|
CNN TALKBACK LIVE
Lawyers Make Final Arguments in Clara Harris Case; Should NFL Have Affirmative Action? Michael Jackson Strikes Deal to Air Own Clips of Martin Bashir Interview
Aired February 12, 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: Hello, everybody. Welcome to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Arthel Neville. Well, it seems that Osama bin Laden, the world's most wanted man, is still playing hide and seek, taunting the world with a taped message to the Iraqi people.
The administration is out in force, using the tape to make the case that there is a connection between bin Laden and Iraq's president, Saddam Hussein. Now Iraqi officials emphatically deny any link with the al Qaeda terrorist network. We are going to talk about that in a minute, but the tape does bring one big question to mind. If that really is Osama bin Laden on the tape, then where is he, and what is he plotting?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE TENET, CIA DIRECTOR: I believe the tape represents an exhortation to his followers. I believe he's trying to raise their confidence, and we know from previous tapes that previous tapes occurred roughly prior to previous attacks that have recently occurred.
So the surface is very concerning to us, and whether there is any other operational signal in this tape, or something we can glean at, we'll work on it and get back to you...
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEVILLE: OK. We're going to talk about that now. Phyllis Bennis is a fellow in the new Internationalism Program of the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington. She's a specialist in Mideast and U.N. affairs. And Danielle Pletka is vice president of foreign and defense policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute. She researches terrorism and weapons proliferation in the Middle East and South Asia.
I want to welcome both of you. And -- Phyllis, I am going to start with you. Do you believe that it is, in fact, bin Laden on the tapes and that he's still alive?
PHYLLIS BENNIS, INSTITUTE FOR POLICY STUDIES: I'm not sure whether it's bin Laden or not. There's no reason to think he's not alive. We know that of the 4,000 or more people that we know of that we have killed in Afghanistan, none of them was named Osama bin Laden. So I think that it is quite likely that he's still alive. I think that it's interesting that we haven't been hearing much about bin Laden lately, as we've seen this war build-up in Iraq with what I consider a spurious claim that there's a link between the two, when clearly bin Laden still represents a threat to Americans, and I think that we should be focusing much more on the real threat of terrorism, rather than on trying to make these false links.
NEVILLE: Danielle, how do you see it?
DANIELLE PLETKA, AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE: Well, on the question that you asked about whether this is bin Laden, I agree with Phyllis. I don't think we have any reason to know. On the other hand, there's no reason to doubt that this is he. The administration clearly thinks it's him.
As far as Iraq is concerned, this is all about the war on terrorism. Clearly there are links, there are shared goals between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein. There is antipathy toward the United States, hostility towards the West. There's means, there is motive, and what we really are waiting for now is the opportunity. And what we want to do is we want to strike at them before they have the opportunity to strike at us.
NEVILLE: So then, Phyllis, who would give bin Laden shelter?
BENNIS: I don't know that anyone would give bin Laden shelter. The question is, where could bin Laden be hiding, and there are a myriad of places on the Pakistani border, inside Afghanistan. There is a range of places. He may well be disguised, shaved off his beard, and be sitting somewhere in Europe for all we know.
I really don't think that we have any idea where he is hiding, and I think part of the problem is that from the beginning, from the moment of the horrific attacks of September 11, by treating this as a war, rather than as a crime against humanity, the response was guaranteed not to work, and I think that's been proven out. We still see bin Laden taunting the West as he has before. Clearly, he has an anti-Western, anti-U.S. agenda.
The notion that means that he's allied with Saddam Hussein's ruthlessly secular regime, the Baathist regime in Baghdad, I think really does not fly. We have to look back at history, including the history when Osama bin Laden, in 1990, offered to the Saudi foreign minister -- sorry, the Saudi deputy foreign minister -- the possibility of providing a massive number of Islamic troops to help Saudi Arabia repel the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, rather than having to endure the humiliation of allowing in U.S. troops. I think that's a better indication of what the real relationship is.
PLETKA: Phyllis, Phyllis. Where are we going here? This was a crime, not an act of war against the American people?
BENNIS: Crime against humanity.
PLETKA: I must say... BENNIS: Crime against humanity.
PLETKA: I must say that is very limited. So what you are recommending is a police response, rather than -- rather than an all- encompassing, all-out war using all of the forces at our disposal to go after everyone who would target the United States with terrorism?
(CROSSTALK)
PLETKA: That is on its face absolutely the wrong approach.
(CROSSTALK)
PLETKA: What we learned throughout the 1990s is that treating these as police actions only encourages the terrorists to believe that the United States is weak, that we are not going to fight back, that we are not out after them, and I would argue further that we've had a lot of success in the war on terror.
NEVILLE: But that is some of the -- some of the message that the voice on the tape that is allegedly bin Laden was sending to the Muslims around the world. Do you think that they will listen to him?
BENNIS: I think it is very hard to know. I think that what is true is that Osama bin Laden has the same capacity as the political operatives in the White House, at 10 Downing Street, and all over the world at finding what is the issue that the population you are trying to reach is really concerned about.
In the case of bin Laden, in 1998, he issued a statement where suddenly he embraced the Palestinian cause, something he had never been involved with before, but because he knew that was far more popular among Arabs and Muslims than was the so-called jihad against Saudi Arabia, which is what he was really involved with.
The same thing, I think, is going on here. There is massive worldwide opposition to a U.S. war in Iraq. What better way to mobilize support for your own views than to link your position with that widespread opposition to a U.S. war in Iraq.
PLETKA: And so we should do what Osama says. We shouldn't go after our enemies in Iraq. We should instead listen to Osama...
(CROSSTALK)
BENNIS: ... not Osama bin Laden's.
PLETKA: Hang on, Phyllis. You just said that Osama bin Laden uses the same methods that they use in the White House and on 10 Downing Street.
(CROSSTALK)
PLETKA: I'm sorry, it's not acceptable. To make a parallel in any way between the elected leaders of Great Britain and the United States and Osama bin Laden, do people go for populist messages? Yes, of course they do.
BENNIS: That was my point.
PLETKA:
(CROSSTALK)
PLETKA: Well, I'm sorry. It is shaming to you and to IPS.
(CROSSTALK)
BENNIS: All people in politics use popular issues to gain support, and we've seen it all over the world. We've seen Osama bin Laden do it before, this time he's done it again.
PLETKA: Yes, but we -- all grownups need to consider the messenger, and I think the people of the world understand that there's a difference between George Bush, Tony Blair and Osama bin Laden.
(CROSSTALK)
NEVILLE: Speaking of the messenger, earlier Rumsfeld was speaking about the search for bin Laden, want to take a listen to that sound bite right now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: It's a big world. People can hide, and the question isn't, Do you find him immediately. The question is, are you putting sufficient pressure that it makes it difficult for the terrorist acts to occur?
QUESTION: Is there a manhunt for Osama bin Laden by this government?
RUMSFELD: Oh, my goodness, yes. And not by this government, but by 70, 80, or...
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(INTERRUPTED BY BREAKING NEWS)
NEVILLE: And we want to discuss that breaking news now with our guests, Phyllis Bennis and Danielle Pletka. You just heard that report that, once again, France, Belgium, Germany, saying no way, we're not sending defense equipment to Turkey. Your reaction to that. Go with you first, Phyllis.
BENNIS: Well, I think that this indicates that the break within NATO and within Europe is a very serious one. There is a widespread view that a U.S. war against Iraq would be destabilizing, would set back the war on terrorism, and many in Europe are not prepared to accept it, even those governments that have signed -- the 18 governments that have signed letters of one sort or another of support of the U.S. position are facing populations where over 70 percent of all of their countries are opposed to this war. NEVILLE: So, Danielle, do you think that this is a cry for more diplomacy, or is there something else behind this?
PLETKA: No, there is something else behind it. I think it is important to look at the numbers. There are 19 countries in NATO. Sixteen of them support some sort of defensive action for Turkey, their NATO ally. Three of them have acted to oppose it. What we are learning about is that there are problems not between the United States and Europe, but problems inside Europe, and that France and Germany and Belgium, to a certain extent, want to speak for Europe, and that the rest of the countries are not willing to allow Schroeder and Chirac to speak for them.
That's why they had to write a letter to President Bush. That's why 18 European leaders -- leaders, I might add, of democracies, have spoken out in support of the United States. I think it's awfully unfortunate, and I think, frankly, that the Europeans need to sit down and talk about their experiment, rather than talking so much about any rift between us and the Europeans as a whole.
NEVILLE: OK. I have to take a break right now, but before I do go to break, I want to know if you think -- going back to Osama bin Laden -- if you think that bin Laden and Hussein are working together, that's the question of the day. Go ahead and give me a call at 1-800- 310-4CNN or, of course, you can e-mail me at talkback@cnn.com. What is my e-mail address? CNN?
Does the bin Laden tape make the connection is the question. Maybe, maybe not. We'll hear both sides of that argument after this break. Don't go anywhere, the talk continues.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: Today on TALKBACK LIVE, are duct tape and plastic all that stand between us and the enemy? How are you preparing for a terrorist attack?
Also, should the NFL be forced to diversify its coaching staff? Charles Barkley speaks out on that, and the painful truth about Michael Jackson. The talk continues after this break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: Now, as we said earlier, the administration is using the bin Laden tape played on Al-Jazeera news network yesterday to link al Qaeda and Iraq's president Saddam Hussein. Now, Germany is dismissing claims of a link.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ARI FLEISCHER, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: I think it just shows that Germany, which is unalterably opposed to the use of force, will still be in denial about Osama bin Laden's links to Iraq. Given the fact, especially, as Secretary Powell demonstrated that we know that there are operatives of al Qaeda operating inside Baghdad, and now we have an exhortation from Osama bin Laden on this tape to people inside Iraq as he calls them, the "mujahideen brotherhood."
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEVILLE: OK, Danielle. So Secretary of State Colin Powell says this audiotape shows a partnership between al Qaeda and Saddam's regime. And so I ask you, do you believe that?
PLETKA: I do believe it, but I think it's important to explain what partnerships between state sponsors, countries that sponsor terrorism and terrorist organizations is about in this day and age. It used to be that terrorist groups needed to go to a government to get passports and money and logistical support, and that's what we saw in the '70s and '80s. That's no longer the case. These groups are wealthy, they are sophisticated, they have ample fake passports and easy passage. What they need a place where they can operate safely and they need access to the kinds of weapons that can terrorize people. And, increasingly again, that's not going to be a little bomb, it's going to be weapons of mass destruction...
NEVILLE: So, Danielle, bottom line.
PLETKA: So again, I come back -- sorry. I wanted to lay the groundwork, forgive me. Do they have a shared motive in terrorizing the West? Yes. Does Osama bin Laden have operatives in Iraq? Yes. Is Saddam Hussein running al Qaeda? Absolutely not, and if that's the premise you want to set up, it can easily be knocked down. But they have a shared target, and that's us.
NEVILLE: Phyllis, do you agree or disagree?
BENNIS: I disagree. I think -- you know, it's interesting. If you look at the State Department's own "Patterns of Global Terrorism," for example, their 2001 edition, the newest edition that came out last year, they say that the last -- the last Iraqi effort at a terrorist attack at -- an attack on the U.S. happened 10 years ago in 1993. That's the State Department's view. That's not my view particularly. I think it's not only Germany that is saying that this tape certainly does not prove a case. John McCain said he's not convinced. I mean, we are seeing this all over. The fact that President Bush says that's what it means, or that Colin Powell asserts at the hearing at the Security Council that this proves that there are al Qaeda operatives...
NEVILLE: So then, why would the president and Powell say that?
BENNIS: Well, it's possible that they may believe it. They may have different views of -- than the FBI and CIA officials who were quoted in the "New York Times" last weekend who said we simply don't think they have made the case for a link. It may be that this is an incident like the Tonkin Gulf incident.
(CROSSTALK)
NEVILLE: Chris, do you think there is a link?
CHRIS: I have to believe there is a link with Osama bin Laden and what he did to the Kurds, and how he uses terror as a weapon. I think that there is definitely a link, and with Osama bin Laden being the way he is, and these countries also to come and disagree to some degree, I think -- if something happened like 9/11 to them, to France and Germany, I think there would be a big link also with that. So it's a huge link between Osama bin Laden and...
NEVILLE: Saddam.
CHRIS: Saddam Hussein, yes.
NEVILLE: Grab him for me, Chris. Kevin there in the audience. Stand up, sir.
KEVIN: I don't doubt that there's a link between the two. I don't know if this videotape actually is a smoking gun. You have two people that hate the United States. Of course they're going to have similar opinions. Whether this tape or not shows that that's a smoking gun, if they are together...
NEVILLE: You are not sure? OK, Kevin, thank you very much for speaking out.
Phyllis Bennis and Danielle Pletka, thank you as well for joining us here on TALKBACK LIVE.
And coming up next -- what stands between you and a terrorist attack? Will the government's supply list offer any protection? We'll have information you can't afford to miss after this break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: Welcome back, everybody. TALKBACK LIVE.
Is duct tape going to protect you from a terrorist attack?
The Hajj is set to end tomorrow and there are dire warnings that we are all at high risk of a possible chemical, biological or dirty bomb attack. Now, Homeland Security officials say, American's should be preparing themselves.
Here to talk about it are, CNN correspondents Jeanne Meserve and Mike Brooks.
Mike, detective of the D.C. police department where he was part of the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force.
And Jeanne I am going to start with you though.
Tell us what is the government telling ordinary Americans to do?
JEANNE MESERVE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, they are urging that people have certain supplies in their homes, that they have three days of water and nonperishable food for every member of the family. That they have a radio with batteries, a first aid kit, things like medications in adequate supply. They are also urging some planning. They say that people should have a communications plan. They should establish a point, a family member at a more distant location through whom they can trade information about one another, if you can't reach the person across town. Have an idea of some escape route, where you may go if you were called upon to evacuate. So, what they are calling on people to plan and prepare a bit, have certain items in their household. But they are saying, you don't have to rush out to the store tomorrow to do this. This is just something you should take care of eventually.
NEVILLE: OK, thanks, Jeanne. Now stay by for us.
We're going to go to Daytona, now. Mike, you're down there for the Daytona 500 happening this weekend. I'm hearing the cars in the background there. In the meantime, though, go ahead and tell us, what are they doing down there to prepare that would be different from any other year.
MIKE BROOKS, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Well, Arthel, they've got more police here than they have any other year. There are a number of different police agencies with the Daytona Beach Police being the lead law enforcement agency here for this special event. Now, law enforcement officials have said they are going to go on as planned. They are taking some extra precautions. They have bomb squads.
They have as I said, extra police here and they are taking every precaution. They are checking every I.D. When we came in here today we had our credentials and they also made sure everyone in the car had a photo I.D. We're talking 168,700 people that will be here at the speedway on Saturday and Sunday for both the Busch and the Daytona 500 races on Sunday -- Arthel.
NEVILLE: That's a lot of people and a lot of photo I.D.s. Let's take a look at this list. Some of the things folks are asked to go out and get. Radio, food and water, duct tape.
Is the government saying we should go out and get this stuff now?
MESERVE: They are saying you should think about it. They aren't saying go tonight and buy this, although a lot of people have been. We've had reports that duct tape and water and plastic sheeting has been sold out in a lot of hardware stores and grocery stores and so forth. But there are questions, Arthel, about the effectiveness of some of these things. This isn't a magic bullet. This isn't going to protect you in every single circumstance. Some of these things they say is wise to have on hand for any sort of emergency.
Real questions about whether plastic sheeting and duct tape are going to protect you from a biological attack, where things may have been released days before we know it in the air. Real questions, too, about radiological attack and whether this would have any affect at all. Most experts say, No, it won't be helpful. An the chemical attack possibility, they say under certain circumstances it could be helpful. It's going to depend on what the agent is, what the dispersal method is. How far away you might be from the plume. Things like that. So stuff they want you to have on hand, whether or not it's going to save your life is going to be completely circumstantial to where you are, and what is being used as an agent here.
NEVILLE: Interesting you are saying that because Daschle said that earlier, say, you know what, duct tape is not enough. We're going to listen to that sound byte now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TOM DASCHLE (D-SD), MINORITY LEADER: As I look at the threats presented to this country, the threat posed by bin Laden and al Qaeda, the threat posed by North Korea, our lack of real coordination, with regard to homeland defense, and this new admonition that people ought to go out and buy duct tape as a response falls fall short, I think, of anyone's expectations. And ought to be -- ought to be reconsidered. We have to do better than duct tape as our response to homeland defense.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEVILLE: You know, Mike, I'm listening to the audience members. They are actually laughing at that particular sound byte. I ask you. You were on the Task Force, Terror Task Force for what six years. What more could people do?
BROOKS: The very nature of terrorism suggests if there is an attack there will be little or no warning. So, that's fine if you are at your house. If you are outside of your house people have to get a security mind-set. And a security mind-set, people have in Europe all the time, Israel, in the U.K., but it's new for people here in the United States. And what they just have to do is when they go to work, when they go to their -- go out for recreation, go to the mall, for years we've been looking at these evacuation signs and people look at them and just let them go.
They don't even look at them. I think they should take note of the evacuation signs when they go to places. Figure out if something happens, what am I going to do, start thinking, what if. It's a security mind-set we have to have in the country. And law enforcement officials say that people here need to be prepared. They need to start taking a little more security minded and being more security minded than they have been in the past -- Arthel.
NEVILLE: Go ahead Charles.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think if you are going to do the plastic and the tape, you have to do it before anything is done or it's history.
NEVILLE: And you know, that leads me to, Jeanne, the next question for you, you know.
What does the government have any further guidance for people like Charles?
MESERVE: He's got an excellent point here. If you are very close to where an event takes place, chances are this isn't going to help you. If there is advance warning, however, there is a possibility it could be useful. But it's all, as I mentioned, very circumstantial.
I wanted to go back to the Daschle sound byte about duct tape is this not enough. I talked to one expert here who said the emphasis is all wrong. It may not be correct to tell each citizen the things they should do to prepare, but look at the first responder situation in this country. They are still waiting for money from the federal government. They need equipment. They need detection equipment. They haven't got it. They need to get it. That's where we should be putting a lot of emphasis at this particular point in time. Don't ignore that when you are trying get Joe citizen ready for what might happen.
NEVILLE: Jeanne Meserve and Mike Brooks, thanks for joining us here on TALKBACK LIVE today.
And coming up next: was she driven to murder by her cheating husband?
The Clara Harris case is now in the hands of the jury. We're going to get a live report and find out, was it all just an accident? We'll be back after this break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: Welcome back, everybody. Clara Harris says she didn't do it on purpose, but prosecutors say she ran over her cheating husband several times, deliberately killing him with her Mercedes. Now Harris had confronted her husband, David, and his lover in a Houston parking lot last July. She said she wasn't aiming for him and doesn't remember hitting him. But at least one witness described a gruesome attack. Today the lawyers made their final arguments to the jury.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE PARNHAM, HARRIS' ATTORNEY: You can consider the relationship and the circumstances of that relationship to determine the condition of the mind of Clara Harris on the 24th day of July, 2002, when she's behind the wheel of that automobile. And make no mistake about it, the automobile that hits David Harris. And that's the crux of this whole matter. It's the issue of intent.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: She acted on her anger and frustration, and the man is dead because of it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEVILLE: Well now the jury has it. And here to discuss the case is criminal defense attorney and former Houston prosecutor Joe Roach. And Joe, first of all, if you would, tell us the best arguments from both the defense and the prosecution.
JOE ROACH, FMR. HOUSTON PROSECUTOR: Well the prosecution came out saying it should be murder and nothing else. She intentionally tried to kill David Harris. She made her Mercedes into a 4,000-pound wrecking machine. And she wreaked havoc on that.
She also -- the defense talked about murder should not be what Clara Harris is found guilty of. It should be voluntary manslaughter or criminally negligent homicide. Or, at best, she should be acquitted, because she didn't intend to ever do any harm to David. If she had, she certainly wouldn't have brought her stepdaughter with her.
So both arguments were very good. It's up to the jury to decide now.
NEVILLE: And speaking of the stepdaughter, how important was it that her in-laws spoke out on her behalf? They testified on her behalf.
ROACH: I think it was absolutely huge. In Texas, in Houston, you rarely see the victim's family coming forward for the defendant. And both her father-in-law, her mother-in-law and her brother-in-law testified for her, saying that she should be home with the twin boys and not be found guilty of anything. So that was a huge moment in this trial.
NEVILLE: You know, it's interesting. I understand that talk around Houston is perhaps Clara Harris won't see a day behind bars. What are you hearing about that?
ROACH: There is talk. There's a lot of talk about that. There's been talk about that since Clara Harris was arrested.
You hear a lot of people on the street saying, he had it coming to him, he deserved it. She merely did what any woman would do, and it wasn't her fault that she took the law in her own hands. But you also hear the opposite reaction. It's not open season on husbands, and those kinds of disputes should be taken to the family court.
So it's been interesting. It really has.
NEVILLE: Yes. But, Joe, now the jury has it. And it's going to be interesting to see how long it's going to take for them to deliberate this.
ROACH: Right, it will be.
NEVILLE: Do you have any idea? Any predictions?
ROACH: They've had four weeks on the case. The longer they are out the more likely they are to acquit Clara Harris. The quicker they come back I think you'll find that they'll probably find her guilty of intentional murder. So we've been out about an hour, so we're waiting patiently here and trying to see what's going to happen.
NEVILLE: So if she's found guilty, what, she faces two to 20 years in prison?
ROACH: If she's found guilty of intentional murder, that's first degree. That's five to life.
NEVILLE: Wow. OK.
ROACH: If she's found voluntary manslaughter or sudden passion, it's two to 20.
NEVILLE: That's the two to 20, OK.
ROACH: So there are all sorts of punishment ranges.
NEVILLE: Interesting. OK. Joe Roach, so good to see you again on TALKBACK LIVE. Thanks so much for that report.
ROACH: You bet. Thank you so much.
NEVILLE: OK. Time for a break right now. Searching for coaches in the NFL, are some candidates being overlooked? Race is the question. We're talking about affirmative action in the NFL. That's coming up next.
Then the Michael Jackson controversy continues. Find out what he's doing next. Don't go anywhere. The "Talk" continues in a moment.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: All right. Welcome back, everybody.
The National Football League is under a mandate to increase the number of black head coaches. Now last fall, attorney Johnnie Cochran leaned on the league and threatened to sue if it didn't make any all- out effort to hire minority coaches. Now out of five openings this year, just one went to a minority, bringing the number of black coaches to three in the NFL.
The last slot was filled Friday, when the San Francisco 49ers selected Dennis Erickson from a field that included New York Jets defensive coordinator Ted Cattrall and Chicago Bears defensive coordinator Greg Blanche. Now should Erickson have been overlooked in favor of a minority candidate?
Here to talk about it are our CNN contributor Charles Barkley and Steve Malzberg, a radio talk show host on WABC and KABC New York in L.A. He's also a columnist at newsmax.com. Want to welcome both of you.
STEVE MALZBERG, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Hi.
NEVILLE: So Charles, I'm going to start with you. Want to hear your thoughts on that. You heard the opening question.
CHARLES BARKLEY, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well obviously I think there needs to be more black head coaches in the NFL. And you look at it from a perspective -- Dennis Erickson is a former NFL coach. So that's like, they always say, we need a coach who has experience. Unless they give these black coaches a chance to get experience, they're always going to be passed over.
But it's unfortunate the way it is. But every year we have the same debate and it goes back and forth and they hire one black coach or fire one black coach, and things aren't getting better.
NEVILLE: So Steve, I ask you then, is the policy that there's a mandate to go ahead and interview potential candidates, potential minority head coaches, do you think that's fair?
MALZBERG: I think it's demeaning, first of all, to any black who is interviewed. Because any black who is interviewed will feel or will be accused of being interviewed just because the league mandated that they be interviewed. Now I got to say that in the case of the Mariucci hiring in -- he went from San Francisco, where he was fired, and he was hired by Detroit, Detroit has come under a lot of criticism for what they did in their search.
But they approached five -- from what I read, they approached five minority candidates. None of...
NEVILLE: Yes, but apparently they didn't step out -- and help me here, Charles -- because they felt that Mariucci was already a shoe-in for that particular job.
BARKLEY: Hey, Steve, I actually -- on the point with Detroit, I can actually give Detroit a pass, because that, to me, was one of the most underhanded back-stabbing things I've seen in a long time, where a guy -- because if Mariucci had not gotten fired, Marty Mornhinweg would still be the coach in Detroit. So that's a totally different situation.
I thought the 49ers did a great job. They interviewed several minority candidates. But, first of all, what do you mean -- it can't be a slap in the face. Any time you get an opportunity, you get a chance to meet with these people, they get a chance to see your personality and see you are no different than they are.
MALZBERG: Well I think they know that -- again, it's like affirmative action. How many people are accused -- how many blacks that make it are against affirmative action because they say then they are looked upon as getting an unfair advantage that they didn't need. They didn't benefit from affirmative action, but they're perceived in that way.
And I got to tell you, Johnnie Cochran I expect it from. You know, threatening to sue the NFL if they don't put some plan. He wants teams penalized if they don't interview black coaches or about black coaching candidates. And Jesse Jackson, unfortunately, I expect it from also. But he's a so-called civil rights leader.
Shouldn't he be more concerned about the education of hundreds of thousands of millions of black kids in the inner cities who are left behind every day in this country? Shouldn't that be his focus instead of black coaches in the NFL for crying out loud? BARKLEY: Well I think that's a great point, and your point is well taken. But I think what happens in sports, it's kind of like you are good enough to play -- now we finally got a black owner in sports, which is something we really needed a long time ago.
NEVILLE: Bob Johnson.
BARKLEY: But it seems like we're good enough to play, we're good enough to be offensive coordinators and defensive coordinators, but we're not allowed to be the man. And I think that's the biggest gripe we have.
MALZBERG: They'll come from those ranks. There are more and more offensive and defensive coordinators in the league, as you know, Charles. And they'll come from those ranks.
Look, a few years ago we were talking about the possibility (ph) of black quarterbacks. There would be quarterbacks in college, they would be drafted and converted into punt returners. That used to be the case. That's not the case necessarily anymore.
There is more and more -- there's a growing number of very talented black quarterbacks. It's going to happen in the NFL, but it has to happen naturally. It can't happen when it's forced upon people, because they resent it that way, in addition to it being unfair.
NEVILLE: So, Steve, what do you think about this number? The fact that there are -- 10 percent of the head coaches in the NFL are black and 67 percent of the players are black?
MALZBERG: Well what about 67 percent of the players being black, and how many does that leave for whites? Should we mandate that coaches play a certain number of white players or draft a certain number of white players? You go with the best. You go with the best that have performed, the best in college, the best potential. That's how you do it when you hire a coach.
BARKLEY: Yes, but that's not fair either, Steve, because now you are saying that blacks aren't good enough to get these jobs.
MALZBERG: No I am not saying that at all. You pointed out the experience factor. When you own a franchise, it's very appealing that the guy has experience, especially as in the case of Parcells or Mariucci. If they are successful, it's very hard to resist that guy. Is that racist? I don't think so.
BARKLEY: No. But my point is, how are blacks ever going to get the opportunity to be head coaches if every time a job comes up guys say you don't have any experience?
MALZBERG: Well it's a catch-22 to an extent, but you can't mandate that somebody hire a black coach or else. That's not right.
BARKLEY: Well, first of all, I don't think -- that's not what they're saying. They're not saying you've got to hire a black coach, you've got to interview him and see what happens. I think if you meet some of these guys you'll see.
Let me give you an example. I have no problem with Detroit. My question with Detroit is, how in the hell did Marty Mornhinweg get a job in the first place over some of those other guys?
(APPLAUSE)
MALZBERG: Well, I don't have an answer for that, Charles. But you know Dallas got criticized when they hired Parcells because they think they only gave a phone call to Dennis Green or whatever. How could you have a problem? Not you.
How could anybody have a problem with Bill Parcells? He's won two Super Bowls. I mean he's a great coach.
BARKLEY: I love Bill Parcells, but I think that's one of the problems. I don't think the black guys complain about big names. They are complaining about these no-name guys who get opportunities.
NEVILLE: OK. I have to take a break right now. When we come back, we'll find out what Michael Jackson has up his sleeve. And we'll talk to Charles about that whole controversy. Don't go anywhere. The "Talk" continues.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: OK, everybody. That two-hour documentary on living with Michael Jackson is still making news. Reports say that Michael has struck a deal to air his own clips of Martin Bashir's interview. He says Bashir's interview was grossly misleading, especially the part where Michael admits sharing his bed with children. He says his own version of the interview will show that Bashir manipulated the outcome.
Steve, going with you first on this one. Do you think Bashir crossed the line?
MALZBERG: Well, no. I think everything Michael Jackson said, he said. I have heard a part of a slip that Jackson's people were running their own camera at the time of the interview, and there is a part where Bashir says to him, Michael, your relationship with your children is phenomenal. Everybody I've talked to said your children and you get along great.
But he's not obligated to put that in, I don't think. But Jackson can't accuse him of making things up or fabricating. He said he's slept in a bed with children that are not his own. I mean this isn't made up, this isn't fabricated.
What kind of loony would, a, do it, and, b, go on national TV and admit it?
NEVILLE: Charles, your reaction? BARKLEY: Steve, you're killing me, man. First of all, I am -- with the exception of Aretha Franklin, I'm the biggest Michael Jackson fan in the world. But he has to -- Clarence Thomas gave me some great advice one time. He says, you got to quit giving them the hammer to hammer you with.
And Michael Jackson has realized these people -- he's bringing this stuff on himself, and Steve is right. When you speak for yourself, it's always going to come back to haunt you. You can't sleep -- you can sleep with your own kids, but you can't sleep with strangers' kids or friends of yours' kids. That's just wrong. I must not love Michael Jackson. I'm having a hard time defending him right now.
NEVILLE: So do you think he made a mistake by doing the interview, Charles?
BARKLEY: Of course he did. I mean, first of all, I don't think you let anybody spend that much time with you to learn every intimate detail of your life. But also, when they ask you questions, you don't say, yes, I sleep with friends' kids or neighbors' kids. You just don't say anything like that.
(APPLAUSE)
MALZBERG: Look, he might be doing a good thing here. Supposedly, some of these kids have cancer and one has gone into remission. If that's the case, do the work, be quiet about it, and say, no, I don't sleep with other kids. And then let the press hound, and if they find out he's lying -- but don't go on there and say, yes, I sleep with other kids. I give them tea, I tuck them in, we play music.
It sounds -- as we wait for Peter Pan, who is all over my bedroom, by the way. I mean that sounds just nuts. I mean anybody advising Michael Jackson would have to say, A, don't do that, and after he did it, they must lock him up in a room and say, you've got to be kidding. But he's Michael Jackson, so probably nobody does that.
NEVILLE: So then what do you think about the excerpts, Michael's version of this show that's going to come out supposedly?
MALZBERG: Positive spin. I mean it will help him. It will help him. But he said what he said. No one else said it, like Charles said. When you are speaking for yourself, it's your responsibility.
BARKLEY: The thing I found amazing is a lot of people try to make fun of Michael Jackson, but that was the number one watched show in the ratings last week. So that lets you know he has a -- whatever type of following you want to call it, he still has an unbelievable fan base. He's obviously got a great critics base.
But I'm a big Michael Jackson fan. And I can't defend him sleeping with other people's kids. You're allowed to sleep, to a certain age, with your own kids, but he's in a no-win situation. NEVILLE: All right. I'm out of time. Steve Malzberg, thanks so much for joining us.
MALZBERG: Thank you.
NEVILLE: And Charles, see you next week?
BARKLEY: Yes, baby.
NEVILLE: All right. And here's the question of the day. Do you think Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein are working together? Give me a call at 1-800-310-4CNN, or e-mail talkback@cnn.com. I'll be talking with you next.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: The question of the day, which is: Do you think Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein are working together?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I absolutely think they are together. There's no way a small organization can hide from the world's greatest military power like he's done.
NEVILLE: OK.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I don't think they are necessarily working together. I do think that we are going to drive them together if we are not careful.
NEVILLE: OK. Thank you very much for your answers. Going to the telephones now. Art (ph) standing by in Pennsylvania. Do you think there is a link?
ART: I definitely don't think there's a link, because I think (UNINTELLIGIBLE) philosophies that they can't be linked together.
NEVILLE: OK. Thank you very much. We do have a lot of e-mails coming in now I want to share with you. C.J. says, "Connection or not between Osama and Saddam, Saddam needs to go. You don't need tanks and bombers to find bin Laden. Let the CIA find bin Laden and the Army get Saddam."
OK. Thank you for that e-mail. Coming in now, George in Georgia. "Bin Laden wants the U.S. to go to war with Iraq because he thinks it will start his giant jihad war against the west. The White House is playing right into his hands."
And that is all the time we have for today. Thanks so much for watching. I'm Arthel Neville. Back again tomorrow 3:00 Eastern, 12:00 Pacific, with more TALKBACK LIVE. Candy Crowley is up next with "INSIDE POLITICS."
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
NFL Have Affirmative Action? Michael Jackson Strikes Deal to Air Own Clips of Martin Bashir Interview>
|
