Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Talkback Live

What Do Attacks in Bali Mean For America?; Police Continue to Track Washington D.C. Area Sniper; Can America Fight Both al Qaeda and Iraq?

Aired October 14, 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.


ARTHEL NEVILLE, CNN HOST: Hello, everybody.
Welcome to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Arthel Neville.

Is terrorism against Western targets again on the rise? Americans and other Western tourists are leaving Bali in droves following this weekend's mass killings at two nightclubs there. At least 181 people are dead. Hundreds remain missing and some 300 were injured. It's the latest in a string of terrorist attacks we're going to talk about today.

Then, stay tuned and find out who is behind this warning and why they say the U.S. can't win a two-front war.

And then later, who is the Beltway sniper? Criminologist Casey Jordan will take your calls and e-mails.

And right now, let's get back to terrorism. CNN national correspondent Mike Boettcher joins us in London. And in Boston, Jim Walsh is a terrorism expert. He's a political scientist and research fellow at Harvard University.

OK, Jim, I'm going to begin with you today. And does this attack in Bali bear the hallmarks of al Qaeda?

JIM WALSH, HARVARD TERRORISM EXPERT: Well, I certainly think that al Qaeda or an al Qaeda affiliated group, like Jemaah (ph) Islamiah (ph) is going to be the prime suspect here. It is a coordinated attack where you have multiple explosions taking place within a short period of time. It does represent something of a different target. In the past, al Qaeda's targets have been primarily U.S. institutions, government institutions, military targets, financial institutions, and a nightclub is somewhat of a different target set than we're used to expecting from al Qaeda.

NEVILLE: Then who were they trying to attack?

WALSH: Well, I think they are trying to attack foreigners. They're trying to attack the financial infrastructure of Indonesia. Indonesia is a country that has a lot of problems. Over the past years, it has been racked by political and religious violence. It is a weak central government. It has several Islamist groups, paramilitaries, and by striking at a disco and making those terrorists want to leave in droves, that strikes at the financial underbelly of Indonesia and relayy hurts the Indonesian economy. NEVILLE: Listen, a short while ago, President Bush spoke out about these bombings in Bali. I want to take a listen to see what the president had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I believe that the attacks on the French vessel in Yemen is connected with this type of terror, that they are related. I believe that the attack on our Marines in Kuwait reflect the international nature of these cells, these killer cells.

And clearly the attacks in Bali, I think we have to assume is al Qaeda. We're beginning to hear some reports that's more definitive than that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

NEVILLE: Mike Boettcher, help us understand the importance, from the terrorist perspective, regarding Indonesia.

MIKE BOETTCHER, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, on this specific target it is -- Indonesia, first, is a launching point for operations around Southeast Asia. You have Jemaah (ph) Islamiah (ph), with a large organization there that has had training camps there and we have video of a training camp in Indonesia that was gotten from Afghanistan, from the tapes that CNN's Nic Robertson got.

And so, it's an important jumping off point. It is basically the base of where they want to establish an Islamic nation that would exist through Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines and other places. So it's very important in that regard.

Now, this particular target was a soft target. And we have indications from the audiotape that was made by Iman (ph) Al-Zawari (ph), who's the righthand man of Osama bin Laden. That was released October 6, in which he emphasizes that they're going to go after economic targets. This, it took a lot of human life, but it was also an economic target. Immediately has killed the tourism industry there, hurt it worldwide and also attacked the confidence of investors worldwide.

NEVILLE: Mike...

BOETTCHER: The tanker being hit in Yemen -- go ahead.

NEVILLE: Let's -- let's talk about the choreography. You're right, the tanker in Yemen, the Bali bombings, the choreography and the coordination behind all of those attacks. Does this signify that al Qaeda is stronger than ever?

BOETTCHER: I think, you know, al Qaeda is an evolving, mutating organization. Is it stronger than ever? I don't think it's stronger than it was before September 11. But when you look at al Qaeda, and you say that al Qaeda's responsible for this attack, you have to be a little bit more specific. These are groups that are affiliated with al Qaeda around the world. Jemaah (ph) Islamiah (ph) and other groups in Morocco and in other places that have planned attacks. And they're not specifically al Qaeda but they're affiliated with that organization and in some instances, those attacks, according to intelligence analysts I've spoken to, are directed by al Qaeda, but in -- not in all instances.

NEVILLE: But of course, Jemaah (ph) Islamiah (ph) is denying any responsibility.

BOETTCHER: Well, it's interesting to see what will come out in the next couple of days. It has promised, in the statements from al Qaeda that came out today on al Jazeera and on the Web site, which we've been monitoring, that two more statements are promised. One may mention Bali. Today's didn't. We'll have to see.

You have to take their denial of this, but also keep it in the context of the fact that they are the most powerful group affiliated with al Qaeda in that region and, frankly, the only group that would have the capability to do such an attack is probably that organization. But you have to listen to their denial and proof has to be put out that they did do it.

NEVILLE: Jim Walsh, without, of course, the luxury of a crystal ball, help us maybe sort of plot from the terrorist's standpoint the possible next targets and why.

WALSH: Well, I think the -- in some ways, the -- this recent spate of attacks is not surprising, neither the timing nor the locations. You know, back on September 21, the U.S. embassy in Jakarta warned Westerners that they may be targets of attacks in Indonesia.

And this comes after really seven different attacks in Southeast Asia. So, if I look to the future, I would expect more of the same. We should expect that there will be other attempts in Indonesia, or in Malaysia, Singapore, in that region. But I also expect that U.S. assets in Pakistan and Afghanistan will be continue to be targets as well. They will try to pick people off, Marines, service people, as they can.

And then finally, as you know, Arthel, just several days ago, the FBI did issue a warning to state and local officials indicating their belief or fear that al Qaeda may be in the process of planning -- not carrying out -- but planning attacks to occur on the U.S. homeland. So, in sum, I think in the short term we should expect more attacks abroad on soft targets as Mike has rightly pointed out, and then in the longer term, you know, they're not going to go away and they're going to take another whack at us here in the U.S. at some point.

NEVILLE: Is it being -- becoming more difficult for them to attack here on U.S. -- U.S. soil?

WALSH: Well, again, I think Mike was right, absolutely. It's certainly a lot more difficult for them to attack us now, after 9/11. We have a new, heightened awareness. We have new rules and regulations. We have new scrutiny at the border. It's tougher to get into the country, it's tougher to get out. So I think operationally it is much more difficult for them to try to pull off an attack, certainty an attack on the scale of 9/11. But that doesn't mean we're immune, and I expect that they will try as they have tried in the past.

NEVILLE: There shouldn't be a false sense of security. Let's go to Jack (ph) here in the audience from Massachusetts.

What do you say, sir?

JACK: Well, I think clearly that al Qaeda has been in Indonesia for quite sometime and the Indonesian government has been denying that, for whatever reason, to draw attention away from themselves, but clearly I think the Indonesian government has been caught with their pants down, essentially.

NEVILLE: So then, what will the Indonesian government do about this, Mike?

BOETTCHER: Well, what they're going to have to do is begin cooperating with other agencies, other countries in that region. In the past, such terrorist attacks have been viewed as internal security matters and there hasn't been a whole lot of intelligence sharing in the region, intraregion in Asia.

Now, after September 11, the U.S. did go in and because of evidence gathered in Afghanistan, frankly, they were able to crack some of those cells that were trying to launch attacks in Singapore. But what's going to have to happen is cooperation. Indonesia is going to have to work with Malaysia, with the Philippines and with Singapore and other governments in the area.

WALSH: Arthel, if I can jump in briefly on Jack's question here. I think it's important to realize that the president of Indonesia is in a bit of a tough spot. Indonesia is a huge, sprawling country, the largest archipelago in the world. Much of it is lawless. There's corruption. It has a weak central government and you have a president who is, on the one hand, trying to balance the interests of the army, an army that has a long record of human rights abuses. And on the other hand, trying to balance the religious parties, who provide her some of her political support.

So, while yes, we would expect more of Indonesia, they have not been as forthcoming as other countries in the region. This is a weak country that's in trouble, that's had trouble, and it's a delicate and difficult time for them.

NEVILLE: Indeed. Listen, I have to take a break right now, but Mike mentioned a note from Osama bin Laden. And up next, we're going to find out what a statement attributed to bin Laden says about recent terrorist attacks.

Then later this hour, we're taking your thoughts on the Beltway sniper. You can phone or e-mail your questions to criminologist Casey Jordan as TALKBACK LIVE continues. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

NEVILLE: And welcome back, everybody. I'm Arthel Neville. We're talking about the weekend nightclub bombings in Bali, Islamic militants, and growing terrorism against the West.

And, Mike, a statement supposedly written by Osama bin Laden has been released, if you could tell us about that?

BOETTCHER: It's been released from a couple of sources, one, this Internet web site that variously has been known as al Meta (ph).com, it has other names, it has a different name today, and also from Al Jazeera (ph), the Arab satellite television news network based in Qatar. The statement basically is signed by Osama bin Laden. It is believed to be authentic according to al Jazeera. And from the sources this came from, it looks authentic, but I'll read you a quote out of this where they take credit.

It says the heroic operation in Kuwait -- and this is the marine attack -- proves the level of danger that threatens U.S. forces in Islamic countries. The priority in this war at this stage must be against the infidels, the Americans and the Jews, who have not stopped their injustice. They also talk about the economic effect of the attack on the tanker. As I said, that looks like a new strategy they're going for.

NEVILLE: Now, Jim, why hasn't al Qaeda claimed responsibilities for those bombings if in fact they're behind it?

WALSH: Well, if you look at al Qaeda's past record, sometimes they have taken direct responsibility for operations. Other times they have not. If you watched bin Laden's tapes over the -- since September through into November, different statements were made at different times and then sort of increasingly over time it appeared as if he took more and more responsibility for 9/11. So just because they don't take responsibility doesn't mean they're not responsible. It's only the evidence that can prove that at the end of the day.

NEVILLE: Yes. And then if Osama bin Laden is alive, why doesn't he just come out instead of writing in newspapers or putting out a tape that could be questioned whether or not if it's authentic or not?

WALSH: Arthel, I think you've put your finger on a very, very interesting question. We have now several communications over the past week. We have the audiotape released on al Jazeera, reportedly from bin Laden himself. We have a tape from his right-hand man, al Zawahiri, and now we have this alleged written communication. So the number of communications seems to be increasing. On the other hand, there are no video tapes. This is the most videotaped terrorist in human history and we saw him regularly last fall. He has not appeared since the beginning of the year. And the question is why haven't we? Why aren't we seeing signed statements? Why are we seeing audiotapes and no videotapes? I think it's very curious.

NEVILLE: Mike, you want to add to that? BOETTCHER: Well, I would say perhaps it could be that they're so far underground in hiding that it would be hard to get a videotape out or a camera in. They may be in that sort of a location. So that could be one possibility. And I will say, Arthel, we are getting rumblings out there, sort of that chatter you hear the intelligence community talk about, a videotape coming out relatively soon. And we're trying to get to the bottom of it, if this is actually a true report.

NEVILLE: Listen, I have Ramona (ph) here in the audience who has a question or a comment.

RAMONA: Could Osama have changed his appearance so much that we wouldn't be able to recognize him? Would that be one reason?

BOETTCHER: Could I add something to that? You know, one interesting aspect to this is that there have been a number of people who have had their faces altered by plastic surgery. I don't believe that Osama bin Laden would worry about that in terms of moving around. But there are plastic surgeons that have been employed who are loyal to the organization. We've been told this by several intelligence sources in the coalition.

NEVILLE: Like Saddam Hussein.

Listen, Jim Walsh, I want to ask you, know, a number of recent attacks on western targets. Let's see, the French tanker explosion in Yemen, the American military fired on in Kuwait, now Bali. Is this a coordinated campaign and is it possible that different terrorist groups are working in concert?

WALSH: Well, I think the answer -- I know it's going to be unsatisfactory -- is both yes and know. I think Mike's earlier point is a good one. That is, we talk about al Qaeda as if it was a single group of people...

NEVILLE: But it's not.

WALSH: What it really is -- exactly -- is a loose affiliation of a variety of people with a variety of causes. People in Kashmir are worried about India and Pakistan, Chechens, Egyptians, Saudis, people who have causes, spread out throughout the world. And we should expect, I think, that some of those people will be acting on their own, some of them will be acting in concert with al Qaeda, and then there will be other operations, particularly high profile operations, that are probably led by or being planned by al Qaeda themselves. So it's hard to put your finger on one over another, but in some sense they may all be tied to the same thing.

NEVILLE: Which, from just a generic, regular old American perspective I'd imagine that's quite a scary thought.

WALSH: Absolutely. This has been a tough couple of weeks and this weekend has been a bad end to a bad week. But that's what happens when you're engaged against terrorism. There are going to be some weeks where the other side gets some hits in and then you have to respond and then try to prevent that from happening more in the future.

NEVILLE: Jim, quick final question. Has the war on terror not made a dent?

WALSH: Well, I think that it's likely that Osama bin Laden is under tremendous pressure. They have had losses. They've had casualties on the field of battle in Afghanistan. They are on the run. They have broken up into decentralized little groups. I think that's all to the good. But it doesn't mean that they've gone away and it doesn't mean that they can't cause havoc and cause problems. So I think he's under pressure, will continue to be under pressure, and I think in the long run this is a battle we're going to win. The U.S. is going to be here a lot longer than Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, but it's not going to happen overnight. He's going to be a wily and difficult foe.

NEVILLE: Jim Walsh, Mike Boettcher, thank you very much for joining us here today on TALKBACK LIVE.

WALSH: Thank you, Arthel.

NEVILLE: OK.

NEVILLE: Time for another break.

And coming up, CNN's Kathleen Koch is standing by with the latest on the Beltway sniper investigation and criminologist Casey Jordan is waiting to hear what you have to say about the attacks. E-mail your comments and questions to talkback@cnn.com.

Right now, we'll be back in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

NEVILLE: And welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE, everybody.

Around Washington's Beltway, investigators probing the sniper attack say they're drowning in tips, theories, and false alarms, but Chief Charles Moose today encouraged anyone and everyone who think they might know something to write and let police decide what's important and what's not.

It was quite a weekend in Washington area. The sniper laid low.

CNN's Kathleen Koch is covering the investigation in Rockville, Maryland.

Kathleen, first of all, tell us about this new address, I mean, Chief Moose released today for people who might want to contact the department by mail.

KATHLEEN KOCH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Basically, Arthel, what Chief Moose said is just as you described. They're simply getting swamped by letters of people mailing who are mailing in with tips, with ideas on who this spree killer might be. So, the police put out a new address, and we'll give it you now: It's P.O. Box 7875, Gaithersburg, Maryland, 20898-7875. And they want people who are perhaps uncomfortable with calling the tip line or uncomfortable with e-mailing to go ahead and send mail there. Again, as you said, they want each and every tip that anyone might offer.

Now, of course, we are lucky thus far this weekend if you can call this area lucky. It's the first three day respite that we have had from any sniper shootings since this spate of violence began back on October 2.

The president himself, though, spoke out today for the first time about these killings. These killings have become a part of his daily briefing and he clearly condemned what this sniper has been up to.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSH: I'm just sickened -- sick to my stomach to think that there is a cold-blooded killer at home taking innocent life. I weep for those who have lost their loved ones. I am -- the idea of moms taking their kids to school and sheltering them from a potential sniper attack is not the American I know. And, therefore, we're lending all the resources of the federal government, all that have been required, to do everything we can to assist the local law authorities to find this -- whoever it is.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KOCH: Tasking a jump in tips and clues that have been coming in from residents in the area since they put out a graphic on Saturday. It's basically a graphic representation of the white box truck that has been seen at the site of a couple of the shootings here in Montgomery County. Police say they have put it together based on the testimony of a couple of witnesses who saw it at the scene.

And the police chief today said that he may be an optimist, but he believes that this investigation is moving forward, that they are making progress. But he says you may not be privy to all the information that we are, that gives us that cause for optimism but the police obviously wants to keep all those clues very close to the vest.

Authorities did take some questions about whether or not this investigation should be turned over to the federal government and a spokesman for the FBI said the federal government's resources are being brought to bear in every way possible in this case, so really nothing more could be done than they're already doing.

So Arthel, things are moving forward, but obviously no suspects and no arrests.

NEVILLE: Kathleen, what about the composite of that white Astro minivan? We keep hearing talk of that. Any idea when that might be released?

KOCH: Authorities are working very hard on that because they believe that just as the graphic composite of the box truck, that putting out an image of this Chevy white -- this white Chevy Astro van will spark someone's memory, again a picture being worth 1,000 words. But they want to get it right. There were several people at the scene of that shooting on Friday who saw this van and they want to take the composite to each and every witness and make sure they are comfortable with what is being put out, that it is as accurate as possible.

NEVILLE: CNN's Kathleen Koch, thank you very much for that report.

KOCH: You bet.

NEVILLE: And Chief Moose is asking for your help and we're asking for your questions such as this one. James, from Newport News, Virginia wants to know: "Is it possible in the Beltway shootings, that there is not, one but multiple shooters?"

We're going to ask criminologist Casey Jordan and take your calls right after the break.

TALKBACK LIVE continues in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

NEVILLE: And welcome back, everybody.

We are talking about tracking the suburban sniper in the Washington area. And joining us is CNN Criminologist Casey Jordan. Hello, Dr. Jordan -- welcome.

CASEY JORDAN, CNN CRIMINOLOGIST: Thank you. Great to be here.

NEVILLE: Good. Let's start right away with James in Newport News, Virginia. He writes, "Is it possible in the Beltway shootings that there is not one, but multiple shooters?" -- Dr. Jordan.

JORDAN: Well, nothing is impossible in this particular case. It would not be consistent, but it is certainly not inconceivable that these shootings are the work of more than one person. Frankly, I think that you've got one shooter and, if there is another, it will probably be just one sidekick. Somebody who is probably not active in the shooting but might be the driver of the so-called getaway vehicle; somebody who is something of a disciple to the shooter, who might stroke his ego and pump up his megalomania.

But the saying goes: Your chain is only as good as its weakest link. So the minute you get two people, two conspirators in a crime, one of them could always turn out to be the weak link that gets the other one caught up. And that's why I think that this shooter is probably acting alone.

NEVILLE: OK. I have Paul (ph) from Florida.

PAUL: Hi. I used to be an investigator on behalf of death row inmates in Florida for about five and a half years. So -- with people like Ted Bundy, et cetera, in Florida. It seems to me that this particular person, who I at this point think is just one person, is a serial killer who gets a kick out of what he's doing. What are your thoughts? JORDAN: There is no doubt in my mind that the motivation for this particular killer, while we don't know specifically what it is, it is intrinsic or very unique to this particular killer. We can generalize it and say that he's driven by issues of power and control, ego, this whole concept of "I am god."

But what tripped this whole thing off is probably something that was very specific, again, to the shooter. And why he continues could actually be changing, evolving and morphing into new and different reasons as the killing continues, as he gets media attention, which he may never have anticipated. And I think that's why this particular case is so disturbing, is that there is no clear motive.

NEVILLE: OK, Dr. Jordan. I have a lot of questions for you here . So we've got Conrad (ph) here from Georgia.

CONRAD: I would like to know why exactly we're not getting more information about the genetic description of the individuals that might be in this white box truck that we're looking for. Because I know initially -- I think after the Manassas killing, there was some report of possibly two Caucasian men, maybe possibly one (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

I just think it would be much simpler -- I would think, anyway -- to try to narrow it down which white van or box truck we're looking for, if (UNINTELLIGIBLE). I'm trying to figure out why they're taking that back.

JORDAN: OK. Conrad (ph), there are a few different reasons why we may not be getting more information. The number one most important reason is that if the information is faulty, even if it's well intended but not accurate, not credible, it could send people and law enforcement investigators in a totally wrong direction, which might actually keep us from catching the perpetrator.

Police always have what we call holdbacks, information that is known only to them. Important for their investigation, because it helps them filter out information that is accurate or not accurate, helps discern copycats, and that's important. We don't need to know everything. The public doesn't have to know everything.

But the third option is that the police really don't know. That the information that came through initially has not been proved to be credible and that the reason we aren't pursuing anything is because we don't have anything.

NEVILLE: OK. Let's go to Florida now, where Derek (ph) is standing by on the phone. Go ahead, Derek (ph).

CALLER: Hello?

NEVILLE: Hello. You're live.

CALLER: Oh, I'm from Silver Springs.

NEVILLE: OK. CALLER: Yes. This is Derek (ph). I'm up here where all the action is. I think the police is going about this the wrong way.

We have focused on the white truck, and I think that the killer is waiting for a white vehicle to go by. And when they go by, it fires, because he's (ph) not afraid of getting caught. And he's getting up and walking away while we're doing a mad chase on these white vehicles.

NEVILLE: OK. Derek (ph), thank you for calling in with your comment. And I have Linda (ph) here in Georgia.

LINDA: Yes. I would like to know when someone snaps and becomes a serial killer.

JORDAN: Wow, that's a very complicated question. First of all, we don't know specifically what started the spree in the first place. We don't know whether it was planned for a great deal of time in advance or whether there was a specific event, an anniversary, something very traumatic that started this entire tragic events starting.

But the point is that usually there is something quite specific. Usually, discord in the family, maybe getting fired from a job, being wrongly accused of a crime, losing children in a custody battle. Something very traumatic to the individual that can start the entire snowball rolling. I can't tell you, however, whether that actually happened in this case because we just don't know yet.

NEVILLE: OK. I have Helen (ph) here from Florida.

HELEN: Hi. This is actually my husband's theory, but he's a little shy, so I'm going to propose it. Is it at all possible, as a movie scenario might be, that this gentleman had a specific victim in mind and in order to cover his traces, have now killed others so that he would not really be...

NEVILLE: So who do you think he might have in mind?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It could have been any of them. I mean, who is to know what his actual victim was, but now he's being -- not being looked at from the point of view somebody who just murdered the one person they wanted to kill.

NEVILLE: Right. Go ahead, Dr. Jordan.

JORDAN: Helen (ph), it's not that far-fetched. In fact, in a very unusual type of serial killing that involves product tampering or food poisoning, we have actually seen your theory come to light, where somebody actually tampered with a product. And I think her husband was one of the victims, and she poisoned other products just to defer the blame away from herself. But frankly, I don't think that's the case in this particular event.

There doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason to the people who are being killed. And unless -- go ahead. NEVILLE: Dr. Jordan, I'm sorry. I have one last question I really want to get in here from Kerry (ph).

KERRY: I would like to know whether or not the killer could be a role player because of the tarot card that was found.

JORDAN: A role player in a particular game?

KERRY: Yes. Like this could all be a game to him.

JORDAN: Oh, I think in his mind this is absolutely a game. Probably something very similar to a video game. And I am not saying that video games have caused these crimes, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if the perpetrator is a big consumer of violent video games, simply because of the way he's operating and his strategy.

But the death card does not really symbolize death in its purest sense. It symbolizes change and transformation. I get the feeling that this particular perpetrator is a wannabe. He reads a lot; he consumes a lot of fantasy information. And that perhaps the use of the tarot card was an unsophisticated way of him trying to say that death is going to come in the future.

NEVILLE: Dr. Casey Jordan, thank you so much for fielding all of the question. And we look forward to seeing you again in the future here on TALKBACK LIVE.

JORDAN: Thanks so much.

NEVILLE: Sure.

Up next, are two wars too many? Can America fight both al Qaeda and Iraq? The people behind this ad -- there it is -- say it can't be done. We'll hear from one of them, Ben and Jerry's founder, Ben Cohen, right after this.

Don't go anywhere. TALKBACK LIVE continues.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSH: If we don't deal with Saddam Hussein and disarm him -- and hopefully it will be done peacefully -- he becomes more and more dangerous. And some day we don't want to step back and say where was the United States government? How come we didn't act? And we've got plenty of capacity to fight war against al Qaeda, which is going to take a while.

We just learned a lesson this weekend. It's going to take a while to succeed.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

NEVILLE: And that was President Bush earlier today. Will the U.S. have to choose its villain? The people behind this ad we're gong to show you in today's "New York Times" says, "America can't fight a war on two fronts: al Qaeda and Iraq." They say right now Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda are the real threats.

Among the people behind this ad is Ben Cohen, founder of Ben & Jerry's. He is president of the True Majority (ph) and online political organization. Also with us today, retired Army Lieutenant Colonel, Robert Maginnis. I want to welcome both of you to the show.

LT. COL. ROBERT MCGINNIS (RET), U.S. ARMY: Thank you, Arthel.

BEN COHEN, FOUNDER, BEN & JERRY'S: How are you?

NEVILLE: All right. Ben Cohen, you're up first. Why did you take out this ad?

COHEN: You know, it's very unusual for our organization and business leaders for sensible priorities to take out a full-page ad in "The New York Times." We took out the ad because we're convinced that going to war with Iraq would be senseless in terms of the amount of civilians that would die, in terms of there being no imminent threat, in terms of the havoc it would wreak to the economy. And in terms of the precedent that it would be setting for so-called preemptive war. Essentially, the right for any country to attack another one without having -- without it having done anything to you first.

NEVILLE: And on that note, I have a veteran here in the audience, Maury (ph), from Florida. Sir, I would like you to address your comments to Colonel Maginnis.

MAURY: Well, Colonel, being an ex-military, United States has never declared war on another sovereign nation. And within our Constitution, it states that we should not do so even though our Congress has given a voice of OK to our president. This requires a constitutional change in our Constitution. This has to be voted on and it has not been done so. It has been debated by Congress.

Also, the al Qaeda is our enemy, not Iraq at this present time, because they have not invaded us.

MAGINNIS: Now, Maury (ph), clearly the United States Congress in the resolution is not a declaration of war. And I think they backed out of some of the stronger language that the president wanted.

The reality is that, you know, we face basically an international terrorist threat that includes Iraq. Iraq has sponsored a great deal of terrorism, not only in the Mid East, but has given aid and comfort to al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, al Zawahiri, who is his deputy, who was there at (UNINTELLIGIBLE), the terrorist training facility.

And so if you go after the head of the snake, and I see that it's not Osama bin Laden. It's really the likes of the dictator like bin Laden -- or rather, Saddam Hussein, that you're going to accomplish far more. You're going to send very clear signals to the terrorists that are in Iran, in Saudi Arabia, Syria and throughout the region. You know, at the same time, we have to be incredibly careful about how we treat the people. I agree with Ben that we have to be smart about this. I don't want to see 250,000 Americans charging up the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) to put a bullet in Saddam Hussein's head. That's not the way to do it.

But we haven't heard from the president how he thinks it ought to be done, and that's very key. And I think soon we'll begin to see bits and pieces of that. And I hope it involves the Iraqi resistance, as well as the exiled community that clearly wants to liberate their country from the terrible situation they've lived under for the last 23 years.

NEVILLE: Ben, I want to ask you, -- you or your group, the people who sponsored the ad with you -- have you made the connection between Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein?

COHEN: Absolutely not. The research that we've done, and based on our military advisers, former senior level military officials, state that there has been no proof of a connection between bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. Moreover, our understanding is that Iraq is a secular state and the terrorists, al Qaeda, have not been getting along with Saddam and Iraq because they believe in religious fundamental states.

NEVILLE: Listen, I have to take a -- excuse me, Colonel, I have to take a break right now. Charles (ph), in New Jersey, I know you're standing by on the phone. I'm going to get to you after the break, as well as Rich (ph) here in the audience.

And also when we come back, I want to know if you think America can handle a two-pronged war. Give me a call right now, and we'll see you after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

NEVILLE: And welcome back, everybody. I'm Arthel Neville. We're talking about whether the United States can fight both Iraq and al Qaeda.

And Colonel Maginnis, some people say that in taking on Iraq, the U.S. loses sight of the real enemy, al Qaeda. Do you agree?

MAGINNIS: Well, that is a possibility. We have to be very careful. Keep in mind our military is 140 different countries around the world, the largest number is about 65,000 in Germany. We have 10,000 left in Afghanistan for certainly decades, perhaps. But what we're talking about is an asymmetric war, Arthel.

This is very different than what we faced traditionally, where you have a front line and a rear. We don't have that here because we're in 60 different countries, much like Bali and the attacks the other day that appear be al Qaeda related. We have to be very smart, use our intelligence, our law enforcement, as well as our military in very strategic ways that we've never done in the past. And so this is a far more difficult operation. What we're about to do, perhaps in Iraq, which would involve many thousands of soldiers and airmen and so forth, would be more traditional perhaps. But it's not going to jeopardize operations in the Philippines or Indonesia or in Afghanistan. And that's something we need to keep in mind.

NEVILLE: OK. Let's go to New Jersey, where I promised Charles (ph) that he would have a chance to speak out. Go ahead, Charles (ph). You're live.

CALLER: Thank you very much. I have two quick points, if possible. One, that I'm 50 years old and we're fighting a war on terrorism that I don't think we'll end in my lifetime.

Secondly, is my concern about going into Iraq. We're saying we're going in because they could be a threat to us down the road and they've broken U.N. sanctions. But we need the Arab people on our side. And they look at what the Israelis are doing to the Palestinians and they have broken U.N. sanctions.

So to get the Arabs on our side, we have to stop what Israel is doing to the Palestinians. Then maybe they'll help us put an end to all of this.

NEVILLE: Charles (ph), thanks for calling, first of all. And Ben Cohen, I would like to hear you respond to that.

COHEN: Well, I feel very much that going into a war in Iraq, yes, it is something that we know how to do. But that would be nothing more than a recruitment poster for al Qaeda, as the ad in today's "TIMES" showed. I agree very much that we need to get the Arabs on our side and Muslims. And, you know, going into Iraq and blowing up a bunch of innocent people is not going to help. It's going to make things worse and it's going to increase terrorism.

MAGINNIS: Arthel...

NEVILLE: Go ahead, sir.

MAGINNIS: A lot of people don't understand how the Palestinian- Israeli crisis really resonates in the Gulf. And I have good friends that are Iraqi and Afghanistan, Pakistani, who say that, you know, because the U.S. fails to be a neutral power in trying to negotiate an end to that, that is just festering the problem.

Now, as Ben says, if you go into Iraq -- and in my opinion -- and you don't go in there to liberate with Iraqis, but you but you leave with American forces, very different proposition. That's just going to anger the Arab street and become a recruiting mechanism for al Qaeda. So these are realities I hope that the National Security Council is considering, because the alternatives could be very deadly for American soldiers.

NEVILLE: Listen, we have to take a break right now. But we're going to try to get more of your e-mails and phone calls as soon as we get back from the break, so don't go anywhere. TALKBACK LIVE continues in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

NEVILLE: Welcome back, everybody. I'm standing here with Rich (ph) from New Jersey.

RICH: Colonel, isn't it the truth since 9/11 that the rules of war changed? Even though the United States has never done a preemptive attack on anyone, could we afford to have a preemptive attack on us (ph) in the form of biological and chemical warfare?

MAGINNIS: Well, that raises an important issue. And clearly that's one of the things the president is concerned about, with smallpox. That's why we've got 280 million different doses that are perhaps going to be used. And even the Israelis have started to inoculate their people.

And we know, as the president said a week ago, that Saddam Hussein had at least 30,000 liters of anthrax, which could kill the world a couple of times over. So we do face credible issues.

You know, these issues -- if you are the commander in chief and your principal concern is the security of the 280 million people in your country, if you're going to take a risk, you're going to risk on one side versus the other. In this case, I think he's going to take the risk that he wants to secure this nation from the likes of a madman that kills his own family and obviously does things like killing his own people.

He's not someone to be relied upon, especially if he's within the grasp of having a nuclear weapon. And we do believe that he is not far off from that.

NEVILLE: Colonel, I have to give Ben Cohen about ten seconds to go ahead and comment --final thoughts.

COHEN: Well, all I can say is that, as business people, if we were to try to pass this off on our shareholders, they'd have our heads.

NEVILLE: Ben Cohen, Colonel Maginnis, thank you very much for joining us. I'm Arthel Neville. Thank you for watching. I'll see you tomorrow at 3:00.

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





to Track Washington D.C. Area Sniper; Can America Fight Both al Qaeda and Iraq?>


Aired October 14, 2002 - 15:00   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ARTHEL NEVILLE, CNN HOST: Hello, everybody.
Welcome to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Arthel Neville.

Is terrorism against Western targets again on the rise? Americans and other Western tourists are leaving Bali in droves following this weekend's mass killings at two nightclubs there. At least 181 people are dead. Hundreds remain missing and some 300 were injured. It's the latest in a string of terrorist attacks we're going to talk about today.

Then, stay tuned and find out who is behind this warning and why they say the U.S. can't win a two-front war.

And then later, who is the Beltway sniper? Criminologist Casey Jordan will take your calls and e-mails.

And right now, let's get back to terrorism. CNN national correspondent Mike Boettcher joins us in London. And in Boston, Jim Walsh is a terrorism expert. He's a political scientist and research fellow at Harvard University.

OK, Jim, I'm going to begin with you today. And does this attack in Bali bear the hallmarks of al Qaeda?

JIM WALSH, HARVARD TERRORISM EXPERT: Well, I certainly think that al Qaeda or an al Qaeda affiliated group, like Jemaah (ph) Islamiah (ph) is going to be the prime suspect here. It is a coordinated attack where you have multiple explosions taking place within a short period of time. It does represent something of a different target. In the past, al Qaeda's targets have been primarily U.S. institutions, government institutions, military targets, financial institutions, and a nightclub is somewhat of a different target set than we're used to expecting from al Qaeda.

NEVILLE: Then who were they trying to attack?

WALSH: Well, I think they are trying to attack foreigners. They're trying to attack the financial infrastructure of Indonesia. Indonesia is a country that has a lot of problems. Over the past years, it has been racked by political and religious violence. It is a weak central government. It has several Islamist groups, paramilitaries, and by striking at a disco and making those terrorists want to leave in droves, that strikes at the financial underbelly of Indonesia and relayy hurts the Indonesian economy. NEVILLE: Listen, a short while ago, President Bush spoke out about these bombings in Bali. I want to take a listen to see what the president had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I believe that the attacks on the French vessel in Yemen is connected with this type of terror, that they are related. I believe that the attack on our Marines in Kuwait reflect the international nature of these cells, these killer cells.

And clearly the attacks in Bali, I think we have to assume is al Qaeda. We're beginning to hear some reports that's more definitive than that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

NEVILLE: Mike Boettcher, help us understand the importance, from the terrorist perspective, regarding Indonesia.

MIKE BOETTCHER, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, on this specific target it is -- Indonesia, first, is a launching point for operations around Southeast Asia. You have Jemaah (ph) Islamiah (ph), with a large organization there that has had training camps there and we have video of a training camp in Indonesia that was gotten from Afghanistan, from the tapes that CNN's Nic Robertson got.

And so, it's an important jumping off point. It is basically the base of where they want to establish an Islamic nation that would exist through Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines and other places. So it's very important in that regard.

Now, this particular target was a soft target. And we have indications from the audiotape that was made by Iman (ph) Al-Zawari (ph), who's the righthand man of Osama bin Laden. That was released October 6, in which he emphasizes that they're going to go after economic targets. This, it took a lot of human life, but it was also an economic target. Immediately has killed the tourism industry there, hurt it worldwide and also attacked the confidence of investors worldwide.

NEVILLE: Mike...

BOETTCHER: The tanker being hit in Yemen -- go ahead.

NEVILLE: Let's -- let's talk about the choreography. You're right, the tanker in Yemen, the Bali bombings, the choreography and the coordination behind all of those attacks. Does this signify that al Qaeda is stronger than ever?

BOETTCHER: I think, you know, al Qaeda is an evolving, mutating organization. Is it stronger than ever? I don't think it's stronger than it was before September 11. But when you look at al Qaeda, and you say that al Qaeda's responsible for this attack, you have to be a little bit more specific. These are groups that are affiliated with al Qaeda around the world. Jemaah (ph) Islamiah (ph) and other groups in Morocco and in other places that have planned attacks. And they're not specifically al Qaeda but they're affiliated with that organization and in some instances, those attacks, according to intelligence analysts I've spoken to, are directed by al Qaeda, but in -- not in all instances.

NEVILLE: But of course, Jemaah (ph) Islamiah (ph) is denying any responsibility.

BOETTCHER: Well, it's interesting to see what will come out in the next couple of days. It has promised, in the statements from al Qaeda that came out today on al Jazeera and on the Web site, which we've been monitoring, that two more statements are promised. One may mention Bali. Today's didn't. We'll have to see.

You have to take their denial of this, but also keep it in the context of the fact that they are the most powerful group affiliated with al Qaeda in that region and, frankly, the only group that would have the capability to do such an attack is probably that organization. But you have to listen to their denial and proof has to be put out that they did do it.

NEVILLE: Jim Walsh, without, of course, the luxury of a crystal ball, help us maybe sort of plot from the terrorist's standpoint the possible next targets and why.

WALSH: Well, I think the -- in some ways, the -- this recent spate of attacks is not surprising, neither the timing nor the locations. You know, back on September 21, the U.S. embassy in Jakarta warned Westerners that they may be targets of attacks in Indonesia.

And this comes after really seven different attacks in Southeast Asia. So, if I look to the future, I would expect more of the same. We should expect that there will be other attempts in Indonesia, or in Malaysia, Singapore, in that region. But I also expect that U.S. assets in Pakistan and Afghanistan will be continue to be targets as well. They will try to pick people off, Marines, service people, as they can.

And then finally, as you know, Arthel, just several days ago, the FBI did issue a warning to state and local officials indicating their belief or fear that al Qaeda may be in the process of planning -- not carrying out -- but planning attacks to occur on the U.S. homeland. So, in sum, I think in the short term we should expect more attacks abroad on soft targets as Mike has rightly pointed out, and then in the longer term, you know, they're not going to go away and they're going to take another whack at us here in the U.S. at some point.

NEVILLE: Is it being -- becoming more difficult for them to attack here on U.S. -- U.S. soil?

WALSH: Well, again, I think Mike was right, absolutely. It's certainly a lot more difficult for them to attack us now, after 9/11. We have a new, heightened awareness. We have new rules and regulations. We have new scrutiny at the border. It's tougher to get into the country, it's tougher to get out. So I think operationally it is much more difficult for them to try to pull off an attack, certainty an attack on the scale of 9/11. But that doesn't mean we're immune, and I expect that they will try as they have tried in the past.

NEVILLE: There shouldn't be a false sense of security. Let's go to Jack (ph) here in the audience from Massachusetts.

What do you say, sir?

JACK: Well, I think clearly that al Qaeda has been in Indonesia for quite sometime and the Indonesian government has been denying that, for whatever reason, to draw attention away from themselves, but clearly I think the Indonesian government has been caught with their pants down, essentially.

NEVILLE: So then, what will the Indonesian government do about this, Mike?

BOETTCHER: Well, what they're going to have to do is begin cooperating with other agencies, other countries in that region. In the past, such terrorist attacks have been viewed as internal security matters and there hasn't been a whole lot of intelligence sharing in the region, intraregion in Asia.

Now, after September 11, the U.S. did go in and because of evidence gathered in Afghanistan, frankly, they were able to crack some of those cells that were trying to launch attacks in Singapore. But what's going to have to happen is cooperation. Indonesia is going to have to work with Malaysia, with the Philippines and with Singapore and other governments in the area.

WALSH: Arthel, if I can jump in briefly on Jack's question here. I think it's important to realize that the president of Indonesia is in a bit of a tough spot. Indonesia is a huge, sprawling country, the largest archipelago in the world. Much of it is lawless. There's corruption. It has a weak central government and you have a president who is, on the one hand, trying to balance the interests of the army, an army that has a long record of human rights abuses. And on the other hand, trying to balance the religious parties, who provide her some of her political support.

So, while yes, we would expect more of Indonesia, they have not been as forthcoming as other countries in the region. This is a weak country that's in trouble, that's had trouble, and it's a delicate and difficult time for them.

NEVILLE: Indeed. Listen, I have to take a break right now, but Mike mentioned a note from Osama bin Laden. And up next, we're going to find out what a statement attributed to bin Laden says about recent terrorist attacks.

Then later this hour, we're taking your thoughts on the Beltway sniper. You can phone or e-mail your questions to criminologist Casey Jordan as TALKBACK LIVE continues. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

NEVILLE: And welcome back, everybody. I'm Arthel Neville. We're talking about the weekend nightclub bombings in Bali, Islamic militants, and growing terrorism against the West.

And, Mike, a statement supposedly written by Osama bin Laden has been released, if you could tell us about that?

BOETTCHER: It's been released from a couple of sources, one, this Internet web site that variously has been known as al Meta (ph).com, it has other names, it has a different name today, and also from Al Jazeera (ph), the Arab satellite television news network based in Qatar. The statement basically is signed by Osama bin Laden. It is believed to be authentic according to al Jazeera. And from the sources this came from, it looks authentic, but I'll read you a quote out of this where they take credit.

It says the heroic operation in Kuwait -- and this is the marine attack -- proves the level of danger that threatens U.S. forces in Islamic countries. The priority in this war at this stage must be against the infidels, the Americans and the Jews, who have not stopped their injustice. They also talk about the economic effect of the attack on the tanker. As I said, that looks like a new strategy they're going for.

NEVILLE: Now, Jim, why hasn't al Qaeda claimed responsibilities for those bombings if in fact they're behind it?

WALSH: Well, if you look at al Qaeda's past record, sometimes they have taken direct responsibility for operations. Other times they have not. If you watched bin Laden's tapes over the -- since September through into November, different statements were made at different times and then sort of increasingly over time it appeared as if he took more and more responsibility for 9/11. So just because they don't take responsibility doesn't mean they're not responsible. It's only the evidence that can prove that at the end of the day.

NEVILLE: Yes. And then if Osama bin Laden is alive, why doesn't he just come out instead of writing in newspapers or putting out a tape that could be questioned whether or not if it's authentic or not?

WALSH: Arthel, I think you've put your finger on a very, very interesting question. We have now several communications over the past week. We have the audiotape released on al Jazeera, reportedly from bin Laden himself. We have a tape from his right-hand man, al Zawahiri, and now we have this alleged written communication. So the number of communications seems to be increasing. On the other hand, there are no video tapes. This is the most videotaped terrorist in human history and we saw him regularly last fall. He has not appeared since the beginning of the year. And the question is why haven't we? Why aren't we seeing signed statements? Why are we seeing audiotapes and no videotapes? I think it's very curious.

NEVILLE: Mike, you want to add to that? BOETTCHER: Well, I would say perhaps it could be that they're so far underground in hiding that it would be hard to get a videotape out or a camera in. They may be in that sort of a location. So that could be one possibility. And I will say, Arthel, we are getting rumblings out there, sort of that chatter you hear the intelligence community talk about, a videotape coming out relatively soon. And we're trying to get to the bottom of it, if this is actually a true report.

NEVILLE: Listen, I have Ramona (ph) here in the audience who has a question or a comment.

RAMONA: Could Osama have changed his appearance so much that we wouldn't be able to recognize him? Would that be one reason?

BOETTCHER: Could I add something to that? You know, one interesting aspect to this is that there have been a number of people who have had their faces altered by plastic surgery. I don't believe that Osama bin Laden would worry about that in terms of moving around. But there are plastic surgeons that have been employed who are loyal to the organization. We've been told this by several intelligence sources in the coalition.

NEVILLE: Like Saddam Hussein.

Listen, Jim Walsh, I want to ask you, know, a number of recent attacks on western targets. Let's see, the French tanker explosion in Yemen, the American military fired on in Kuwait, now Bali. Is this a coordinated campaign and is it possible that different terrorist groups are working in concert?

WALSH: Well, I think the answer -- I know it's going to be unsatisfactory -- is both yes and know. I think Mike's earlier point is a good one. That is, we talk about al Qaeda as if it was a single group of people...

NEVILLE: But it's not.

WALSH: What it really is -- exactly -- is a loose affiliation of a variety of people with a variety of causes. People in Kashmir are worried about India and Pakistan, Chechens, Egyptians, Saudis, people who have causes, spread out throughout the world. And we should expect, I think, that some of those people will be acting on their own, some of them will be acting in concert with al Qaeda, and then there will be other operations, particularly high profile operations, that are probably led by or being planned by al Qaeda themselves. So it's hard to put your finger on one over another, but in some sense they may all be tied to the same thing.

NEVILLE: Which, from just a generic, regular old American perspective I'd imagine that's quite a scary thought.

WALSH: Absolutely. This has been a tough couple of weeks and this weekend has been a bad end to a bad week. But that's what happens when you're engaged against terrorism. There are going to be some weeks where the other side gets some hits in and then you have to respond and then try to prevent that from happening more in the future.

NEVILLE: Jim, quick final question. Has the war on terror not made a dent?

WALSH: Well, I think that it's likely that Osama bin Laden is under tremendous pressure. They have had losses. They've had casualties on the field of battle in Afghanistan. They are on the run. They have broken up into decentralized little groups. I think that's all to the good. But it doesn't mean that they've gone away and it doesn't mean that they can't cause havoc and cause problems. So I think he's under pressure, will continue to be under pressure, and I think in the long run this is a battle we're going to win. The U.S. is going to be here a lot longer than Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, but it's not going to happen overnight. He's going to be a wily and difficult foe.

NEVILLE: Jim Walsh, Mike Boettcher, thank you very much for joining us here today on TALKBACK LIVE.

WALSH: Thank you, Arthel.

NEVILLE: OK.

NEVILLE: Time for another break.

And coming up, CNN's Kathleen Koch is standing by with the latest on the Beltway sniper investigation and criminologist Casey Jordan is waiting to hear what you have to say about the attacks. E-mail your comments and questions to talkback@cnn.com.

Right now, we'll be back in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

NEVILLE: And welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE, everybody.

Around Washington's Beltway, investigators probing the sniper attack say they're drowning in tips, theories, and false alarms, but Chief Charles Moose today encouraged anyone and everyone who think they might know something to write and let police decide what's important and what's not.

It was quite a weekend in Washington area. The sniper laid low.

CNN's Kathleen Koch is covering the investigation in Rockville, Maryland.

Kathleen, first of all, tell us about this new address, I mean, Chief Moose released today for people who might want to contact the department by mail.

KATHLEEN KOCH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Basically, Arthel, what Chief Moose said is just as you described. They're simply getting swamped by letters of people mailing who are mailing in with tips, with ideas on who this spree killer might be. So, the police put out a new address, and we'll give it you now: It's P.O. Box 7875, Gaithersburg, Maryland, 20898-7875. And they want people who are perhaps uncomfortable with calling the tip line or uncomfortable with e-mailing to go ahead and send mail there. Again, as you said, they want each and every tip that anyone might offer.

Now, of course, we are lucky thus far this weekend if you can call this area lucky. It's the first three day respite that we have had from any sniper shootings since this spate of violence began back on October 2.

The president himself, though, spoke out today for the first time about these killings. These killings have become a part of his daily briefing and he clearly condemned what this sniper has been up to.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSH: I'm just sickened -- sick to my stomach to think that there is a cold-blooded killer at home taking innocent life. I weep for those who have lost their loved ones. I am -- the idea of moms taking their kids to school and sheltering them from a potential sniper attack is not the American I know. And, therefore, we're lending all the resources of the federal government, all that have been required, to do everything we can to assist the local law authorities to find this -- whoever it is.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KOCH: Tasking a jump in tips and clues that have been coming in from residents in the area since they put out a graphic on Saturday. It's basically a graphic representation of the white box truck that has been seen at the site of a couple of the shootings here in Montgomery County. Police say they have put it together based on the testimony of a couple of witnesses who saw it at the scene.

And the police chief today said that he may be an optimist, but he believes that this investigation is moving forward, that they are making progress. But he says you may not be privy to all the information that we are, that gives us that cause for optimism but the police obviously wants to keep all those clues very close to the vest.

Authorities did take some questions about whether or not this investigation should be turned over to the federal government and a spokesman for the FBI said the federal government's resources are being brought to bear in every way possible in this case, so really nothing more could be done than they're already doing.

So Arthel, things are moving forward, but obviously no suspects and no arrests.

NEVILLE: Kathleen, what about the composite of that white Astro minivan? We keep hearing talk of that. Any idea when that might be released?

KOCH: Authorities are working very hard on that because they believe that just as the graphic composite of the box truck, that putting out an image of this Chevy white -- this white Chevy Astro van will spark someone's memory, again a picture being worth 1,000 words. But they want to get it right. There were several people at the scene of that shooting on Friday who saw this van and they want to take the composite to each and every witness and make sure they are comfortable with what is being put out, that it is as accurate as possible.

NEVILLE: CNN's Kathleen Koch, thank you very much for that report.

KOCH: You bet.

NEVILLE: And Chief Moose is asking for your help and we're asking for your questions such as this one. James, from Newport News, Virginia wants to know: "Is it possible in the Beltway shootings, that there is not, one but multiple shooters?"

We're going to ask criminologist Casey Jordan and take your calls right after the break.

TALKBACK LIVE continues in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

NEVILLE: And welcome back, everybody.

We are talking about tracking the suburban sniper in the Washington area. And joining us is CNN Criminologist Casey Jordan. Hello, Dr. Jordan -- welcome.

CASEY JORDAN, CNN CRIMINOLOGIST: Thank you. Great to be here.

NEVILLE: Good. Let's start right away with James in Newport News, Virginia. He writes, "Is it possible in the Beltway shootings that there is not one, but multiple shooters?" -- Dr. Jordan.

JORDAN: Well, nothing is impossible in this particular case. It would not be consistent, but it is certainly not inconceivable that these shootings are the work of more than one person. Frankly, I think that you've got one shooter and, if there is another, it will probably be just one sidekick. Somebody who is probably not active in the shooting but might be the driver of the so-called getaway vehicle; somebody who is something of a disciple to the shooter, who might stroke his ego and pump up his megalomania.

But the saying goes: Your chain is only as good as its weakest link. So the minute you get two people, two conspirators in a crime, one of them could always turn out to be the weak link that gets the other one caught up. And that's why I think that this shooter is probably acting alone.

NEVILLE: OK. I have Paul (ph) from Florida.

PAUL: Hi. I used to be an investigator on behalf of death row inmates in Florida for about five and a half years. So -- with people like Ted Bundy, et cetera, in Florida. It seems to me that this particular person, who I at this point think is just one person, is a serial killer who gets a kick out of what he's doing. What are your thoughts? JORDAN: There is no doubt in my mind that the motivation for this particular killer, while we don't know specifically what it is, it is intrinsic or very unique to this particular killer. We can generalize it and say that he's driven by issues of power and control, ego, this whole concept of "I am god."

But what tripped this whole thing off is probably something that was very specific, again, to the shooter. And why he continues could actually be changing, evolving and morphing into new and different reasons as the killing continues, as he gets media attention, which he may never have anticipated. And I think that's why this particular case is so disturbing, is that there is no clear motive.

NEVILLE: OK, Dr. Jordan. I have a lot of questions for you here . So we've got Conrad (ph) here from Georgia.

CONRAD: I would like to know why exactly we're not getting more information about the genetic description of the individuals that might be in this white box truck that we're looking for. Because I know initially -- I think after the Manassas killing, there was some report of possibly two Caucasian men, maybe possibly one (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

I just think it would be much simpler -- I would think, anyway -- to try to narrow it down which white van or box truck we're looking for, if (UNINTELLIGIBLE). I'm trying to figure out why they're taking that back.

JORDAN: OK. Conrad (ph), there are a few different reasons why we may not be getting more information. The number one most important reason is that if the information is faulty, even if it's well intended but not accurate, not credible, it could send people and law enforcement investigators in a totally wrong direction, which might actually keep us from catching the perpetrator.

Police always have what we call holdbacks, information that is known only to them. Important for their investigation, because it helps them filter out information that is accurate or not accurate, helps discern copycats, and that's important. We don't need to know everything. The public doesn't have to know everything.

But the third option is that the police really don't know. That the information that came through initially has not been proved to be credible and that the reason we aren't pursuing anything is because we don't have anything.

NEVILLE: OK. Let's go to Florida now, where Derek (ph) is standing by on the phone. Go ahead, Derek (ph).

CALLER: Hello?

NEVILLE: Hello. You're live.

CALLER: Oh, I'm from Silver Springs.

NEVILLE: OK. CALLER: Yes. This is Derek (ph). I'm up here where all the action is. I think the police is going about this the wrong way.

We have focused on the white truck, and I think that the killer is waiting for a white vehicle to go by. And when they go by, it fires, because he's (ph) not afraid of getting caught. And he's getting up and walking away while we're doing a mad chase on these white vehicles.

NEVILLE: OK. Derek (ph), thank you for calling in with your comment. And I have Linda (ph) here in Georgia.

LINDA: Yes. I would like to know when someone snaps and becomes a serial killer.

JORDAN: Wow, that's a very complicated question. First of all, we don't know specifically what started the spree in the first place. We don't know whether it was planned for a great deal of time in advance or whether there was a specific event, an anniversary, something very traumatic that started this entire tragic events starting.

But the point is that usually there is something quite specific. Usually, discord in the family, maybe getting fired from a job, being wrongly accused of a crime, losing children in a custody battle. Something very traumatic to the individual that can start the entire snowball rolling. I can't tell you, however, whether that actually happened in this case because we just don't know yet.

NEVILLE: OK. I have Helen (ph) here from Florida.

HELEN: Hi. This is actually my husband's theory, but he's a little shy, so I'm going to propose it. Is it at all possible, as a movie scenario might be, that this gentleman had a specific victim in mind and in order to cover his traces, have now killed others so that he would not really be...

NEVILLE: So who do you think he might have in mind?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It could have been any of them. I mean, who is to know what his actual victim was, but now he's being -- not being looked at from the point of view somebody who just murdered the one person they wanted to kill.

NEVILLE: Right. Go ahead, Dr. Jordan.

JORDAN: Helen (ph), it's not that far-fetched. In fact, in a very unusual type of serial killing that involves product tampering or food poisoning, we have actually seen your theory come to light, where somebody actually tampered with a product. And I think her husband was one of the victims, and she poisoned other products just to defer the blame away from herself. But frankly, I don't think that's the case in this particular event.

There doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason to the people who are being killed. And unless -- go ahead. NEVILLE: Dr. Jordan, I'm sorry. I have one last question I really want to get in here from Kerry (ph).

KERRY: I would like to know whether or not the killer could be a role player because of the tarot card that was found.

JORDAN: A role player in a particular game?

KERRY: Yes. Like this could all be a game to him.

JORDAN: Oh, I think in his mind this is absolutely a game. Probably something very similar to a video game. And I am not saying that video games have caused these crimes, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if the perpetrator is a big consumer of violent video games, simply because of the way he's operating and his strategy.

But the death card does not really symbolize death in its purest sense. It symbolizes change and transformation. I get the feeling that this particular perpetrator is a wannabe. He reads a lot; he consumes a lot of fantasy information. And that perhaps the use of the tarot card was an unsophisticated way of him trying to say that death is going to come in the future.

NEVILLE: Dr. Casey Jordan, thank you so much for fielding all of the question. And we look forward to seeing you again in the future here on TALKBACK LIVE.

JORDAN: Thanks so much.

NEVILLE: Sure.

Up next, are two wars too many? Can America fight both al Qaeda and Iraq? The people behind this ad -- there it is -- say it can't be done. We'll hear from one of them, Ben and Jerry's founder, Ben Cohen, right after this.

Don't go anywhere. TALKBACK LIVE continues.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSH: If we don't deal with Saddam Hussein and disarm him -- and hopefully it will be done peacefully -- he becomes more and more dangerous. And some day we don't want to step back and say where was the United States government? How come we didn't act? And we've got plenty of capacity to fight war against al Qaeda, which is going to take a while.

We just learned a lesson this weekend. It's going to take a while to succeed.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

NEVILLE: And that was President Bush earlier today. Will the U.S. have to choose its villain? The people behind this ad we're gong to show you in today's "New York Times" says, "America can't fight a war on two fronts: al Qaeda and Iraq." They say right now Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda are the real threats.

Among the people behind this ad is Ben Cohen, founder of Ben & Jerry's. He is president of the True Majority (ph) and online political organization. Also with us today, retired Army Lieutenant Colonel, Robert Maginnis. I want to welcome both of you to the show.

LT. COL. ROBERT MCGINNIS (RET), U.S. ARMY: Thank you, Arthel.

BEN COHEN, FOUNDER, BEN & JERRY'S: How are you?

NEVILLE: All right. Ben Cohen, you're up first. Why did you take out this ad?

COHEN: You know, it's very unusual for our organization and business leaders for sensible priorities to take out a full-page ad in "The New York Times." We took out the ad because we're convinced that going to war with Iraq would be senseless in terms of the amount of civilians that would die, in terms of there being no imminent threat, in terms of the havoc it would wreak to the economy. And in terms of the precedent that it would be setting for so-called preemptive war. Essentially, the right for any country to attack another one without having -- without it having done anything to you first.

NEVILLE: And on that note, I have a veteran here in the audience, Maury (ph), from Florida. Sir, I would like you to address your comments to Colonel Maginnis.

MAURY: Well, Colonel, being an ex-military, United States has never declared war on another sovereign nation. And within our Constitution, it states that we should not do so even though our Congress has given a voice of OK to our president. This requires a constitutional change in our Constitution. This has to be voted on and it has not been done so. It has been debated by Congress.

Also, the al Qaeda is our enemy, not Iraq at this present time, because they have not invaded us.

MAGINNIS: Now, Maury (ph), clearly the United States Congress in the resolution is not a declaration of war. And I think they backed out of some of the stronger language that the president wanted.

The reality is that, you know, we face basically an international terrorist threat that includes Iraq. Iraq has sponsored a great deal of terrorism, not only in the Mid East, but has given aid and comfort to al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, al Zawahiri, who is his deputy, who was there at (UNINTELLIGIBLE), the terrorist training facility.

And so if you go after the head of the snake, and I see that it's not Osama bin Laden. It's really the likes of the dictator like bin Laden -- or rather, Saddam Hussein, that you're going to accomplish far more. You're going to send very clear signals to the terrorists that are in Iran, in Saudi Arabia, Syria and throughout the region. You know, at the same time, we have to be incredibly careful about how we treat the people. I agree with Ben that we have to be smart about this. I don't want to see 250,000 Americans charging up the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) to put a bullet in Saddam Hussein's head. That's not the way to do it.

But we haven't heard from the president how he thinks it ought to be done, and that's very key. And I think soon we'll begin to see bits and pieces of that. And I hope it involves the Iraqi resistance, as well as the exiled community that clearly wants to liberate their country from the terrible situation they've lived under for the last 23 years.

NEVILLE: Ben, I want to ask you, -- you or your group, the people who sponsored the ad with you -- have you made the connection between Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein?

COHEN: Absolutely not. The research that we've done, and based on our military advisers, former senior level military officials, state that there has been no proof of a connection between bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. Moreover, our understanding is that Iraq is a secular state and the terrorists, al Qaeda, have not been getting along with Saddam and Iraq because they believe in religious fundamental states.

NEVILLE: Listen, I have to take a -- excuse me, Colonel, I have to take a break right now. Charles (ph), in New Jersey, I know you're standing by on the phone. I'm going to get to you after the break, as well as Rich (ph) here in the audience.

And also when we come back, I want to know if you think America can handle a two-pronged war. Give me a call right now, and we'll see you after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

NEVILLE: And welcome back, everybody. I'm Arthel Neville. We're talking about whether the United States can fight both Iraq and al Qaeda.

And Colonel Maginnis, some people say that in taking on Iraq, the U.S. loses sight of the real enemy, al Qaeda. Do you agree?

MAGINNIS: Well, that is a possibility. We have to be very careful. Keep in mind our military is 140 different countries around the world, the largest number is about 65,000 in Germany. We have 10,000 left in Afghanistan for certainly decades, perhaps. But what we're talking about is an asymmetric war, Arthel.

This is very different than what we faced traditionally, where you have a front line and a rear. We don't have that here because we're in 60 different countries, much like Bali and the attacks the other day that appear be al Qaeda related. We have to be very smart, use our intelligence, our law enforcement, as well as our military in very strategic ways that we've never done in the past. And so this is a far more difficult operation. What we're about to do, perhaps in Iraq, which would involve many thousands of soldiers and airmen and so forth, would be more traditional perhaps. But it's not going to jeopardize operations in the Philippines or Indonesia or in Afghanistan. And that's something we need to keep in mind.

NEVILLE: OK. Let's go to New Jersey, where I promised Charles (ph) that he would have a chance to speak out. Go ahead, Charles (ph). You're live.

CALLER: Thank you very much. I have two quick points, if possible. One, that I'm 50 years old and we're fighting a war on terrorism that I don't think we'll end in my lifetime.

Secondly, is my concern about going into Iraq. We're saying we're going in because they could be a threat to us down the road and they've broken U.N. sanctions. But we need the Arab people on our side. And they look at what the Israelis are doing to the Palestinians and they have broken U.N. sanctions.

So to get the Arabs on our side, we have to stop what Israel is doing to the Palestinians. Then maybe they'll help us put an end to all of this.

NEVILLE: Charles (ph), thanks for calling, first of all. And Ben Cohen, I would like to hear you respond to that.

COHEN: Well, I feel very much that going into a war in Iraq, yes, it is something that we know how to do. But that would be nothing more than a recruitment poster for al Qaeda, as the ad in today's "TIMES" showed. I agree very much that we need to get the Arabs on our side and Muslims. And, you know, going into Iraq and blowing up a bunch of innocent people is not going to help. It's going to make things worse and it's going to increase terrorism.

MAGINNIS: Arthel...

NEVILLE: Go ahead, sir.

MAGINNIS: A lot of people don't understand how the Palestinian- Israeli crisis really resonates in the Gulf. And I have good friends that are Iraqi and Afghanistan, Pakistani, who say that, you know, because the U.S. fails to be a neutral power in trying to negotiate an end to that, that is just festering the problem.

Now, as Ben says, if you go into Iraq -- and in my opinion -- and you don't go in there to liberate with Iraqis, but you but you leave with American forces, very different proposition. That's just going to anger the Arab street and become a recruiting mechanism for al Qaeda. So these are realities I hope that the National Security Council is considering, because the alternatives could be very deadly for American soldiers.

NEVILLE: Listen, we have to take a break right now. But we're going to try to get more of your e-mails and phone calls as soon as we get back from the break, so don't go anywhere. TALKBACK LIVE continues in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

NEVILLE: Welcome back, everybody. I'm standing here with Rich (ph) from New Jersey.

RICH: Colonel, isn't it the truth since 9/11 that the rules of war changed? Even though the United States has never done a preemptive attack on anyone, could we afford to have a preemptive attack on us (ph) in the form of biological and chemical warfare?

MAGINNIS: Well, that raises an important issue. And clearly that's one of the things the president is concerned about, with smallpox. That's why we've got 280 million different doses that are perhaps going to be used. And even the Israelis have started to inoculate their people.

And we know, as the president said a week ago, that Saddam Hussein had at least 30,000 liters of anthrax, which could kill the world a couple of times over. So we do face credible issues.

You know, these issues -- if you are the commander in chief and your principal concern is the security of the 280 million people in your country, if you're going to take a risk, you're going to risk on one side versus the other. In this case, I think he's going to take the risk that he wants to secure this nation from the likes of a madman that kills his own family and obviously does things like killing his own people.

He's not someone to be relied upon, especially if he's within the grasp of having a nuclear weapon. And we do believe that he is not far off from that.

NEVILLE: Colonel, I have to give Ben Cohen about ten seconds to go ahead and comment --final thoughts.

COHEN: Well, all I can say is that, as business people, if we were to try to pass this off on our shareholders, they'd have our heads.

NEVILLE: Ben Cohen, Colonel Maginnis, thank you very much for joining us. I'm Arthel Neville. Thank you for watching. I'll see you tomorrow at 3:00.

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





to Track Washington D.C. Area Sniper; Can America Fight Both al Qaeda and Iraq?>