports fans did not really take it seriously as a real sport. And it was kind of cheesy, having the cameras in the locker rooms of the cheerleaders.

COSTELLO: And shooting up the cheerleaders' skirts, which was a favorite feature of mine.

Let's go through the top 10 quickly, because we only have a minute left.

Go ahead.

BERNHARD: Well, No. 4, we have "The Brady Bunch Hour." Now, God forbid we would attack the classic original "Brady Bunch" series. This was when "The Brady Bunch," actually in character, did a variety show. Dad Mike gave up his architecture business and they were a traveling variety show. So, that is at No. 4.

(LAUGHTER)

COSTELLO: "Hogan's Heroes."

BERNHARD: "Hogan's Heroes," I know. So, a lot of people have taken us to task for this. It's kind of remembered as a classic show. But we went back and even looked at some classic shows and thought that they did not really stand the test of time. They didn't hold up. And we thought, you know what? What is really so funny about Nazis in the end, anyway?

COSTELLO: I know, but aren't they making a feature film about "Hogan's Heroes"?

BERNHARD: They are making a feature film. And it was even featured on many "TV Guide" covers, "Hogan's Heroes."

COSTELLO: Yes, well, trash sells. That just goes to show you.

OK, "Celebrity Boxing" is No. 6. No. 7 is "After MASH." What the heck was that?

BERNHARD: "After MASH" was obviously a sequel to the classic. But I think the big problem was that you did not have Hawkeye and the lead characters. They did not take -- they were not there on the show anymore. So, you had like Klinger and Colonel Potter and kind of the secondary characters that you did not care that much about with the original series. Now they had the A storylines. So it was really kind of a flop.

COSTELLO: I wish we could talk to you more about this, but, unfortunately, we have run out of time. And we can't go over. They will be really mad at us, especially Judy Woodruff.

(LAUGHTER)

COSTELLO: So, Lisa Bernhard, thank you for joining us today.

And thanks to all of you for watching TALKBACK LIVE. We are out of time. I'm Carol Costello, in for Arthel Neville. I'll see you again tomorrow at 3:00 Eastern time with more TALKBACK LIVE.

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