|
CNN TALKBACK LIVE
Free-For-All Friday for January 31, 2002
Aired January 31, 2003 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ARTHEL NEVILLE, HOST: Today on TALKBACK LIVE's "Free-For-All Friday": President Bush meets with British Prime Minister Tony Blair. Will they draw that line in the sand for Iraq's President Saddam Hussein?
Then, we'll look at a widening anti-war effort and how star power is used to deliver the message.
Also, did former South African President Nelson Mandela go too far in his caustic criticism of President Bush and the United States?
Plus: the teacher who demonstrates condoms in the classroom; another who demands belief in evolution or else.
And, of course: our mind-boggling "Flash Round."
"Free-For-All Friday" starts right now.
Hello, everybody. Welcome to TALKBACK LIVE. I am Arthel Neville. It is "Free-For-All Friday."
Of course, CNN will keep you updated throughout the hour on this tense standoff in the streets of Miami. And, in just about one hour from now, President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair will hold a news conference at the White House. Of course, CNN will bring that to you live as well.
Mr. Blair is in Washington for the day to discuss the next step as time for diplomacy with Iraq runs out. He outlined what he sees as the clear and present danger during an interview today with CNN.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TONY BLAIR, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: if these international terrorist groups could get hold of weapons of mass destruction, they would use them, without any doubt at all, and that's why I've constantly said, these two issues, by these extremist, fanatical groups, weapons of mass destruction held by unstable rogue states who are trading in this material, keeping it, proliferating it, these issues are linked. This is the threat to our international security and peace and prosperity today, and we have to deal with it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEVILLE: OK. It's time now to meet our "Free-For-All Friday" panel. Royal Marshall is host of "The Royal Treatment" on WSB Radio here in Atlanta. Martin Lewis is a political commentator. His Web site is GiveMeSomeTruth.com. Greg Dobbs is a syndicated columnist and radio talk show host on KRNC in Denver, Colorado. And Joyce Kaufman is a radio talk show host on WFTL in Miami, Florida.
And I want to welcome all of you.
Joyce, you are up first today.
What can or should Bush and Blair say to get skeptics to see it their way?
JOYCE KAUFMAN, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Well, I think they can continue to bring more proof to the table.
Obviously, the British government has had a lot of intelligence that they've been talking about for over a year. And now the president indicated that he's got intelligence as well. The more they tell the public, the more likely they are to have the support of the public. And I'm just -- I'm here in Miami with hostages happening all over the place. It's just another day in paradise.
NEVILLE: So, Royal, how much evidence do you need to see?
ROYAL MARSHALL, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Well, I think, first of all, let me just say that there are some people that, no matter how much evidence they see, they're still going to be against the war with Iraq. And we need to point that out, first of all.
As far as I'm concerned, I am going to wait to see what Colin Powell delivers to the United Nations on Wednesday. And that is kind of where I think a lot of the American public is as far as they're going to decide whether or not this war with Iraq is just or not. But even so, even if we're not convinced, the question still remains, do we still proceed forward?
Because, if we decide to not go to war, at this point, it makes our country look very weak. So, even with or without the evidence, I think it's important that we act.
NEVILLE: All right, let's go to Greg now.
What sort of evidence do you need and what are your thoughts on military, possible military action against Iraq?
GREG DOBBS, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST: Arthel, Colin Powell can prove that Saddam Hussein is a bad guy and that he's been hiding all kinds of bad stuff. What he can't prove is that the risk of leaving Saddam alone is greater than the risk of going to war.
Right now, if we go war, we put American troops at much greater risk than we did during the Gulf War, which was somewhat of a cakewalk. And we put ourselves at risk because we stir up the trouble amongst the terrorists. And they can come at us with much more venom in much greater volume than they did before. NEVILLE: Martin, do you agree with that?
MARTIN LEWIS, POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, to a great degree.
It's not that I have to be convinced. It's the fact that the vast majority of Americans and people in the world want to feel that we go through the United Nations, so that the United States and Great Britain maintain their mole superiority and authority. You don't have that if you start taking a first-strike option, which is not the American way.
Furthermore, I will upset some of my liberal friends when I say that I do understand George Bush's predicament. If my father had made colossal blunder, I'd want to try and make up for it. And that's what George Bush has got on his mind. His father completely messed up in 1991. And you even have to have sympathy for George Bush Sr., because he was only following what Reagan had done, which was sell arms and send money to Iraq and send money to Osama bin Laden, because he was fighting the Russians.
That's why we've got this confusion.
MARSHALL: I want to -- can I jump in real quick, Arthel?
NEVILLE: Go ahead.
MARSHALL: I want to the say that, first of all, George Bush Sr. did not colossally mess up earlier in 1991.
Last time I took a look around, Kuwait was liberated, OK? So, you need to wake up to that fact. George Bush Sr. did at least liberate Kuwait. And that was the aim of that mission. That was the aim of the mission.
(CROSSTALK)
KAUFMAN: But didn't his son just say in the State of the Union address that he was going to be the president not to leave anything behind for future generations and future presidents? I think that was a shot at his father.
MARSHALL: What was the aim of the Gulf War mission? What was the aim of that war? Was it to liberate Kuwait?
KAUFMAN: To liberate Kuwait.
MARSHALL: Oh, thank you. Was that accomplished? Was that accomplished?
(CROSSTALK)
DOBBS: Here's what some people are missing.
We didn't go into Baghdad looking for Saddam Hussein for the very reasons why it's a bad idea to try to go there now. Saddam Hussein designed that country for his own protection. And he is able to hide. He is able to escape. He could have done it a dozen years ago. He could have done it now.
If we'd gone in a dozen years ago, our soldiers would have been at risk from snipers, from people dropping Molotov cocktails down the lids of their tanks. And the same situation could happen again now.
(CROSSTALK)
LEWIS: At least there was a coalition. There may have been some people who would have left that coalition, but he was a clear and present danger at that point.
The problem we have at that moment and the reason the rest the world is so agitated is because we have a situation. War is not something on PlayStation2. It's serious. People die. And there is a difference between the war that was waged against Adolf Hitler and the war that we're proposing to wage against Saddam Hussein.
We can draw a distinction. Hussein is an evil person, but you don't go to war on this flimsy evidence.
KAUFMAN: But if we had stopped Adolf Hitler in Munich, there never would have been millions of people who died in a Holocaust. We know that Saddam Hussein is insane. Why shouldn't we stop him in Baghdad?
MARSHALL: Arthel, what I find amazing is that the burden of proof has been shifted.
All along, the burden of proof has been on Saddam Hussein to prove to us, to show to us that he has eliminated or reduced or gotten rid of all his biological weapons. Now, all of a sudden, the pressure is on the administration to prove that we somehow know that Saddam Hussein has biological weapons.
The reality is this.
KAUFMAN: We gave them to him.
MARSHALL: The proof should not be upon -- the burden of proof should not be upon the United States of America to prove that we have evidence that Saddam Hussein has biological weapons. We know that he has them. It is upon Saddam Hussein to prove to the rest of the world that he has rid himself of all those biological weapons.
NEVILLE: And that is exactly what the Bush administration is saying, Royal.
Listen, I do have to go to break right now.
Coming up next: Do you have to believe in evolution to be an effective doctor? In the latest evolution vs. creationism clash, I'm going to tell you about a professor who's being accused of religious bigotry.
(INTERRUPTED FOR BREAKING NEWS)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: And welcome back, everybody. I want to remind you that we're awaiting a news conference with President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair, and of course, CNN will bring that to you live when it takes place.
In the meantime, even as the president works toward setting a deadline for Iraq, anti-war protesters are out whipping up support and predicting millions upon millions will show up at a global protest Friday, February 15. Excuse me, February 15. Not sure which day of the week that is. It's a Saturday, as a matter of fact.
Leading the way are a number of celebrities, including Janeane Garofalo, who appears in a television ad with high-ranking bishop Melvin Talbert. We're going to look at that ad right now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JANEANE GAROFALO, ACTRESS: If we invade Iraq, there's a United Nations estimate that says there will be up to half a million people killed or wounded. Do we have the right to do that to a country that's done nothing to us?
MELVIN TALBERT: No nation under god has that right. It violates international law. It violates god's law. War only creates more terrorists and makes a dangerous world for our children.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEVILLE: OK. Joyce Kaufman, I want to ask you if you think those celebrity ads are effective.
JOYCE KAUFMAN, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Well, I'm not sure. It really always fascinates me how people say the "liberal Hollywood elite," and they represent so many voices and they're sort of a shill for the Democratic Party. I've never known any liberals to run any of these Hollywood people for public office. It's always the conservatives in the Republican Party that run them for, you know, Senate and governor, and even president of the United States.
We don't take them that seriously. We take their money and we use it in campaigns, and we run politicians. So I'm never sure who it is that's so impressed by the Hollywood elite. I don't even know who Janeane Garofalo is.
NEVILLE: Janeane Garofalo. Martin Lewis, are you impressed?
MARTIN LEWIS, POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Janeane Garofalo is an extremely talented actor. It seems to me that sometimes people are (UNINTELLIGIBLE) when the patriotic citizens express their views. We put a third-rate actor in the White House for eight years who did nothing but spiral our deficit to the highest ever.
When you take a first-rate actor, like Janeane Garofalo, who wishes to express a patriotic view that is shared by the majority of Americans, I think it's something to be (UNINTELLIGIBLE). We should care very deeply and listen carefully to what she's saying, and those of other committed patriotic people who are in the majority in this country.
NEVILLE: Let's see what Chris (ph) here -- do those celebrity ads carry any weight with you?
CHRIS: No, they really don't. I support their right to protest and make those ads. However, public opinion is not the way to decide whether you need to go to war or not.
NEVILLE: Well, Greg, let me ask you Greg. Should the White House, should Bush listen at all to public opinion?
GREG DOBBS, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST: Oh, of course he ought to listen to public opinion. And no, policy should not be founded on public opinion. But it certainly appears that the president has turned a deaf ear.
I mean I personally hope that the celebrities in these ads, Susan Sarandon and Janeane whatever her last name is, are...
NEVILLE: Janeane Garofalo.
DOBBS: ... persuasive because -- thank you -- they're on my side. But the bigger question is, why does this country, why, in fact, does the media put a spotlight on singers and dancers and actors and actresses, who in many cases don't even write their own lines? I mean I remember once years ago, the latest actor Robert...
NEVILLE: Yes, but hang on, though. Don't you think that they -- I don't think anybody just gave Janeane Garofalo lines to read. This is obviously something she's passionate about.
DOBBS: Well she may feel it, but why does she understand the situation, where politicians and diplomats and writers and journalists and philosophers and managers and real thinkers probably have opinions that ought to be highlighted more than theirs? I mean just because you play something in the movies doesn't mean that you really are an authority.
LEWIS: Hold on a moment. Hold on. It's not that she necessarily understands the situation better -- though I happen to think she does -- it's just that in our unfair world if you're not a celebrity, if you're just a good thinker, you don't necessarily get TV time. So celebrities selflessly are putting themselves forward.
She make no money for this. She's doing it out of her heart and patriotism, because the media does not want to share (ph) and listen to the opinions of the majority of people who think that this war without U.N. support is wrong.
KAUFMAN: Yes, but that ad showed a bishop. Now I would like to hear what the religious people in this country have to say about war. I think that's relevant. I think they guide us morally. But actors and actresses and "American Idol" and "Survivor" and "Fear Factor" don't mean that much to most of us. ROYAL MARSHALL, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: I want to say for the record that I think the ads, first of all, are great. But they also highlight a major thing that we need to look at. Do you think an ad like the ones that are created here could run in Iraq?
KAUFMAN: No.
MARSHALL: Think about that. That's a very important question, because I'm also happy that in this country we have the freedom and the freedom of speech in this country to go ahead and address issues. And although I may not agree with everything the actors have to say, I am so happy that we live in a country with the freedom and the ability to express dissent...
LEWIS: Exactly so. I couldn't agree with you more.
NEVILLE: Martin, you know that there is another -- another form of protest was to take place in February at a poetry symposium hosted by the first lady. Now some of the participants had planned to do everything from wearing peace scarves to creating a book of poems protesting the war. But the White House has postponed that event saying, "While Mrs. Bush respects the right of all Americans to express their opinions, she, too, has opinions and believes it would be inappropriate to turn a literary event into a political forum."
And going to Martin on this one, wondering if you feel the first lady did the right thing.
LEWIS: Well I think that the first lady was badly advised by the political operatives in the White House. I seem to recall that some of the most poetic words in favor of peace and against war and violence were uttered by one Jesus Christ. "Blessed are the peacemakers."
I would like to think that in this wonderful country that somebody like Jesus Christ, who utters poetic words of peace, would be invited to the White House. There's something very, very sad when the White House is frightened of words, frightened of poetry.
NEVILLE: So Royal, if you were advising the first lady, what would you have told her to do?
MARSHALL: I would have definitely told the first lady to go ahead and let the poets have their moment. It occurs to me that poetry at its best challenges your belief. Poetry and art at its best challenges our long-held beliefs and asks us to ask questions about some of the things we hold true.
DOBBS: It's not a matter of poetry.
KAUFMAN: Right. It's not a matter of poetry.
DOBBS: It's a matter of dissent.
MARSHALL: I understand the first lady -- the first lady is upset, so she's going to take her (UNINTELLIGIBLE) and she's going to go home. It's like when other kids won't let you play, you're going to take your ball, you're going to go home. You're not going to let anybody else play.
KAUFMAN: But she has a right.
MARSHALL: That's exactly what's happening with this literary...
KAUFMAN: She has a right to say, you can say anything you want, but not in my House. Not at my party.
MARSHALL: Well she invited everybody, but now she's rescinding the invitations. Here's the deal: you invite the guests...
KAUFMAN: I wasn't invited to this party.
(CROSSTALK)
DOBBS: You know what, let me tell you what my reaction was. Let me tell you. My reaction when I heard about it...
KAUFMAN: We're you invited to this party?
MARSHALL: I'm not a poet. But I would be offended if I was invited. And then she said, well, because of the poems you're going to read, you are no longer invited.
DOBBS: Here we go again. Here we go again.
NEVILLE: OK, panel. Hang on for me. I need to get a break in here. We are going to continue this discussion on the other side of the break. And also I want to add some strong words from Nelson Mandela and I want to get your thoughts on that. So the "Talk" continues in a moment. Don't go anywhere.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: So the voice of anti-war protesters is getting louder and louder. And someone else added to that voice is former South African President Nelson Mandela. Let's take a listen to what Mr. Mandela had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NELSON MANDELA, FMR. SOUTH AFRICAN PRESIDENT: ... is that one power with a president who has no foresight, who cannot think properly, is now wanting to (UNINTELLIGIBLE) the world into a holocaust. All that he wants is Iraqi oil. That is all. Because Iraq produces 64 percent of the oil in the world. What Bush wants is to get hold of that oil.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEVILLE: Greg, is there any validity to Mandela's words? And, if so, do those words carry any weight? DOBBS: Well, perhaps until the president makes a more convincing case, many people will think so. But, yes, the words ought to carry weight whether his motive (UNINTELLIGIBLE) is or isn't accurate, his words ought to carry weight, because everybody would agree, Nelson Mandela is a loyal man. And maybe Mrs. Bush ought to pay attention to the following.
Just because you're not with us doesn't really mean you're against us. It doesn't really mean you're siding with the terrorists. I resent the sentiment that dissent means either if you're Nelson Mandela, unloyal to America, or if you're an American citizen you're unpatriotic.
KAUFMAN: Look, Nelson Mandela is one of the few people on earth who can really stand up and say, I am a pacifist; I am into non- violence. He didn't just talk the talk. He walked the walk, and he spent years in prison in protest.
And I said on this very show years ago that the one person I wanted to sit down with and talk to is Nelson Mandela. But I will say this, he has forgotten that if it wasn't for American citizens like me, who boycotted South Africa and didn't invest money there, and didn't allow institutions in this country to forget to one moment that he was in prison, he'd still be in prison.
LEWIS: A very good point. A very good point. And of course it was by peaceful means that you solved the problem.
KAUFMAN: Absolutely.
LEWIS: The reason that Nelson Mandela resonates so strongly is that there is genuine concern all over the world about George Bush and those behind George Bush. When you are threatening to use for the first strike nuclear weapons, it behooves you to...
(CROSSTALK)
NEVILLE: OK. I'm sorry. I have to jump in here, Martin. I do have to take a break. Martin -- OK, I want to remind everybody that we are awaiting that news conference from the White House. Prime Minister Tony Blair, and, of course, President Bush will be addressing the press and the public at 4:00. We're going to bring it to you live right here on CNN.
In the meantime, don't go anywhere, because we will continue our lively discussion right here on TALKBACK LIVE.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: OK. Well, we are continuing the conversation in the break, as we always do. But unfortunately, we have no more time for conversation on the air. So I need to thank my guests, Greg Dobbs, Martin Lewis, Royal Marshall, and Joyce Kaufman. Thank you all for joining us here on Free-For-All Friday. Martin, you have to come back to finish your thought.
That's it for today. I'm Arthel Neville. Enjoy your weekend. And I will see you again Monday, 3:00 Eastern, 12:00 Pacific, right here on TALKBACK LIVE.
Now don't go anywhere, because CNN is going to bring you a live news conference with President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair at the White House. Judy Woodruff takes it from here.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
|
