Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live At Daybreak

Interview with Neal Boortz

Aired September 10, 2002 - 06:34   ET

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


CAROL COSTELLO, CNN ANCHOR: Scott Ritter, September 11, Saddam Hussein, the Vatican and the United Nations, they're all on the mind of our next guest, nationally-syndicated radio talk show host, Neal Boortz.
Good morning, Neal.

NEAL BOORTZ, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Hi. How are you?

COSTELLO: You're a guy with strong opinions. We know that.

BOORTZ: I was just laughing at Scott Ritter.

COSTELLO: You're laughing at him. Why?

BOORTZ: Yes. I just -- I just not understand. He got a bad meal somewhere. I know. He got something tainted in his system.

COSTELLO: Well, I know a lot of people are wondering what his agenda is, and why he's there in Iraq, and why he's allowed in, et cetera, et cetera.

BOORTZ: Well, he's allowed in, because he's singing off of their sheet music right now. And I had -- there were rumors of a large Iraqi payment for a documentary that he's trying to produce, that they're going to underwrite a documentary. My guess is that sooner or later, if you do what you always should do in a case like this, follow the money, and you're going to find out why Scott Ritter is saying some of the things he is saying.

COSTELLO: I'm sure some reporter or correspondent out there will be doing exactly that.

BOORTZ: You got it.

COSTELLO: Other weapons inspectors are talking to members of Congress today, and they may present a different viewpoint than Scott Ritter.

BOORTZ: Listen, they may. Isn't it obvious what this man, Saddam Hussein, has been trying to do? This is a man that used these weapons against his own people. We have aerial photographs of drones, kind of like our drones that we were using over Afghanistan, but his are equipped with tanks and spray nozzles, so that they can fly unmanned over large civilian populations, spraying them with something, and we know it's not deodorant.

COSTELLO: But again, all of that is understood, but there is no evidence that he is preparing to attack the United States.

BOORTZ: It's a different era. It is a different era now. An attack doesn't need a large army. It doesn't need battalions or divisions of troops. It doesn't need shiploads of tanks. It needs one person with some sort of a device in the trunk of his car coming across the Canadian border. And when there's a foreign leader who is seemingly intent on doing just such a thing, then it is perfectly within our interests and within the realm of self-defense to take him out if you have to.

COSTELLO: But what's wrong with letting the United Nations become involved and getting other countries on board? What's wrong with that?

BOORTZ: Carol, since the formation of the United Nations, it has been basically structured and operated as an anti-American institution. OK? I am not willing to turn American sovereignty and safety over to an organization that the very basis of its existence has been anti-Americanism.

Just one quick fact: When the United Nations was formed, the United States had one vote in the General Assembly. How many votes did the Soviet Union have? Three. Three judges on the World Court to our one. It was all stacked against us from the very beginning, and it has been the principal world forum for anti-Americanism and anti- American ranting and raving ever since then. And now, we're supposed to, you know...

COSTELLO: Well, you know there are many out there who disagree with you. And if you only...

BOORTZ: Oh, of course. That's what makes a good game.

COSTELLO: If you only have Britain on your side, many people believe that if the United States goes and attacks Iraq without more support -- and President Bush is still, like, you know, trying to convince people it's the right thing to do -- unless the United States has some support, a lot of support, it could throw that part of the world into disarray.

BOORTZ: Well, I'm more concerned about this part of the world.

Now, here is something to watch that's interesting.

COSTELLO: OK.

BOORTZ: The Democrats are going to refuse to allow a vote in support of the Iraqi situation until after the elections.

COSTELLO: Now, how do you know that?

BOORTZ: Just watch. If I am wrong, then when that vote happens, you can say, Boortz, I got you on this one. They will not allow a vote until after the election. They do not want Democratic congressmen or senators to have to go on the record about what to do about Iraq until after the election, where the voters can't hold it against them.

COSTELLO: OK, in fairness to the Democrats, they look at the polls, too, and still, the majority of Americans feel we should do something about Iraq. So how would it behoove the Democrats to wait until after November?

BOORTZ: Because they'd have to be on the record. They want to make the vote a close one, which gives them an out if things go bad. If the vote is held before the election, it can't be made a close vote.

Daschle can't say, you vote against it, you vote for it, we're going to get a 52 to 48 vote here. And then, if things don't go well for the president, we'll have some sort of a standing to attack him on it. If that vote is taken before the election, it's going to have to be overwhelmingly in favor, of course, and it won't give the Democrats that little ploy.

COSTELLO: I don't think I can convince you anything else.

BOORTZ: I have it all figured out.

COSTELLO: So I'm just going to give up on that point.

A little bit about September 11...

BOORTZ: Yes.

COSTELLO: ... and the coverage that many networks are giving over to the anniversary tomorrow. Too much? Enough?

BOORTZ: No, it's not too much. I think one of the things that upsets me is this stupid movement that started about, well, let's not play commercials on September 11, as if there is something inherently evil about capitalism and the free market system that we can't taint a day like this with an actual commercial on the air.

COSTELLO: Now, I haven't heard that one. I haven't heard that point of view. That's a new one.

BOORTZ: I'm original. But that's the motivation behind some of this. And then, how many other national holidays, well, you know, we just shouldn't really play commercials on Martin Luther King Day.

COSTELLO: Oh, come on. We've got national holidays that are all about commercialism.

BOORTZ: Then, we're going to make them all commercial-free at some point.

COSTELLO: Neal Boortz, thank you very much. You'll be back on your radio show today, right?

BOORTZ: I will be back, and see you again Thursday morning.

COSTELLO: OK. BOORTZ: OK, bye.

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