|
CNN CONNIE CHUNG TONIGHT
Bush Administration Advocates Assassination?; Victim Killed in Teen Mob Beating
Aired October 1, 2002 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
CONNIE CHUNG, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening. I'm Connie Chung.
Tonight, target: Saddam. Does U.S. want an assassin for the job?
ANNOUNCER: Has the fight against Saddam escalated to a new level?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
QUESTION: I'm asking you if you intend to advocate from that podium that some Iraqi person put a bullet in his head?
ARI FLEISCHER, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Regime change is welcome in whatever form that it takes.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANNOUNCER: This as the U.N. and Baghdad decide weapons inspector will go back to Baghdad. Tonight: CNN's Christiane Amanpour on the agreement in Vienna and the U.S. response: not so fast.
A savage attack.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KEITH YOUNG, BROTHER OF CHARLIE YOUNG JR.: It was unhuman, not human what they did.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANNOUNCER: A man nearly beaten to death by a mob of children, one as young as 10 years old.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They just have a total disregard for life, which is very scary.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANNOUNCER: As the victim clings to life, the community wonders: What has happened to their children?
Young Americans held captive in Saudi Arabia.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I haven't seen her since she was 2. I haven't seen a photo of her since she was 2. I haven't talked to her since she was 2.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANNOUNCER: Mothers fight to get back their children. They say they were kidnapped by their Saudi fathers and taken away to the desert kingdom.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'm a taxpayer. That's my taxpayer's money. Can't you help my baby?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANNOUNCER: Tonight: Is the Saudi Arabian government responsible for holding U.S. citizens against their will?
Conjoined twins: first, the little Marias. And now two 1-year- olds from Egypt face a delicate, dangerous procedure to live separate lives. Tonight: their doctor on their chances of survival and the decision only their father can make.
This is CONNIE CHUNG TONIGHT. Live from the CNN Broadcast Center in New York: Connie Chung.
CHUNG: Good evening.
Tonight: Accidentally or otherwise, the Bush administration launched a guessing game about whether the U.S. is encouraging Iraqis to assassinate their president, Saddam Hussein. It began with White House spokesman Ari Fleischer's afternoon briefing. He decided to decline to speculate about the cost of invading Iraq, but compared the cost of war to the cost of Iraqis getting rid of Saddam themselves.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
FLEISCHER: The cost of a one-way ticket is substantially less than that. The cost of one bullet, if the Iraqi people take it on themselves, is substantially less than that. The cost of war is more than that.
QUESTION: I'm asking you if you intend to advocate from that podium that some Iraqi person put a bullet in his head?
FLEISCHER: Regime change is welcome in whatever form that it takes.
QUESTION: So the answer is yes?
FLEISCHER: Thank you.
Regime change is welcome in whatever form it takes.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CHUNG: As you might guess, the White House refusal to explain what exactly was being said didn't quite put the matter to rest. After all, encouraging assassination of a nation's leader would be a startling turn for U.S. policy. And a presidential order specifically prohibits American officials from involvement in assassination.
So the questions about U.S. policy on Saddam continued.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
QUESTION: Is the hope, though, that he ends up dead in all of this?
FLEISCHER: Regime change is the policy, in whatever form it takes.
QUESTION: I just want to re-ask again then the question I've been asking for several weeks. Is the administration about to rescind the executive order prohibiting assassination of foreign leaders and claim that he's an international terrorist and in fact put out a hit on him?
FLEISCHER: No, the policy remains in place, per the law.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CHUNG: So, is he White House saying it would be wrong for America to assassinate Saddam Hussein, but maybe not so wrong for someone else to do it?
Joining us now: CNN White House correspondent Suzanne Malveaux.
Suzanne, would it be an understatement to say that the White House press corps was generally surprised at what they heard Fleischer say?
SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Certainly not an understatement, Connie.
It was quite a surprise to many of us who were listening to these comments, really the White House call for regime change taking a very strange twist today in that briefing, but Ari Fleischer really doing some damage control right after that briefing, calling reporters, trying to clarify his statements.
He said that, first of all, he was making a rhetorical point. He was saying that, of course, U.S. policy barring assassinations of foreign leaders by U.S. officials still stands. He says what he really was saying was that, of course, no one would cry over the loss of Saddam Hussein, but, as you noted, a lot of that getting lost in the briefing in some of that harsh rhetoric.
CHUNG: Suzanne, do you think that there was some intentional confusion, that the president actually did want to get this message out in some way or another? MALVEAUX: Well, I really don't think so, in light of a lot of the damage control that was done after the briefing. It really seemed like they were trying to backpedal a bit from a lot of these comments that were made.
But it's a very good question. What is this euphemism that the Bush administration has been using, regime change, really mean? It is a point that lawmakers are debating, members of Congress who signed that '98 resolution calling for regime change, but arguing that it does mean military force, that being a different situation this time around in the congressional resolution that is being considered now.
But the Bush administration is saying that, yes, they support these Iraqi opposition groups, both inside and outside of the country, to try to at least send Saddam Hussein into exile, that they are using psychological warfare to actually try to convince Saddam's generals to turn against him, that these are the types of things that the Bush administration is engaged in. But, yes, a very good question: Exactly what does regime change mean?
Connie.
CHUNG: Suzanne Malveaux at the White House, thank you.
Fleischer's comments were especially controversial because the U.S. is trying to win support in the U.N. among countries that generally aren't likely to smile upon calls for assassination. Today, the U.N. and U.S. also moved further apart on the issue of weapons inspections. It happened after the weapons inspectors reached an agreement with Iraqi officials on details of their return to Iraq.
CNN chief international correspondent Christiane Amanpour is on the story in Vienna.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Two days of talks in Vienna led the Iraqi government to reverse the position its held for the past four years. Iraq now says the U.N. can carry out weapons inspections mandated under existing resolutions.
HANS BLIX, CHIEF U.N. WEAPONS INSPECTOR: On the question of access, it was clarified that all sites are subject to immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access.
AMANPOUR: All sites except the eight presidential sites. Restrictions on them were agreed to by the U.N. secretary-general and later enshrined in a resolution. The U.S. would have to muster a deal in the Security Council to annul that deal.
However, in a significant move, Iraq will now lift restrictions it imposed on other sensitive sites, such as key ministry buildings.
GENERAL AMIR AL-SADI, IRAQI DELEGATION LEADER: We have come to a very practical arrangement that we would, from our side, anticipate every inspection to sort of go to sensitive sites. And we will take the measures that will cancel the need for a waiting period and getting approvals.
AMANPOUR: Chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix says that Iraq has also agreed to all the practical arrangements for weapons inspections, including the use of aircraft and helicopters for reconnaissance, although Iraq says security in the U.S. no-fly zones was out of its hands.
General Amir al-Sadi said that he was happy agreement had been reached, and, along with Blix, described the talks as businesslike and focused. Iraq also handed over four CD-ROMs containing four years of information that it owes the U.N. about what's been happening at so- called dual-use facilities that inspectors suspect can be used to produce weapons of mass destruction. Both sides said weapons inspectors could be back in Iraq by mid-October.
(on camera): Two key questions remain: whether Iraq's agreement here will translate into full implementation on the ground; and how the deal struck here would be affected if new and stiffer demands are issued by the United Nations.
Christiane Amanpour, CNN, Vienna.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CHUNG: In fact, it is the Bush administration's call for exactly that, different demands by the U.N., that may block the weapons inspectors from returning. The U.S. said today that it will block inspectors from returning until a new U.N. resolution establishes consequences for Iraq.
Excuse me.
If it fails to cooperate with inspectors, it will thwart any U.N. attempt to send the inspectors in.
One more time. I'll get a drink of water in a minute.
That came from Secretary of State Colin Powell, which brings us to CNN State Department correspondent Andrea Koppel.
Thank goodness you're there, Andrea, so I can get a drink of water.
But all of this must be good news for the international community, right?
ANDREA KOPPEL, CNN STATE DEPARTMENT CORRESPONDENT: Well, you're right, Connie.
The international community has been calling for the return of weapons inspectors. But it is not good news for the United States. The Bush administration has said that the terms that Hans Blix negotiated under, that old resolution, didn't work, and that the U.S. needs and the international community needs a new U.N. resolution, one that would be much tougher, with consequences spelled out in it.
Secretary of State Colin Powell made very clear earlier today, when he spoke with reporters, that that will not work under those circumstances.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: We don't want to get into a negotiating situation with the Iraqis under these old terms. That's why we need a new resolution with clear terms, tough terms, high standards, because we are determined to solve this problem once and for all.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KOPPEL: But the U.S., Connie, is racing against the clock, because the Iraqis announced today that the weapons inspectors could come back as soon as the middle of this month.
And the U.S. has said, as you already pointed out, that it would thwart, it would block the return of weapons inspectors unless there was a new U.N. resolution in place.
CHUNG: So, Andrea, what exactly does the U.S. want in terms of specifics, specific terms in the resolution to be passed?
KOPPEL: There are really three key ingredients that the U.S. has in its draft resolution.
And they are: spelling out the violations that Saddam Hussein has had over the last 11 years with the previous U.N. resolutions; calling for the return of weapons inspectors and to let them have unfettered access to any site and any person in Iraq, including those presidential palaces; and, third, a clear spelling-out of the force, all necessary means that could be used by the international community if Saddam Hussein doesn't comply.
CHUNG: And those presidential sites are key to the U.S., are they not?
KOPPEL: Well, they are.
This is something, in fact, that was spelled out just last week in the U.K. dossier that Tony Blair presented. He said that some of these presidential sites are so much more than just a palace; they are actually huge and would encompass many Buckingham Palaces. They have buildings in them, warehouses. And the U.S. believes that weapons inspectors need to get inside these buildings to see whether or not there are any documents there. They don't necessarily believe that there are weapons of mass destruction.
CHUNG: And, finally, Andrea, is the Security Council close to reaching an agreement on the resolution?
KOPPEL: Well, that's the question that's hanging out there today. Secretary Powell said that they are making some progress in narrowing differences with the other permanent members of the Security Council. That is the French, the Russians and the Chinese. The British, as you know, are on the same side as the U.S. right now. But they're still not there, Connie.
In fact, CNN has learned that the State Department has begun to prepare two drafts right now of different U.N. resolutions that are sort of the contingency plan. If this one big resolution, with consequences spelled out, doesn't manage to make its way through the Security Council, the U.S. has this fallback position, which actually mirrors the position that the French have put forward, that would have one tough resolution.
It would have the weapons inspectors getting back into Iraq, getting complete access. And then, in the second resolution, it would spell out the fourth, the all-necessary means. The U.S., of course, wants to add a little finesse to that, wants to have a connection, a trigger mechanism between the two, so that it would be approved really before it went before the Security Council -- Connie.
CHUNG: CNN's Andrea Koppel in Washington, thank you.
Still ahead: A new diplomatic fight begins tomorrow over a U.S. ally accused of holding American women and children there against their will.
Stay with us.
ANNOUNCER: Still ahead: a vicious beating by a mob of kids.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They came inside the house and pulled the man out.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANNOUNCER: Why would children beat a man to death?
CONNIE CHUNG TONIGHT will be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ANNOUNCER: Tonight, a 36-year-old Milwaukee man died from injuries he received in a beating Sunday night. Originally, authorities would not say what hospital he was in because they were afraid his attackers would return to finish the job.
Who inspired such fear? The mafia? Drug cartels? No. None of the killers who beat the man to death was older than 18. One of them was 10 years old. Even before their victim died, their attack had horrified the community, as well as the victim's brother.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
YOUNG: It was unhuman, what they did.
CHUNG (voice-over): What they did was chase a 36-year-old man, Charlie Young Jr., to this porch and beat him with shovels, bats and branches. Young tried to escape into the house, but his attackers pulled him back outside and continued to beat him until police responded to a neighbor's 911 call.
The police believe it all started when one of them threw an egg at Young. Young responded with a punch that knocked out a 14-year-old boy's tooth. The teens got reinforcements, caught Young, and began beating him. The victim's brother was horrified.
YOUNG: If they had any kind of heart about how they would want their family or brother treated, they wouldn't have did that.
CHUNG: Today, police said they had nine of them in custody, including the 10-year-old who threw the egg. Seven more remained at large. And residents of the area say they are scared.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Who will be next? Will it be me?
CHUNG: They also say that teens have been intimidating residents in the area for a while.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We're going to take the neighborhood back. The residents are tired of being prisoners in their own homes.
CHUNG: And some are criticizing local police response to the problem.
FRED GORDON, ALDERMAN: Obviously, police presence in the neighborhood has to be upgraded and escalated, so that people can clearly understand that that kind of activity won't be tolerated.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CHUNG: We've asked Milwaukee's police chief, Arthur Jones, to join us tonight.
Chief Jones, thank you for being with us. We just learned a few moments ago that the victim, Charles Young, had died. Based on your investigation, what happened?
ARTHUR JONES, MILWAUKEE POLICE CHIEF: Well, Connie, basically, as you have reported on your intro, that Mr. Young was walking down the street when the 10-year-old was goaded into throwing an egg at Mr. Young. And the egg struck him on the shoulder.
He chased the 10-year-old and was stopped in the process of chasing the 10-year-old by a 14-year-old. It was at that point that Mr. Young struck the 14-year-old in the mouth, knocking one of his teeth out. And at that point, the 14-year-old summoned assistance, if you will, or gathered other people to join him in chasing Mr. Young.
They lost Mr. Young for a period of time, because he had secreted himself in some bushes. However, they found him and then proceeded to chase him to the porch of a residence. And, ultimately, he entered the residence, but they were able to pull him back out of the residence, where, on the porch, they struck him about his body with baseball bats, shovels, broom handles, tree limbs, a steel folding chair, a plastic milk carton, which ultimately and unfortunately caused his death.
CHUNG: Chief, in your 35 years on the Milwaukee Police Department, have you ever seen anything as violent as this, as savage as this?
JONES: Well, probably as violent and as savage, but certainly not from this number of individuals and certainly not from 16 young people who are 18 years and younger, and one of whom is 10 years old.
CHUNG: How many people do you have in custody now?
JONES: We now have 10 of the individuals in custody. Earlier today, we reported we had nine. We now have 10. And we're seeking the other six. We know who they are. And we are going to find them. And they're going to be arrested.
CHUNG: Do you believe that the community should be nervous that these kids are still out there? Are they violent in that respect, that they could be a danger to the community now?
JONES: I think that, obviously, they are dangerous individuals. And, as a group, they were extremely dangerous. As to whether or not they are dangerous individually, I don't know. But they are dangerous individuals.
And I think the community should be concerned. I think the community should be shocked by what occurred here. It was senseless, needless violence. And we're going to have to ensure, the Milwaukee Police Department and the citizens of the city of Milwaukee, that this does not occur again.
CHUNG: Chief Jones, are any of these suspects that you have in custody now, do any of them have previous criminal records?
JONES: I haven't been able to ascertain that yet. It is known to us, but not known to me.
CHUNG: A lot of the neighbors around there said that there were roaming bands of teenagers recently in the area. Why weren't they stopped?
JONES: Well, teenagers, and especially -- it's 85 degrees here in Milwaukee. And teenagers and young people band together. They group together and they walk down the street.
The term "roaming" was used. However, if they are not engaged in illegal activity, it is not for us to stop them and prevent them from being in their neighborhoods. It is when we know -- and, obviously, this resulted in some extreme violence. But until we have reason to believe that they are engaged in illegal conduct, I don't believe that we should interfere with them walking in groups together. CHUNG: Now, you believe that this was not -- quote, unquote -- "gang-related," correct?
JONES: That is correct.
We have no information that these individuals collectively belong to a gang, their gang, nor do we have any information at this point in time that any of the individuals involved have any gang-related ties.
CHUNG: And, at this point, I'm sure you believe that the local prosecutor will eventually press charges, murder charges against these youngsters?
JONES: Well, yes. In Wisconsin, in Milwaukee, when we make an arrest, we charge the person -- we arrest the person for what we think is the appropriate charge. We arrested these individuals for attempted homicide. Our arrest will now be escalated to homicide.
It will be up to the district attorney's office to determine, certainly, who to charge and what to charge them with. But I am reasonably sure, from my experience, that the district attorney's office will issue charges of first-degree intentional homicide, either against all or some of the individuals involved in this assault.
CHUNG: All right, Chief Arthur Jones, thank you so much for being with us. We appreciate your expertise.
What could have sent a group of children into such a violent rage? We wanted to get some insights into pack mentality. So, earlier, I spoke to someone who knows Milwaukee and the criminal mind.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CHUNG: Joining us now: Stan Stojkovic, professor of criminal justice at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.
Thank you for being with us. We appreciate it.
STAN STOJKOVIC, ASSOC. DEAN OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MILWAUKEE: Thank you for having me.
CHUNG: As you look at the scenario of what happened, do you think mob mentality was working here?
STOJKOVIC: Well, possibly.
I think you have a situation, again, that none of these suspects, none of these alleged perpetrators woke up in the morning on Sunday and said they were going to do this, obviously. There were a number of precipitating events, including the victim's involvement in the process. He became the aggressor once the egg was thrown at him. That's not to justify the behavior of the young men and the young boys.
But the reality is that you had a lot of factors that came together all at the wrong time to produce this tragedy. And the question is, what can you do about it? And what are the kinds of things that either police or other institutions in society can effectively respond to?
CHUNG: Well, in order to ask you that question, I think I should tell you that the neighbors say that these are boys who do not go to school, seem to be hanging around all day, sort of roaming around in a pack.
STOJKOVIC: That's probably the case.
It's reflective of a school system that is in real serious trouble, financially as well as educationally. You have to remember, in the city of Milwaukee -- and I think it's true in a lot of big cities -- educational systems, schools are where most kids spend their time. If they're not in school, the question is: Where are they? Well, they're on the street.
And if they're on the street, who is supervising them, whether it be parents, in some cases a truant officer, the police, ultimately? These are reflections of larger issues going on in the city of Milwaukee, as well as other cities across this country. So you want to know: Did this happen? Were there these roaming gangs? Probably. Was this action a common kind of action? Probably not.
CHUNG: What troubles me is, how could these boys become so vicious?
STOJKOVIC: Well, it's hard to know.
Until we learn more and we talk to these individuals, find out what's going on, on its surface, it sounds like mob mentality. It surely was expressed that way in terms of the viciousness, what happened to the victim. I think we're at a point right now of trying to discern and figure out what else was going on in these kids' lives.
We can speculate and hypothesize and theorize all we want, but I think, until we really talk to the young men about what actually was going on -- and, again, I think we have to look at the dynamic that was occurring here. If we look at the event, we will get a certain understanding, albeit I think limited. I think we have to look larger, to ask larger questions about, again, the role of society and where people fit into society. And how do communities produce people like this? What's going on in those communities? That's the larger question.
CHUNG: And, very quickly, what should communities do about it?
STOJKOVIC: I think you have to make deeper kinds of decisions about priorities and how you spend money, how your school system functions, how your families are doing.
In the state of Wisconsin, for example, we've gone through revolutionary changes in the last 10 to 20 years concerning welfare issues, concerning educational issues, budgetary concerns. We have low priorities for people who are disadvantaged in this country. That's the reality. CHUNG: Thank you so much. Stan Stojkovic, thank you.
STOJKOVIC: Thank you very much.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CHUNG: And still ahead: two baby boys. They were joined at birth -- a father's dilemma.
Stay with us.
ANNOUNCER: Next: American children held captive in Saudi Arabia. Is the Saudi government preventing their return?
CONNIE CHUNG TONIGHT will be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CHUNG: What kind of country would prevent American children from leaving of their own free will? Libya? North Korea? Tomorrow, a congressional hearing begins and it will hear testimony that Americans are being held against their will, not in an enemy country, but within the borders of an ally. Saudi Arabia.
Why? Because they are forbidden by Saudi law from leaving unless a male family member says it's OK. You're about to meet members of two families who say their loved ones are trapped in Saudi Arabia and the Bush administration isn't doing enough to get them out. How can this happen in the 21st century?
CNN's Kathleen Koch explains.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KATHLEEN KOCH, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): They are American children kidnapped, say their families, by their Saudi fathers and held there against their will, some mothers also allegedly unable to leave. The State Department has documented 46 cases involving nearly 100 Americans.
Authorities say Pat Roush's daughters were kidnapped in 1986 from Chicago by her ex-husband and taken to Saudi Arabia.
PAT ROUSH, MOTHER: They never had a mom after they were kidnapped. And they have never been able to know their American family and to walk and talk in freedom.
KOCH: Dria Davis, on the right, says she escaped her Saudi father after being held there for two years.
DRIA DAVIS, ESCAPED SAUDI ARABIA: This man I knew as my father began beating me every time I begged to go home or begged to speak to my mother.
KOCH: Congressman Dan Burton has championed their cause. Still, a trip this summer to persuade the Saudi government to arrange the Americans' release failed.
REP. DAN BURTON (R), INDIANA: And you're talking about kids who have been kept for 16 years, women who have had them and their kids thrown out of our embassy over there because we have to be concerned about their law? That's ridiculous.
KOCH: The Saudi government denies any Americans are being held against their will and that, even if they were, the government couldn't dictate to its private citizens where to go.
Saudi law states that fathers or husbands decide whether or not a woman or child can travel, especially out of the country. Officials say that's why, despite the president himself raising the issue in meetings with the Saudi prince, there's been little progress.
RICHARD BOUCHER, STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN: It's been a very difficult problem in Saudi Arabia, which has a completely different set of laws on this subject.
KOCH: Others, though, blame past U.S. inaction on self-interest.
DOUG BANDOW, CATO INSTITUTE: Well, it's obvious that underlying the Saudi-U.S. relationship is a three-letter word. It's oil. That's what really matters.
KOCH: Still, a former ambassador says more can be done.
RAYMOND MABUS, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO SAUDI ARABIA: If a family member kidnaps a child and brings them to Saudi Arabia, the rest of that family is going to forfeit their right to travel to our country, that we're not going to grant them a visa to come here until those children are returned.
KOCH: Tougher measures to reunite families before they become strangers.
ROUSH: I have tremendous hope. I'm a devout Catholic. And I know that the Lord will bring my daughters home.
KOCH: Kathleen Koch, CNN, Washington.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CHUNG: Congressman Dan Burton joins me now from Washington. And we're also joined by Maureen Dabbagh, whose ex-husband took their daughter Nadia to Saudi Arabia, also Suzanne Basrawi, who is also in Saudi Arabia. Her mother, Debra Docekal and brother Ramie join me now as well.
And, Congressman, I will get to you in just one moment, but what I'd like to do is just have these mothers tell their story for a moment. And then I'll be right back at you to ask you some questions.
First Maureen.
Maureen, how old is your daughter now? MAUREEN DABBAGH, MOTHER: Nadia is now 12 years old.
CHUNG: And how long has it been since you've seen her?
DABBAGH: Ten years.
CHUNG: I'm sorry, 10 years.
DABBAGH: Ten years.
CHUNG: Now, you've gotten a lot of help from the U.S. government and from Syria, I know. But do you have any idea if your daughter would really like to come and be with you?
DABBAGH: Since there's been absolutely no communication of any kind, I don't even know if Nadia knows she has a mother, or at least me as her American mother.
CHUNG: When you were living with your husband -- your marriage didn't work out -- you did give birth to Nadia here in the United States, right?
DABBAGH: Correct.
CHUNG: Your marriage eventually broke up. You got custody of her, but your husband was allowed visitation. And that's what was the key. He was able to take her and keep her in Saudi Arabia.
Have you been able to at least determine how she's being brought up in any way?
DABBAGH: There's been absolutely no information, just a total lack of communication. Despite every effort by various government agencies, there is absolutely no communication on her.
CHUNG: You must be so desperate.
DABBAGH: Yes, I am. I don't even know what my child looks like. If I saw her on the street, I might not even recognize her.
CHUNG: All right, let's go over to Debra.
I know, Debra, you had married your husband. You had a son, Ramie, who is sitting right next to you. He's 19 now. And he was born in the United States. Then later, when you went to Saudi Arabia and lived there, you had a daughter, Suzanne.
Now you didn't like it there, correct, basically? And you came back to the United States.
DEBRA DOCEKAL, MOTHER: It was like a prison.
CHUNG: What was it about Saudi Arabia that you found so objective?
DOCEKAL: It was just like a prison. The women are nobody. You can't do anything. And they change as soon as you get there. You are not the same person that you were here -- or they aren't.
CHUNG: Were you able to visit, if you wanted to, and see your children?
DOCEKAL: He asked me to come and visit, but I was too scared to go visit.
CHUNG: Because?
DOCEKAL: I didn't feel safe, because I stayed here with the kids and tried to take them from him.
CHUNG: So you never went back there to visit.
DOCEKAL: No.
CHUNG: And, consequently, were you able to have any contact with your son and your daughter?
DOCEKAL: I talked to them twice. And this was the second time.
CHUNG: Over a period of how many years?
DOCEKAL: Fourteen-and-a-half years.
CHUNG: Oh, my goodness.
All right, so let's go over to your son. I know he came to visit and he decided to stay.
Ramie, why did you decide to stay here in the United States?
RAMIE BASRAWI, SON OF MAUREEN DOCEKAL: Because I don't want to live there, because it's hard to live there. And I always wished to be with my mom. But no one listened to me.
CHUNG: And does your sister suffer from that same problem? I know Suzanne is only 15. Will she be able to come here to the United States and be able to see your mom?
BASRAWI: No, she can't without permission from my dad.
CHUNG: Do you know if she wants to come here?
BASRAWI: Yes, she wants to come. She always told me.
CHUNG: Yes.
Congressman Burton, let's go to you now. Do you believe that this is simply a class of cultures? Or do you believe that the Saudi Arabian government is actually preventing and harboring these American-born children?
BURTON: Well, in many cases, Connie, the Saudi government is complicitous in helping these men in Saudi Arabia to kidnap American children, who the courts have granted custody to the mother, and to take them to Saudi Arabia. And the mothers, in many cases, never get to talk to the children again or even see them.
We had a woman from Indianapolis -- or from Terre Haute, Indiana, who had talked to the judge and said: "I have custody of my children. If my husband takes them on a vacation for two weeks, I'll never see them again." So he contacted -- the judge contacted the Saudi Embassy and said: "He's under court order not to take these children out of the country." And the Saudi Embassy understood.
He got the children, took them to the Saudi Embassy, got two passports, took them to Saudi Arabia. And the mother hasn't seen them or heard from them for two years. Now, when we were over there, we were able to arrange for the two children to talk to their mother for the first time in two years, but she hasn't seen them.
And I just think it's tragic, because the depiction of this being a prison is very accurate. Women over there are scared -- American women are scared to death to say anything. I talked to a woman over there who was actually trembling. Her life had been threatened. She had been physically harmed. She said, "Put me in the box of a belly of a plane with my kids and I'll leave today." But she said, "If my husband finds out that I'm even talking to you, he might kill me."
CHUNG: Now, some of these children, American-born children, who are being held in Saudi Arabia in fact say that they are not being held, that they do not want to come see their mothers. Do you believe that they genuinely feel that way or have they been coerced into saying that?
BURTON: Well, we had one young lady testify before my committee.
Her father took her to the embassy because there was a great deal of pressure being brought to bear on her. And he told her before they went to the embassy, if she said anything he didn't want her to say, when they left there, he would kill her. And so she said she hated America, she hated her mother, and she didn't want to come here.
She finally, with the aid of her mother, was able to get out of Saudi Arabia. They had to hire somebody to help get her out under the cover of darkness -- like in that movie "Not Without My Daughter," which I hope everybody will watch. And when the girl got to the United States and testified before my committee, she said: "My life was threatened. He said he'd kill me if I didn't say what I said." But she said, "I always wanted to come to America, and I couldn't because of the fear."
CHUNG: Congressman, as you well know, there have been other daughters who have been marched forward. And do you honestly believe that they are being forced to say that they do not want to come here? Or do you believe that there is some genuine truth to it and that it's just a matter of a clash of cultures?
BURTON: You might ask the young man who is there with you tonight if he thinks those girls can speak of their own free without reprisals.
CHUNG: All right, I think that's a great idea, Congressman. Let's go over to Ramie.
Ramie, I'm sure you have heard these young women come before cameras and say: "I don't want to go to the United States. I don't want to be there with my mother, who wants me there." Are they telling the truth?
BASRAWI: I don't think so.
CHUNG: And why don't you think so?
BASRAWI: Because many people -- I think she's threatened by her father. I don't know.
CHUNG: You mean whoever you hear from can conceivably be threatened? Do you think that your sister, for instance, Suzanne, is not free to say what she wants to say, whether or not she wants to come to the United States or not?
BASRAWI: She is not free to say. But even if she wants to come, she can't, because everything in my dad's hands. He can do what he wants.
BURTON: Connie, if I might chime in.
CHUNG: Yes.
BURTON: I talked to women over there, several women, who told me they were absolutely terrified that their husband might find out that they even talked to an American congressman about coming to America.
One woman told me that her husband, when we went into Afghanistan, said he was going to chop her up into little pieces and send her to the United States in a box, send it to President Bush. The threats, they were just unbelievable. And the Saudi government, as I said before, has been complicit in some of these kidnappings. And we know that for a fact.
And so we need to put as much pressure on them as possible. They need us every bit as much as we need them.
CHUNG: So, Congressman, what can the U.S. government do? What can the State Department do? And what can the Bush administration do that it isn't doing now?
BURTON: Well, first of all, we could say on passports, when a Saudi man comes into the country, he has to have an entrance stamp on his passport. And if he tries to take children out of the country with a passport and they don't have an entrance stamp on it when they get their exit stamp, that would be a red flag for our immigration people to check whether or not he has the legal right to take them out of the country.
We could deny visas to the immediate family and other people in the family or the government itself, if they are complicit in helping kidnap a child from the United States. There's a whole host of things we can do. And we're going to be introducing legislation to do just that.
I've also talked to the secretary of state, Colin Powell, and told him of these suggestions. He's looking into it right now. And, hopefully, we'll get some positive things accomplished very quickly.
CHUNG: And why do you think the State Department is not doing that?
BURTON: I think this State Department wants to do something about it. I think President Bush wants to do something about it. He even talked to Prince Bandar, their foreign ambassador, about this problem when he was visiting the ranch down in Texas.
So I know the administration wants to see some positive changes. And our ambassador over there does as well. I met with him. I think he's very anxious to see some positive changes. So we're going to work very hard and keep the pressure on the Saudi government. They are spending a lot of money on positive advertisements in this country right now.
They have got foreign -- U.S. ambassadors who are now on their payroll here in the country being their mouthpieces. And it's unfortunate. Obviously, we need them, because we've got a military base there. But they need to observe and respect U.S. law and U.S. courts. And they don't do that right now.
CHUNG: All right, Congressman Burton, thank you so much for being with us.
Maureen, Debra, and Ramie, thank you all.
Incidentally, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher spoke about this issue at today's daily briefing. And he said -- in response to a question, Boucher said how difficult the issue is and added -- quote -- "We continue to work with families. We continue to press the cases. We continue to look for the overall interests of the families and the children. And we continue to support the decisions of U.S. courts and the interests of U.S. parents" -- unquote. Boucher declined to comment on specific cases.
Tomorrow, CNN's week-long series, "Inside Saudi Arabia," looks at how President Bush's relationship with Saudi Arabia differs from that of the first President Bush, his father. That's tomorrow at 8:00, 10:00, noon and 5:00 Eastern time.
We'll be right back.
ANNOUNCER: Still ahead: Two boys must undergo dangerous surgery to live a normal life. Their father must decide if it's worth the risk.
CONNIE CHUNG TONIGHT continues in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) ANNOUNCER: The Iranian Revolution provided a backdrop for perhaps the most notorious case of a cross-cultural custody battle. It was 1984, when the Iranian hostage crisis was only a few years past, when Betty Mahmoody arrived for a vacation with her Iranian-born husband and their daughter.
But the religious-based law of Iran declared that any woman married to an Iranian was an Iranian citizen, forced to heed her husband's word. So when Betty's husband decided to stay and keep their daughter in Iran, Betty had no legal recourse.
The Sally Field movie "Not Without My Daughter" was inspired by her 18-month ordeal in Iran and her harrowing 500-mile escape across lawless Iranian terrain into neighboring Turkey.
What ever happened to Betty and her daughter Mahtob? The answer when we return.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ANNOUNCER (voice-over): Whatever happened to the mother and daughter whose story inspired the movie "Not Without My Daughter?" Betty Mahmoody found the group One World for Children to assist other parents dealing with international kidnappings and custody disputes.
The daughter seen in the movie has grown up to pursue a premed degree, but she and her mother live under assumed names now, still in fear for their lives.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CHUNG: A father of twin baby boys is preparing to travel to America from halfway around the world to face an agonizing decision. The options: let his sons live as they were born, joined at the head, or have them undergo risky surgery that could lead to death.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
(voice-over): Since 1-year-old conjoined twins Mohammed and Ahmed Ibrahim arrived in Dallas in June, they've been impressing their nurses.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They could only say mama before. Now they are saying mama, dadda, baba, making different sounds.
CHUNG: They were born in a small hospital in Egypt, joined at the crown of their heads.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was a surprise for the obstetrician. It was a shock, actually.
CHUNG: Egyptian-based doctors searched for help for the boys and found it through the Dallas-based World Craniofacial Foundation, run by Dr. Ken Salyer.
KENNETH SALYER, FOUNDER, WORLD CRANIOFACIAL FOUNDATION: We have two essentially normal kids attached together who have the potential to lead normal lives if they are separated.
CHUNG: Dr. Salyer and his team have been closely watching the case of conjoined twins Maria Teresa and Maria de Jesus Alvarez, who were separated in Los Angeles last August. Both have been improving and may even return home to Guatemala later this month.
But doctors say separating Mohammed and Ahmed may be even more difficult. While they have separate brains, Mohammed and Ahmed do share the main blood vessel that drains blood from the brain. Doctors say they won't move forward with the surgery until they can explain the risks in a face-to-face discussion with the boys' father, who is still in Egypt with his wife and their two other children. That should occur soon.
A travel visa has been issued. And doctors expect the boys' father to arrive in Dallas later this week.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CHUNG: And Dr. David Genecov, member of the surgical team at North Texas Hospital for Children, joins me now from Dallas.
Thank you, Doctor, for being with us.
When the father arrives from Egypt, obviously, you'll talk to him and you'll have to make a decision along with him. What will you tell the father?
DR. DAVID GENECOV, NORTH TEXAS HOSPITAL FOR CHILDREN: Well, I think a couple of things. We are going to tell them that the surgery is, of course, risky. Any separation of children with craniopagus, conjoined twins, or otherwise joined at the head is incredibly risky.
But we also need to explain to him what their life is going to look like in five, 10, 15 years if they are not separated.
CHUNG: And what is that likelihood? Would they be able to live to adulthood if indeed they were not separated?
GENECOV: I think the children would be able to live, but the quality-of-life issue is, I think, something that is of significant issue.
CHUNG: And what do you mean?
GENECOV: Well, at this time, they are not able to walk. They are not able to see each other. And they are not able to use normal active daily instruments. In other words, they can't -- well, they roll over together, but that's not what you'd want for your children. You want them to be ambulatory, to walk, and go to school and do all the things that other normal children will do.
CHUNG: Sure.
I understand -- one of the things that was very fascinating to me when I was reading the research on this story was that therapists were working with them so that they could use their brains individually, which they do not do?
GENECOV: No, they do. They are separate children who each have a distinct personality.
But what they are trying to do is work with them on a regular basis to help them move and try and get as much activity as they possibly can, considering their present form.
CHUNG: Well, maybe you can help explain to me one other thing that I read, then. The research that I read suggested that they could not close their eyes completely. And why are you smiling? Is that -- I don't understand why they can't close their eyes completely when they sleep.
GENECOV: I think there was one child that had some difficulty with closing his eyes completely when he was sleeping.
And I really don't know if that had anything particularly to do with the fact that they were conjoined. However, that has improved with therapy. He can now close his eyes. And they can also move around quite a bit better.
CHUNG: I see.
So what are you most concerned about, if this surgery does proceed?
GENECOV: Well, I think that we are all concerned. As you know, this is a team of people taking care of these children. It's not one or two physicians, but a whole team of people. And I think the team in general is concerned with the success of the operation and hoping that we can separate both children and have viable kids when we're finished.
CHUNG: And does the success out in Los Angeles with the two Marias give you some encouragement, even though their case is a little different and not as difficult as this one?
GENECOV: Well, I think any case that is successful when you deal with conjoined twins offers hope for other children who have a similar problem.
CHUNG: Dr. David Genecov, thank you so much for being with us.
GENECOV: Thank you.
CHUNG: And good luck.
We'll be right back with a new development that could affect the balance of power in the Senate.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CHUNG: Now a quick bit of breaking news to report to you before we go: CNN has confirmed that New Jersey Democratic Party officials have chosen 78-year-old former Senator Frank Lautenberg to run in place of Senator Robert Torricelli, who yesterday withdrew his name from next month's election.
Republicans are challenging the party's right to replace Torricelli's name on the ballot. But today, the state Supreme Court agreed to hear Democratic arguments in the case tomorrow. Torricelli's announcement was big national news because the Democrats control the Senate by only a 51-49 majority.
Tomorrow on our program: The president calls a conference on missing and exploited children. We'll talk to the parents of Samantha Runnion and Elizabeth Smart.
And coming up next on "LARRY KING LIVE": Greg and Lauren Manning, a burn victim from the World Trade Center and a love story.
Thank you for joining us. And for all of us at CNN, good night and see you tomorrow.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Killed in Teen Mob Beating>
|
