|
CNN TALKBACK LIVE
Showdown Iraq: More Inspections Needed or War Time Imminent?
Aired February 14, 2003 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ARTHEL NEVILLE, HOST: Does today's report from chief weapons inspector Hans Blix provide ammunition for war, or does it put the U.S. behind the eight-ball?
Then high anxiety grips Washington as the government tells us all to be ready for attack. We'll get a live report on fear fever in the capitol.
And find out: Are you alert or alarmed?
And some Democrats say the nation may not be prepared when al Qaeda strikes. Are war and terror fueling party politics?
The talk starts right now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
Hi, everybody. Welcome to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Arthel Neville.
Well, will today's report by chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix lead to peace or war?
Bottom line, Blix told the Security Council they found in evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but it's too soon to tell if those weapons are really gone or are being hid.
Both Blix and ElBaradei say the inspections are working. Baghdad is cooperating, and they want more time.
Now, could the report impede U.S. efforts to get Security Council backing for a military action in Iraq?
Our State Department correspondent Andrea Koppel will have a live interview with the man making the case for the U.S., Colin Powell. That's 45 minutes from now, live on CNN.
And Andrea joins us now from New York, along with CNN's Michael Okwu at the United Nations and senior international correspondent Nic Robertson is in Baghdad.
And we're going to start with Michael.
Michael, first of all, was this report more favorable towards Iraq than the last one, or does it depend on who you ask? MICHAEL OKWU, CNN CORRESPONDENT: You're reading my mind, Arthel, exactly. It depends on who you ask.
If you talk to the United States they'll say that this is further evidence that the end game should come quickly, that Iraq should be disarmed by force. It appears to be necessary, as far as they're concerned.
But if you talk to the French and if you talk to the Russians and the Chinese, they all say, look, because information came out as a result of talking to inspectors, then clearly, it means the inspections regime should continue.
And, in fact, as you know, Arthel, the French foreign minister calling for further discussions on the 14th of next month, on the ministerial level. He wants to continue inspections to bolster the infrastructure there, triple the number of inspectors.
The United States saying, you know, we don't want this.
NEVILLE: And then again, I go to Andrea Koppel and ask you then, is the U.S. out on a limb?
ANDREA KOPPEL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Oh, absolutely, Arthel.
President Bush has made very clear that he intends to make a move, whether it is unilaterally or whether it's with the United Nations, within a matter of weeks. What we just heard today from many of the Security Council members is that no one has changed their mind, it seems.
Now what we don't know is whether or not what they said behind closed doors matches what they said very passionately in public.
And Secretary Powell certainly has his hands full and he's going to be meeting with many of these Security Council members, the permanent members, France, Russia and China, privately.
And he is going to have a lot of arms to twist to convince them that it isn't -- the answer is not, in U.S. eyes, sending in more inspectors and giving it more time. Secretary Powell wants to try to get a second U.N. Resolution. This is very important to the British and, as you know, they're the -- one of the strongest allies behind the U.S.
And the U.S. doesn't believe it has much time to accomplish this, Arthel.
NEVILLE: Now Andrea, would you say the opposition is based in political theater, or is it firm and do you think that eventually, the key allies will go along with the U.S.?
KOPPEL: I spoke to some senior U.S. officials this morning ahead of the Blix/Baradei presentation, and they said they really didn't know how this was going to go down, and much of it would depend upon what Blix and ElBaradei said. From the reaction that you've heard now from many of the Security Council members, it doesn't seem as if what they said in their report, the inspectors' reports, has helped the U.S. case very much.
That is what the U.S. was hoping, that Blix and ElBaradei would just state the facts as they were. They seemed, however, to leave the door open to the fact that it would be helpful if they had more time.
That is not something that the U.S. had wanted them to say. And in point of fact, it's not something that was in their brief. They were supposed to be very factual.
This is what those other Security Council members have seized upon and it is going to be a Herculean challenge right now, it seems, to try to get these members to change their minds.
What the U.S. is going to be saying behinds closed doors, however, Arthel, is if you want to have a piece of the action in post- Saddam Iraq, if you want to get your oil money -- remember, Russia and France are owed billions of dollars in oil contracts by Iraq -- If they want to have a chance of getting any money or any piece of the action after Saddam Hussein is gone, then they better get on the boat before, not after, Arthel. That's what Secretary Powell is telling them.
NEVILLE: I'm sure, Andrea, you'll be talking to Secretary Powell about the fact that Hans Blix and ElBaradei said, yes, they do need more time.
KOPPEL: That's exactly right. There are any number of questions to ask Secretary Powell. Chief among them, does he think, would he advise President Bush to go for a second U.N. resolution under the circumstances? And if so, what would be in that resolution?
The U.S. believes, at this stage of the game, Arthel, that it would have enough votes -- remember, it only needs nine out of 15 votes -- to pass a resolution. The problem is it doesn't believe that it has those permanent members on board and there really is a risk out there that either France or Russia, in particular, might veto a resolution. So this is the dilemma right now.
NEVILLE: OK. Michael Okwu, I know you have to run. We do appreciate your report from the U.N. Thanks so much for joining us.
Meanwhile, I'm going to go to Nic Robertson now and ask you, Nic, what is the official reaction from the Iraqi government?
NIC ROBERTSON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Arthel, this morning, the real concern here among Iraqi officials was that Hans Blix might actually focus on the negative issues and play up the negative issues.
From what we're hearing from Iraqi officials so far, they seem to think that this does enough at the moment to head off the possibility of war.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The two reports shows that Iraq has complied with the resolution number 1441. And Iraq hasn't got any weapons of mass destruction. At the same time, it shows that Colin Powell claims, in front of the Security Council, (UNINTELLIGIBLE) the two reports also indicate that the inspection teams needs more time to put forth their best.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ROBERTSON: Now Hans Blix did, of course, say that Iraq still had prescribed missiles, had rebuilt something previous weapons inspectors had destroyed, a missile engine casting facility, and that they also had prescribed missiles. He told Iraqis in his speech that they needed to be serious about all these other outstanding issues.
But the calculation by an Iraqi official late yesterday, Arthel, was that if they could get 80 percent positive in this, then they would be doing enough to head off the possibility of war.
NEVILLE: And Nic, today, the Iraqi government officially banned weapons of mass destruction. How significant is that?
ROBERTSON: This is exactly what the weapons chiefs have been calling for, to outlaw weapons of mass destruction. This was a presidential decree. President Saddam Hussein is the highest authority in the country. His signature went on this document.
What it says is that no individuals, no private or mixed companies can import, produce, manufacture chemical, biological or nuclear weapons of mass destruction.
What it doesn't say in that is whether or not this governs or commands the state companies here -- and of course, many of the state companies are those who have been involved in the military production of Iraq's past weapons of mass destruction.
So this is something, however very much that the weapons chiefs were looking for -- Arthel.
NEVILLE: Andrea, getting back to you now, do you think the U.S. would proceed with military action with or without a second U.N. resolution?
KOPPEL: Well, that's what President Bush has threatened to do. He has said that he doesn't believe the U.S. needs a second U.N. resolution or some like to say an 18th resolution, dating back if you want to go back to 1990.
That back in the early '90s, after the Gulf War ended, there was a Resolution 687, which authorized the U.S. and the international community to -- that Iraq had to forcibly disarm or it would be disarmed using military force.
So President Bush doesn't believe he needs additional U.N. resolutions. The problem is, even though the U.S. is threatening those countries, France, Russia, China others, that if they don't sign on in the beginning they'll lose out in the post Saddam economic sense, the U.S. really does need their help, Arthel.
It doesn't want to be carrying the burden of this war, not just the fighting of it, which it can handle, but the reconstruction aspect of it and the peacekeeping aspect of it.
So it is very much in U.S. interests to try as long as it can to build an international coalition, not just for the war, but for the day after, the months after, the years after.
The question is whether the American people, how they would feel knowing that tens of thousands of American troops might have to remain in Iraq to maintain peacekeeping just on its own if it doesn't have other countries within Europe supporting it.
NEVILLE: Right. Absolutely. Andrea Koppel, Nic Robertson, thank you both for joining us here today.
And I want to remind everybody to stay tuned for Andrea's interview with Secretary of State Colin Powell. That's at 3:45 eastern, 12:45 on the west coast. Going to be live right here on CNN. Going to be very interesting.
In the meantime, do you think the Blix report provided the U.S. with enough ammunition for war? It's our question of the day. Want to get you to give me a call now at 800-310-4CNN or e-mail me at TalkBack@CNN.com.
And we will meet our panel after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: Today on TALKBACK LIVE, we're going to go to the nation's nervous capital, where the latest terror alert is leaving its mark. We're going to find out how people are coping.
Then, how far will Americans go to show their displeasure with the French over Iraq? A group of Congressmen is calling for a boycott and one French cheese merchant is already feeling the pinch. Is this a boycott you could support?
The talk continues after this break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DOMINIQUE DE VILLEPIN, FRENCH FOREIGN MINISTER (through translator): The use of force is not justified at this time. There is an alternative to war, disarming Iraq via inspections.
Moreover, premature resource to the military action would be fraught with risks. The authority of our action is based today on the unity of the international community. Premature military intervention would bring this unity into question and that would detract from its legitimacy and, in the long run, its effectiveness.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEVILLE: You just heard the French foreign minister speak out. And right now, it's time to meet our TALKBACK LIVE panel. It is, after all, Friday.
John LeBoutillier is a political commentator and former Congressman, and he is also a columnist for NewsMax.com. Eric Alterman is a media columnist for "The Nation." He writes for MSNBC.com and is the author of "What Liberal Media?" and "More Lies: The cost of Presidential Deception."
Adam Eidinger, an activist with the Green Party, who is trying to organize this weekend's anti-war demonstrations.
And Rebecca Hagelin is vice president of communications and marketing for the Heritage Foundation, as well as a columnist for World Net Daily.
Want to welcome all of you.
And John, I'm going to start with you today. OK. You've heard France, you've heard Germany, Blix, ElBaradei. Has the report changed anyone's position?
JOHN LEBOUTILLIER, COLUMNIST, NEWSMAX.COM: I don't think it's changed anybody's position. I think it hurt the president in his effort to get this thing moving more quickly.
He really is put up against his own words now. He's been saying for several months, it's a matter of weeks and not months, and now, unless he wants to break his word, he's going to really have to either do this by himself, with a few other countries, or wait longer and try to bring the U.N. along with him.
NEVILLE: Rebecca, how do you see it?
REBECCA HAGELIN, THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION: Well, I see it as Iraq's continued problem here, where they disavow the resolutions that the U.N. has passed and the U.N. continues to allow them -- or individual countries continue to allow them to break their promises.
When I think as a mother about this issue, I think about the fact that my son was 3-years-old at the time we first went to war with Iraq. And now he's 15. And the business still hasn't been finished with Iraq.
It's time to end this threat. It's time to disarm this monster, who tortures children in his own country, who stores up chemical weapons by the quantities that could kill millions of people. It's time that we do something about this.
This is not some person who has no record. This is a person who has a record of violence and torture. It's a person who's created prisons in his own country made of terror. The walls and the bars are made of terror. It's time to do something about him.
NEVILLE: OK. Go ahead, Adam.
ADAM EIDINGER, THE GREEN PARTY: Arthel, I just want to say that we are doing something about this. I mean, the whole world is doing something about this. The United Nations is there to make sure that we have people on the ground.
Iraq is up against the wall right now. They're not going to -- not threatening their neighbors. Their neighbors are not saying they're being threatened.
The Arab states feel that the real threat to the region right now is the United States going to war without the support of the United Nations, without the support of the rest of the world.
There are going to be millions of people on the streets this weekend in every capitol on this planet saying "No war in Iraq." They know this is about oil. They know this is about going in and claiming resources and keeping U.S. dominance in that region.
It was reported in the "New York Times" and the "Washington Post" that the big concern worldwide is that we're going to be moving away weigh from the euro -- I'm sorry, from the dollar to the euro, because the euro might become the new oil currency.
You know, there are a lot of factors involved here besides disarming weapons of mass destruction. And the real threat is that nuclear weapons are being built as we speak in North Korea and the U.N. is talking about Iraq, which is clearly not going to be invading any time soon.
HAGELIN: Are you advocating that we bomb North Korea? I just want to get you on record here.
EIDINGER: I'm not advocating that.
HAGELIN: Is this what you're advocating?
EIDINGER: Absolutely not.
HAGELIN: OK, I see.
EIDINGER: I'm saying that the diplomacy worldwide needs to also look at North Korea. We need to be having talks with the North Koreans immediately. That situation could spiral out of control in a matter of days.
HAGELIN: Of course it could.
EIDINGER: And yet -- and yet we're all distracted with, you know, duct tape and plastic and code orange. Come on, the American public is smarter than this, and we need to have leaders who are actually focusing on real threats. HAGELIN: You know, it's not...
NEVILLE: Let me get Eric in there for a sec, Rebecca. Excuse me.
HAGELIN: OK.
ERIC ALTERMAN, MEDIA COLUMNIST: Hello?
NEVILLE: Hello, Eric.
ALTERMAN: Yes, hi. A couple of points that I hope break through the din a little bit.
On the one hand, with regard to the woman's first point about her child and the poor kid has had to grow up with this threat of Iraq for all these years, I think if you listen to the CIA testimony to Congress, you'll see that Iraq has been given a clean bill of health from the CIA with regard to terrorism in the United States, since 1993.
But if we do attack Iraq, the CIA and, in fact, the head of the defense intelligence agency the other day predicted that there would be terrorism against the United States and against U.S. civilians.
So if you really want to protect your children, the idea...
HAGELIN: There's already terrorism against the United States.
ALTERMAN: ... is not to strike Iraq. That's point No. 1.
Point No. 2 -- point No. 2, I've never really thought, to get back to Mr. Blix's report, I've never really thought that the Bush Administration could care less what the U.N. or the NATO allies think.
To me, the reason that they've gone through the Security Council has been a reaction to public opinion polls, which have told them that there isn't much support in the United States for a unilateral invasion of Iraq. There's only support for a multilateral invasion of Iraq.
Now, the Bush Administration has just unleashed one of the most sophisticated and intense propaganda offensives on behalf of the war for the past six months. And yet, according to today's "New York Times," 66 percent of Americans don't want to go to war without the Security Council.
So that's their political problem. They can go to war without the Security Council if they want, and they'll win the war, but the peace is going to be very difficult and they're going to need public support for that. And they're not going to have it if they go in with support...
LEBOUTILLIER: Arthel...
NEVILLE: Excuse me. You know what? Hang onto that thought for me. I do have to go to break. I'll get you after the break, OK?
Time now for a break, as I said. Later this hour, we're going to find out how people in Washington are preparing for the worst and going on with life unusual.
And next, some lawmakers call for a French boycott, but American cheese lovers are way ahead of them. I'll explain after this break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: And welcome back, everybody. I'm Arthel Neville.
Now, some Americans don't seem too happy with France and Germany these days. They've been the fly in the ointment, as far as the U.S.'s push for action is Iraq is considered.
Right now we're going to take a look at the front page of the "New York Post." It says "See the weasels." OK, referring to them as weasels.
Now some members of Congress want Americans to boycott the Paris air show this summer, and a French cheese company that does business on the Web has been deluged with e-mails from disgruntled Americans and customers who have decided to do without their French cheese, at least for the time being.
And John, going back to you now, should the boycott approach be considered?
LEBOUTILLIER: I think there's bigger fish to fry. We're at war with terrorism, not with France.
And I want to get to the whole thing that we've been talking about so far, Arthel, which is we were hit terribly on September 11. The president rallied the country and the entire world, every country -- France, Russia, Germany, all the Muslim and Arab countries -- everybody supported the United States when we took off and went after al Qaeda and the Taliban. And Osama bin Laden, who the president said we're going to get him dead or alive.
We are now a year and a half later. We have not caught Osama bin Laden. The president has not even mentioned Osama bin Laden by name since last July.
All of this energy, this horrible anger we all feel about September 11, has been dissipated worldwide and, instead, the president has taken it and pitted it over towards Iraq and aimed it at Saddam, who is an awful man. And Rebecca is right, he uses fear, torture, all of that.
HAGELIN: And that's OK. Is that OK that he does that? I just want to know if that's OK that he does that.
LEBOUTILLIER: But we were hit by al Qaeda. We were hit by them, and we need to retaliate against them.
HAGELIN: That, at the same time, he's storing up all these weapons of mass destruction.
ALTERMAN: It's obviously not OK.
HAGELIN: He's a dictator that likes to collect this stuff because it's a hobby of his.
LEBOUTILLIER: Rebecca -- Rebecca, would...
HAGELIN: He plans to use it.
LEBOUTILLIER: Rebecca...
HAGELIN: The world knows that and should know and that understand that.
LEBOUTILLIER: Rebecca, doesn't it amaze -- Rebecca...
NEVILLE: Go ahead, John.
LEBOUTILLIER: Rebecca, doesn't it amaze you that we have the sight last Tuesday of the secretary of state, Colin Powell, using a tape of Osama bin Laden to rally support to go after Iraq?
My God, this proves...
HAGELIN: Does it not amaze -- does it not amaze the viewers...
NEVILLE: I'm sorry, Rebecca. I want to get one viewer here involved, Miko (ph).
MIKO: I have to agree with -- what's his name?
NEVILLE: John.
MIKO: I have to agree with what John says, because do we really know who our enemy is? Because we still haven't dealt with the issues from the 9/11.
And who's to say that if we go to war with Iraq, who is to say that the al Qaeda then is not, that's not going to give them open door for them to attack again?
NEVILLE: Is that something that you are afraid of or fear?
MIKO: Yes, I am, because in every war, it's always the innocent people of any country that always suffers the backlash of any war.
NEVILLE: Thank you very much, Miko (ph).
We have a phone call coming in now. Jeff, go ahead, where are you calling from?
CALLER: Montana.
NEVILLE: Go ahead, Jeff. What do you say? CALLER: I'm fully for the French boycott. And I think we should take it one step further and I think we need to go -- I think we should go over to the Normandy Coast and dig up every one of them soldiers and bring them back to our country, who remembers and respects what they did in 1945 and '44.
NEVILLE: All right, Jeff.
EIDINGER: Can I respond to the caller for a second, if that's all right?
NEVILLE: Go ahead, yes. Of course.
EIDINGER: I just want to say that the French should be applauded for what they're doing. They're standing up for human rights; they're standing up for American soldiers, whose lives could be senselessly wasted in Iraq.
You know, the Iraqi people are going to fight back. They're going to fight back.
HAGELIN: The Iraqi people want freedom.
EIDINGER: Urban combat is very costly and you know what? Freedom from the opinion of the Bush Administration is installing a general to run that country. That's not freedom.
HAGELIN: Oh, my.
EIDINGER: All the bombing and destruction of Iraq will not bring democracy. It will just bring another military dictatorship.
LEBOUTILLIER: Arthel?
NEVILLE: Go ahead, yes. Go ahead.
LEBOUTILLIER: I just want to get back to this one more time. I see 200,000 U.S. troops, five aircraft carriers, billions of dollars worth of equipment being relocated over there to take down the Iraqi regime.
I would like to know, why wasn't the same commitment made a year and a half ago to go to Afghanistan and into Pakistan and hunt down this bastard Osama bin Laden, who attacked this country? Why have we forgotten him and moved over here to Iraq?
ALTERMAN: You know, Arthel -- Arthel?
NEVILLE: Yes, go ahead.
ALTERMAN: I find myself in total agreement with Congressman LeBoutillier, but I would even like to take his point a step further.
You know, I was in New York on 9/11, and I had friends and so forth running away from the destruction. And I'd like to know what the administration has done to protect us from another 9/11. I mean, we're going to be inspiring terrorism against us by launching this war. And yet, the homeland security effort is in complete and total disarray, all this stuff...
NEVILLE: That's right.
ALTERMAN: ... about buying masks and so forth and putting duct tape on your doors.
NEVILLE: And even the local government hasn't planned...
ALTERMAN: My daughter's in pre-K yet.
NEVILLE: We haven't seen any of that $3.5 billion allotted for the homeland security.
ALTERMAN: Even the preparations they are asking us to take are completely...
HAGELIN: What's amazing to me is that...
ALTERMAN: Excuse me, I'm not done.
HAGELIN: ... terrorists.
NEVILLE: Go ahead, Eric. Quickly, Eric, 10 more seconds. I've got go to break. Hurry up, Eric.
ALTERMAN: Well, it's just they tell us to duct tape our doors, but what about our children in school, what about people in the workplace? The whole thing is a joke and we're not protected the way that -- That's the government's first responsibility.
NEVILLE: And here is where I jump in with a break.
Coming up next, speaking of what Eric is talking about, people around the nation are clearly wrapped up in this new alert. National correspondent Bob Franken talks about terrorist threats and high anxiety in D.C. That's coming up next. Stay right where you are.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: And welcome back, everybody. Now given the horrors of September 11, it's not surprising that folks in Washington and New York are more sensitive to the current state of a heightened alert. President Bush was out today talking up the country's preparedness.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The American people need to know that we're collecting a lot of information and we're going to share it in a way that enables us to do our jobs that you expect us to do. That we're going to use the best information technologies available to not only make sure information flows freely at the federal level, but flows from this data bank of information to local law enforcement officials. It will enable us to make sure that we do everything we can to win the war on terror at home, just like we're going to do everything we can by unleashing one of the greatest militaries -- the greatest military ever assembled abroad.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEVILLE: Now while the president may be confident, some citizens are more alarmed than alert. CNN national correspondent Bob Franken joins us now from Washington. And, Bob, go ahead and tell us what the scene is like up there in the D.C. area.
BOB FRANKEN, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, I mean the scene looks like it does all the time. But regrettably, all the time now means jangled nerves. There seems to be two feelings here. On the one hand, you have people who in fact are genuinely alarmed. They've gone through a period of time where there was the attack on the Pentagon, the anthrax attacks.
Of course we had the unrelated but still nerve-jarring sniper assault last summer -- last fall, rather -- which caused all kinds of problems. But there's another feeling too among many people. The skeptics who say, is this really necessary, or is this really just a jittery government trying to make sure it can say that there was a warning issued, even though it may be going overboard a little bit.
And then there are questions about the effectiveness of what's being suggested, questions about the plastic and duct tape, whether it really works against some sort of chemical attack. Questions about what do you do about going for a walk? Do you carry it with you?
So, as I say, there's sort of this combination of feelings which really could be described as hopelessness, helplessness, just a little bit. Nevertheless, there are visible signs all over the place. There is the heavy security in the metro system, which is the Washington subway system. Very visible, very, very jarring.
There is the experience that you get when you go into government buildings like the Pentagon, where they pass out brochures. I have one here which talks about what to do in the event of an emergency. And it comes down to, we'll tell you when the time comes. There are all the preparations that are going on in schools.
Right now, being in Washington, D.C. is like being in New York. It's kind of a scary place to be for a lot of people.
NEVILLE: Bob, you know we have people here in the audience. Some people are saying they don't want to hear the information. They do want to hear the information. Just getting -- want to get a sense from you, the people in D.C., are they wanting to hear more information? Do they want these alerts? Or do they say leave us alone and just let us go about our daily lives?
FRANKEN: It depends on the person in D.C. that you talk to. Some of them are saying, yes, sure, whatever. And others are saying, give me more information, give me more information.
There is a feeling on the part of some people that they want to believe that they have some control over things. And, of course, it's a bitter pill to swallow when you realize that the control may be very limited, that we're really at the mercy of events.
NEVILLE: OK. Bob Franken, thank you very much for that report from D.C.
And Rebecca, I want to ask you, with these alerts, do they make you feel more prepared or just scared?
HAGELIN: Well they do put me on notice that it is time to prepare, if I haven't done so already as a mother. And I think Americans need to take more responsibility into their own hands to try to prepare.
We live in a country with wonderful freedom, which makes us incredibly vulnerable to terrorist attack. And what we don't want is to become a police state, where we have armed guards on all of our doorsteps monitoring everything that we do. In order to protect our civil liberties, but at the same time protect our families, we have to take some of the responsibilities ourselves. Laura Bush made an important point yesterday...
NEVILLE: I'm sorry. Excuse me, Rebecca...
HAGELIN: and that was the news alerts that aren't really news alerts, though, that confuse the issue.
NEVILLE: So you're saying the media?
HAGELIN: Yes. The media I think bears some responsibility for people feeling overconcerned. Because when you put up a news alert and the story is really about Michael Jackson being unhappy with a recent documentary, people become numb to this. It's almost like the little boy calling wolf.
If news alerts were really reserved for the true alerts and the states of emergency that government is putting on, I think people would pay more attention to them and take responsibility.
NEVILLE: Interesting. Rebecca, do you think that also if the government didn't continue giving these new code orange or code red or whatever, yellow, blue, whatever the color is of the day, do you think that people are becoming a little more desensitized to that sort of stuff as well?
HAGELIN: Well I think they are desensitized, because, again, if the whole culture of news alerts, and the bottom of your screen there are things that are shown as if, you know, these are emergencies all the time, but it is a very important role of the government in this heightened state to keep us informed.
LEBOUTILLIER: Arthel?
NEVILLE: Yes. Go ahead.
LEBOUTILLIER: Arthel, I think we're all a little put off by these constant alerts and then removal of the alerts. And then this latest one. And then we discover today that the main source of this alert that there may be an attack coming is a detainee who now has failed a lie detector test.
NEVILLE: Right.
LEBOUTILLIER: Now why aren't they giving him a lie detector test before they put the country on alert and have everybody out buying duct tape and plastic paper? It's crazy.
NEVILLE: Paul (ph) hang on for me one second. I think Eric is talking. But I'm going to get to you. Paul (ph) from New York, I want to hear your thoughts.
PAUL: Well I think at this point we need to admit to ourselves that the terrorists are planning another attack. But to deal with that, we need to be observant, pay attention, anything unusual, get word to the authorities and let's live our lives. I'm not going to go home and tape up my windows and doors and, you know, and pray that everything goes well. I'm going to live my life.
NEVILLE: OK. Thank you very much, Paul (ph) I know I didn't hear from Eric or Adam. I'm definitely going to get to your comments after the break.
And I also want to remind everybody that just in about five minutes from now Andrea Koppel will have an interview with Secretary of State Colin Powell. That's going to be live right here.
An exclusive interview held right here on CNN. You don't want to miss that.
And we will continue our discussion right here on TALKBACK LIVE in just a few moments. Don't go anywhere. The talk continues.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEVILLE: OK, everyone. We want to go outside the U.N. right now, where Secretary of State Colin Powell is speaking.
(INTERRUPTED BY CNN COVERAGE OF LIVE EVENT)
NEVILLE: That was Secretary of State Colin Powell addressing reporters. And Secretary of State Colin Powell is probably on his way to an exclusive sit-down interview with CNN's Andrea Koppel. That will take place in minutes right here live on CNN. So you don't want to miss that.
In the meantime, we're going to take a break. And we'll talk to you after the break.
(APPLAUSE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) NEVILLE: And welcome back, everybody. We are talking about how Americans are reacting to the terror alerts. And Eric, I want to start with you. Your reaction.
ALTERMAN: I tell you, I'm kind of shocked by how easy the country and particularly the media -- you know I just wrote a book about the media -- how easy the country is being on George Bush and company in this case. I mean, clearly, we're not very well protected from the next terrorist attack.
I really don't want to survive a terrorist attack if my daughter in school is not protected from it. And she clearly isn't. And yet, instead of putting the energy, the resources, the intellectual ability to try to figure out how to protect us from terrorists, we're starting another war which is going to inspire more terrorist attacks. I'm frankly shocked by it and I don't understand why there isn't a larger outcry against it.
NEVILLE: Adam.
EIDINGER: Well I think the raising things to the high level of alert has a lot to do with the political climate in this country. The president in one month -- I mean literally since the State of the Union -- has lost 10 percent of the public support for going it alone. I mean the polls are really bad for him right now.
And to come out with a high alert, it changes the subject. I think if he would have not come out with a high alert this week, the whole media would have been talking about how there are massive protests planned this weekend all over the world. Millions of people, probably bigger than we've ever seen in the history of the world...
HAGELIN: I doubt it...
EIDINGER: No, I think it's going to be massive in New York City.
HAGELIN: I seriously doubt that.
EIDINGER: And I want to just point out that it's no coincidence when the high alert news comes out a day or two later, we're hearing about Enron didn't pay taxes from 1996 to 1999. I think this whole war is a cover for a failed domestic policy.
(CROSSTALK)
HAGELIN: Oh my gosh. I can't believe that. You know what?
EIDINGER: And it's not about real security. If you really want to promote security, you have to work for peace. That will prevent terrorism.
HAGELIN: When you and your (UNINTELLIGIBLE) are protesting tomorrow, I mean, the button that says "antiwar," I don't know how more hypocritical a button can be. Remember that it's people who have been willing to put their lives on the line that you even have the freedom to have your protest tomorrow. EIDINGER: You know what? The Bush is trying to take away those freedoms right now with the Patriot Act, too (ph). There's so much hypocrisy in the right wing right now, it's amazing.
HAGELIN: We should hold Saddam Hussein accountable for what he has done. And this is going to be a real moratorium, a real vote on whether the U.N. really has any purpose in the world anymore. If they can pass resolution after resolution after resolution, over more than a 12-year period, have them all violated, and still allow them to be violated. So I think there are going to be a lot of issues that shake out here.
LEBOUTILLIER: Rebecca, the problem that many conservatives have in defending the Bush administration is this: the Bush administration asked to go into the U.N. last September. They asked for this process.
HAGELIN: Of course.
LEBOUTILLIER: Hold on. Can I finish, please?
HAGELIN: Of course we do.
LEBOUTILLIER: They don't have a leg to stand on when they start complaining about how slow it is and how much stalling there is. They knew this before they went in. So they're getting what they asked for.
HAGELIN: You know what? The president said, I will try the U.N. on this as the president of the United States. We will pass a resolution and then we will stick by what that resolution says. Resolution 1441 has been violated.
NEVILLE: OK, Rebecca. Excuse me. I'm going to have to toss to Washington, where Judy Woodruff is standing by -- Judy.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Imminent?>
|
