Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Will Roman Polanski Go Free?; Republicans Under Fire in South Carolina
Aired October 21, 2009 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
RICK SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: Another South Carolina controversy involving Republican officials and a comment about Jews that some say is revealing.
Will Roman Polanski, who once raped a 13-year-old, be let out of jail? We have got an update.
Nancy Pelosi putting the screws to other Democrats on health care reform. What is she saying?
All this right now on your national conversation for Wednesday, October 21, 2009.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SANCHEZ: All right. Hello, again, everybody.
We have been following up on this announcement that we got today from some of the feds that there's something going on, something going on right now with some folks who may be trying to attack people here in the United States.
But here's where -- and we want to be very, very straight with you on this. Let me take you through this one more time. We have got a couple of experts who are going to be drilling down on this for us.
Again, a Massachusetts man is charged with a count of conspiring to provide material support to terrorists abroad. Now, when you think of that, you say, OK, he's charged with doing something not in this country, perhaps in another country.
Stay with me here. Here's what else this affidavit says. This is important. It says that he had planned or wanted to kill U.S. soldiers in Iraq and hoped to kill one or two members of the executive branch of the U.S. government.
Have we got a picture of what he looks like? Let's put that up, if we possibly can. This is who police have been talking about in this case. His name is Tariq Mehanna, 27 years old, of Sudbury, Massachusetts, traveled overseas, sought training from the Taliban, according to officials.
And here's what I think alarms a lot of Americans. It certainly alarms me, as somebody who worries about his wife and kids going to the mall. The suspect and his co-conspirators also had discussed an attack on at least one U.S. mall, at least one U.S. mall.
That's important. In fact, let's pick this up now with sound from the U.S. attorney when he revealed this information.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MICHAEL L. LOUCKS, ACTING U.S. ATTORNEY: This mall assault planning is alleged, including discussions on the logistics of a mall attack, including coordination of an assault from different entrances, the weapons need for such an assault, and the possibility of attacking emergency responders.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Let's bring in two of the best.
Let's go with Tom Foreman. He's assistant -- former FBI assistant director. He's also a CNN contributor. Always have to have him, and our law enforcement analyst Mike Brooks.
Gentlemen, thanks for being with us.
Tom, let me begin with you.
As our viewers sit around and watch this story develop throughout the day, I think many of them are left with a lot of questions. Let's cut right to the chase in some of these allegations about wanting to kill U.S. soldiers in Iraq and hope to kill one or two members of the executive branch of the U.S. government.
I know you've got some pretty good contacts over there. Can you flesh this out at all for us?
TOM FUENTES, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Yes, Rick.
I spoke to the special agent in charge in the Boston division, Warren Bamford, and he basically said that anybody motivated enough to go to the Middle East in order to learn how to kill and then come back here and tell several people that that's what he wanted to do just can't be ignored.
Now, they realize that he did not obtain the assault rifles that he wanted to here. He did not get the training and detail that he wanted to in the Middle East. But the fact that he intended to is just something that the FBI is not in a position to just ignore and believe him to be safe.
SANCHEZ: Mike, let me bring you into this conversation.
We have had these talks before.
MIKE BROOKS, CNN SECURITY ANALYST: Yes.
SANCHEZ: It is a constant concern for law enforcement officials that someone like this will actually be able to pull off going into a mall with either some kind of explosives or lots of weapons... BROOKS: Sure.
SANCHEZ: ... and do a lot of damage. I'm reading this and it sounds like this is exactly what this guy and his -- quote -- "co- conspirators" wanted to do. What do we make of this?
BROOKS: Now, again, want to make it clear to the viewers, he was not charged with conspiracy to do this, to do an attack at a shopping mall.
SANCHEZ: We get that.
(CROSSTALK)
BROOKS: Exactly. But we just want to make sure.
But they just looked at -- and Tom will agree with me. Many reports you see, and a lot of cases that come in front of us, you will see mentions of shopping malls. Why? Because they're look at as soft targets.
Now, this was a conspiracy that played out somewhere around 2001 to May of 2008. He was arrested at Logan International Airport in November of 2008. So, he was doing this all along that time, couldn't get the weapons, but they had enough to go ahead and charge him with at least one count of conspiracy. And I thought it was interesting. And it said...
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: Wouldn't it be easy...
(CROSSTALK)
BROOKS: ... and extraterritorial homicide of a U.S. national, killing someone overseas.
SANCHEZ: Would it not be easy in this country because of our weapons and the availability of them as we have often reported for someone, if they really wanted to, to be able to get automatic weapons, or do we just assume that? I know there's a difference between semiautomatic and automatic, right?
(CROSSTALK)
BROOKS: Right.
Yes. You know what? Yes, it could be easy, if you had the right connections. But apparently he didn't have the right connections in this particular case.
But whenever shopping centers are mentioned, that's a soft target.
SANCHEZ: I get scared. I get scared. BROOKS: And you know what? And the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI always put out I call them vigilance alerts sometimes to local law enforcement around holidays and other incidents when they occur, but saying be on the lookout for possible people possibly casing and looking to do something at a shopping mall.
SANCHEZ: Let me bring Tom back into this conversation.
Tom, you know what I come away with viewing this that makes me feel good about what law enforcement officials in this country are doing? This is the second case, the Zazi case just a couple of weeks ago as well, where someone tried to do something, somebody tipped someone off and law enforcement was able to case them and move in.
So, it makes me think -- and here's the question to you -- have we gotten good enough where usually if someone's out there looking for explosives or looking for a high volume of weapons, somebody in authority will usually find out and they will be able to move on them?
FUENTES: Well, hopefully, that will be the case, and it was in this situation. It was thoroughly investigated because the big concern is, is he part of a larger cell? Does he have other comrades in arms that may wish to go ahead with an attack here?
And as Mike mentioned here, when there's talk about a soft target like a shopping mall, where there's thousands of citizens unarmed going about their business, that's a very dangerous situation. And not to mention, sooner or later, anybody in this country determined enough to obtain an automatic weapon is going to be able to do so. This is not the hardest country to come by assault rifles by any means.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: But here's my question. Let me make it as concrete as I possibly can. As a law guy, both of you guys who are here with us today, if I wanted to obtain an automatic weapon, would I normally give myself away when I start seeking it, given the way our law enforcement is set up right now? Do we have enough ears out there?
BROOKS: I think, and Tom will agree with me, one of the things the FBI prides itself on, when I was there with the JTTF, assets. There's a lot of people out there who are informants for the FBI. And you never know who you're talking to. And that's how a lot of these cases are made.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: Do you agree with that, Tom?
FUENTES: I do agree with it. And that's certainly what we're hoping for in every case, that when the attempt is made to obtain the weaponry, someone notifies the FBI or the joint terrorism task forces to be alert to it.
SANCHEZ: That makes me feel good. One final question. (CROSSTALK)
BROOKS: And I call this a prevention, definitely, Rick.
SANCHEZ: It is. It is.
BROOKS: Absolutely.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: And I think we can come away with this a little concerned that it's still happening, but they did the right thing.
BROOKS: Yes.
SANCHEZ: What about the part of this story where they say that he had gone overseas? And it's not the first time and we keep hearing about these people who are in the United States, but leave the United States or have come from one of these countries. They talk about going to all these different countries.
Should we be concerned? And is there anything else we can do to automatically either restrict travel or know that when they go there, it's a sign that they're coming back with bad news?
BROOKS: Well, you know, Rick, that's one of the things. They talk a lot about the Patriot Act and how it violates people's rights.
But people like him who travel from country to country, you know what? From the United States, you're free to do that. But when you go -- when you do, do that and you fit certain profiles, you may have a flag.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: But does that flag go off? Tom, when as far as you know someone like this goes to Afghanistan or Iraq or Syria, comes back to the United States, do the feds automatically say, uh-oh, let's check on this guy, and do they do so? And how do they do it?
FUENTES: Well, they automatically begin looking at him. And in this case, of course, you have cooperative witnesses who record conversations with him where he discusses his intention to commit jihad overseas and in the U.S., and to commit these attacks.
So, you get to a point -- and this is the problem that the authorities are faced with -- that you can't just ignore it. The FBI doesn't have the resources to follow a guy like this around for the next 75 years to see if he actually gets his hand on a weapon and does the attack.
SANCHEZ: Right.
(CROSSTALK)
FUENTES: And even 75 years from now, I mean, he's only 27 years old, he can be in his 80s, and look at the attack of the Holocaust Museum, a guy in his 80s.
So, there's really -- there's no time that you can really let your guard down and feel safe. And I would like to contradict you a little bit, Rick, where you talk about feeling safe. On the other hand, he chose not to initiate an attack with handguns.
And we saw what one person with two handguns was able to do at Virginia Tech three years ago, kill more than 30 people. So, a person with a handgun going to a shopping mall...
SANCHEZ: I hadn't thought about that.
FUENTES: ... who could say how long it would be before the police caught up with him and stopped him once he began firing.
So, really, this is a very dangerous situation. The fact that he was not able to pull it off makes us feel very good and very happy with the investigation in Boston, but on the other hand, we can't feel too confident that we're always going to be there.
SANCHEZ: Point well made. My thanks.
And we're lucky to have both of you guys here to take us through this. I appreciate it.
FUENTES: Thank you, Rick.
SANCHEZ: Tom Foreman, Mike Brooks.
I want you to look closely at these guys right here. This is video that we have gotten in. Police bust them for unloading a huge order of fertilizer. This is what you and I were just talking about a moment ago, Mike, not just any yard chemicals, though, the kind of stuff that can do this.
That's right.
Also, this story -- he raped a 13-year-old. He's one of the most famous directors in the world. Will he be let out of jail? There's an update on Roman Polanski.
Stay with us. We will be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: We call it the national conversation and many of you have been watching this story unfold with us throughout the course of the last couple of hours and now you're getting involved in the conversation as well.
Let's go to the Twitter board, if we possibly can, and you will see right there, the very first person writing to us says: "Look, any form of terrorism is frightening, also, the fact that a shopping mall could be a very easy target for these cowards."
Point well made, one that we have all been thinking about around here.
And then SharkGoddess is writing as well. She says: "Catching that 'B-word' should shut up right-wingers who say that Obama won't keep us safe, two plots in the U.S. thwarted now."
Well, that's what we were alluding to moments ago. I think you can make the point, though, without having to use that word. Just saying.
All right, let me tell you what else is going to be coming up in just a little bit. Let's roll this. Watch this right there. You see that? It's a bus that plows into a car and it runs through an intersection. And then you see what continues after that. We're going to be all over that in just a little bit.
Also, two South Carolina Republican chairmen; controversial remarks about Jews raising a lot of eyebrows. And it's got some asking, what's the deal with politicians in South Carolina? We will tell you what they say. We will see what you think. We will be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Welcome back. I'm Rick Sanchez here in the world headquarters of CNN.
Because this is part of a national conversation, I have asked you to engage in some of the things we have show you so far. And there's something else. I want to show you this now. And I have asked Mike Brooks to say out here. And he's going to able to get this take, his take on this as well, because I think this is important.
I want you to watch this. All right? I want to give you now a rare glimpse at a very serious homegrown terror plot. But it's not here. This one's in Canada, a place where we don't often think about terrorism. Maybe we should. This is a gang of terror suspects, but they're caught in a sting. And you're going to see this as it plays out. Watch this video. We will watch it together.
This is from CTV's Scott Laurie.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SCOTT LAURIE, CTV REPORTER (voice-over): Bag by bag by bag on an hour-long surveillance tape, convicted members of the so-called Toronto 18 unload what they thought was fertilizer, enough to make three bombs.
STEVE SKURKA, LEGAL ANALYST: It's a wakeup call for Canadians that terrorism is alive and well on our soil.
LAURIE: But it was a police sting, the fertilizer fake.
JOHN THOMPSON, TERRORISM EXPERT: It's reassuring how well everything worked. All the relationships between the agencies worked. Everyone did what they were supposed to do. LAURIE: Now that the main bombmaker has pleaded guilty, the courts allowed these videos to be shown since this evidence is now in the public domain. It includes audio of the bombmaker Zakaria Amara.
ZAKARIA AMARA, CONVICTED IN CANADA: I have been able to get through and meet the order, and (INAUDIBLE) will be getting two tons.
LAURIE: Their plan was huge, an all-out attack on downtown Toronto.
THOMPSON: We didn't have three large explosions in downtown Toronto. Hundreds of people didn't die. So, as a result, very few Canadians, I mean, take the problem seriously.
LAURIE: To show how serious it was, the RCMP detonated a ton of fertilizer in a Saskatchewan field. You can see the shockwave and a shipping container gets flipped.
MICHEL JUNEAU-KATSUYA, FORMER SENIOR INTELLIGENCE OFFICER: For the people who sort of might still be in denial that Canada is on the radar screen of terrorist cells, this is sort of a confirmation.
LAURIE: Of the 18, seven had their charges dropped, five have been convicted.
(on camera): And three years later, the courts are still deciding the fates of the accused. The other six go on trial in January, about the same time that the bombmaker faces sentencing.
(voice-over): Prosecutors will likely demand a long sentence, since an explosion like this is what he and his co-conspirators planned.
Scott Laurie, CTV News, Toronto.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SANCHEZ: And once again, Mike Brooks is joining us. We're talking about just the level of explosives, had that been the real thing. How much was used in Oklahoma City, for example?
(CROSSTALK)
BROOKS: In Oklahoma City, there were 4,500 tons of ammonium nitrate, 2.5. tons. And there was another 500 pounds of fuel oil and tanks that were used inside that truck by Timothy McVeigh.
SANCHEZ: And how much were these guys trying to use?
BROOKS: Well, they said -- he said we heard on a recording about two tons, 4,000 pounds. But you saw RCMP set that off, that shot there by them. That was 1,000 pounds, one ton, 2,000 pounds.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: What would that do to a 10-story building? BROOKS: Oh, you kidding me? Look what 4,500 pounds did to the Murrah Building. And the FBI explosives unit here in the United States, they're out there all the time looking and doing these kind of tests, just to see what kind of -- cases like this, because they're working on cases all the time, too, after we had Oklahoma City, after we had Khobar Towers bombing in 1996 in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia.
They set off something similar to that. Also, after the bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Nairobi, 1998, they went back to replicate that also.
SANCHEZ: Some people argue that sometimes police use entrapment methods. And I guess if they're talking about some guy with maybe a marijuana cigarette or something like that, you could make a really good argument.,
But when the charges or the suspected charges are this important, is there such a thing as entrapment?
BROOKS: Absolutely not.
You look at the video. Just like Tom Fuentes and I were talking about, about the other case, they wanted to carry this out.
SANCHEZ: It's worth it.
BROOKS: And this was an excellent prevention, because, Rick, we know here in the United States, when I was on the JTTF, we know that there are terrorist cells in Canada. Look at the number of terrorist acts that have been prevented coming from Canada.
SANCHEZ: Right.
BROOKS: Look at the millennium, the guy coming across the border from Canada who was going to bomb LAX.
(CROSSTALK)
BROOKS: ... there.
SANCHEZ: But it's an important point to make that sometimes the charge of entrapment, not that we're making it in this case, we're just raising it because you hear people say it, has a lot to do with the severity of the accusations.
And in this case, these are severe, damn severe, accusations.
(CROSSTALK)
BROOKS: Oh, this was a great investigative case by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.
And I want to say, we have got a great relationship here in the United States. The FBI and RCMP work together on a regular basis. They're our neighbor to the north and they're the ones who are helping protect our border. SANCHEZ: Good for them. Good for them.
Thanks, Mike. Appreciate it...
BROOKS: Thank you, Rick.
SANCHEZ: ... both stories.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: How much do we know about ourselves? For example, how much do Americans know about Latinos? What do they think of them? How many do you think are -- quote -- "legal or illegal," for example? Here's why I'm saying this.
There's a brand-new poll out that many Americans will find revealing, because it compares reality with perception. And, yes, in this case as well, they're very different. We will be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Welcome back.
Here's what I promised you just a little while ago. I want to show you something. If you saw a guy who looked Hispanic, serious question, as you were just driving by in your car, would you tend to assume that he may be in the United States illegal?
In fact, let's show you one. Let me give you a visual reference here, OK? Take a look at that guy right there. You think he may be undocumented? He's in an area where all the day laborers hang out. He's got his little knapsack, certainly looks Hispanic. He's got some jeans on, a baseball cap.
What do you think? Who is that guy? All right, in case you haven't figured it out, that is me. That's right. I was doing a special report about a year-and-a-half ago on the day in the life of a day laborer while sitting in one of those corners in New Jersey.
Did I fool you? The point I'm trying to make and the reason I wanted to show you that is this. It's because of a poll we have just commissioned about what all of us as Americans think of Hispanics. CNN asked more than 1,000 people last weekend some very direct questions.
In fact, I will put them up for you. Here you go. Let's do this together. You ready? The first one, when you see a Latino in your neighborhood, would you be more likely to assume that he or she was born in this country or here legally or here illegally?
Now, remember, there is no right, there's no wrong answer on this, but the results, they may surprise you.
Next question, how much contact do you have with these ethnic groups? How often do you have a black person over to your house? How often do you mingle and associate with Latinos or Asian Americans? How much of that happens in this country? This is important as well. It tells us a lot about us.
And wait until you see how these responses compared to the very same question when it was asked 10 years ago. It's fascinating.
Next, question, should the United States census next year ask everyone whether they are in the United States legally? The difference, again, between perception and reality -- when we come back.
Oh, by the way, also coming up, Roman Polanski, a man who raped a 13-year-old girl, is he going to be let out of jail?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: As you know, we as a network are drilling down on something today that we call "Latino in America," and many of you are responding with your own take on this. And it's interesting to share this. Hey, it's a national conversation, so let's engage in conversation.
Prompter, stay where you are. I'm not reading yet.
All right. Let's go to the Twitter board if we possibly can.
"I am Latino born and raised in Arizona. I don't think anything good or bad when I see a Latino."
Next one: "I love in Dallas." This is somebody watching us right now. "I have piles and piles..." -- interesting word choice -- "... of Hispanic friends. Most are legal and some are illegal. That's just the way it is."
"LOL. You fooled me, Rick."
And then there's this one: "There's only one race, as I have said before. The human race."
Let's look at just one more before we go.
"I look at Latinos like I look at other ethic groups in the United States. I don't lump Latinos into one lump sum."
All right. Those are some of the comments that we're getting from people who claim to be pretty open minded as they're watching us today.
Now let's go through this test that I told you about just a little while ago, given the CNN poll we commissioned. I asked you a question. Now I want you to compare what your answer was to what the majority of Americans' answers were.
This is a CNN/Opinion Research Poll. Ready?
First question: "When you see a lat Latino in your neighborhood, would you be more likely to assume that he or she was born in this country, is here legally or is here illegally?" Now, this is interesting. Even though six out of 10 Latinos are born in the United States, our poll found that only 38 percent of you assume when you see a Latino that he was born here. Thirty percent of you assume he was legal. Nineteen percent of you assumed right away he's illegal.
Next question: "How much contact do you have with these ethnic groups?"
Responses. How many Americans had contact with blacks? This is interesting. Back in 1990, it was 73 percent. Now, 69 percent.
How many say they have had contact with blacks, now only 16 -- fewer Americans today say they associate with blacks than they did 20 years ago. That seems odd.
As for Latinos, it's more -- 66 percent today, versus less than 50 percent. That was back in 1990.
How about Asians? Forty-seven percent say that they associate with Asians today. Thirty-eight percent said they associated with Asians back in 1990. So that one's gone up as well.
Final question: "Should the U.S., next year, when they do the census, ask everyone whether they're legally in the United States when they go around to take the census?"
What did our pollsters find? A huge majority of you say, yes, ask them. Only 12 percent of Americans say that a person's legal resident status is none of the government's business.
Now, by the way, we should add as a caveat, I have spoken to Census Bureau officials, and here's what they say. They say that they fear that if they go out and start asking a question like that, the respondents will see it as threatening and then they won't take the test. And if they don't take the test, then we really won't know how many people are in the United States, period.
So, that's their reasoning. Their reasoning, not ours.
So, who are Latinos in America? And is there much that all of us as Americans, when you think about it, even those of us like myself with Latino names, need to know about other Hispanic-Americans, for example?
I want you to watch this piece. This piece was put together by my colleague Soledad O'Brien for "Latino in America."
This is interesting. It's' a suburb of Los Angeles that is called Latino Mayberry.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It's opening day in the Los Angeles suburb of Pico Rivera and the scene is pure Americana -- hot dogs, popcorn, cotton candy. And, of course... UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (singing): ... at the twilight's last gleaming.
O'BRIEN: But take a closer look at the jerseys, the faces. These kids are Fuentes, Vasquez, Aramantas (ph), Garcia, Lopez and Martinez. That's because Pico Rivera is 92 percent Latino and as American as apple pie.
BOB SPENCER, PICO PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER: Sorry, on the what?
O'BRIEN: That's Bob Spencer, the lone Australian in town, and Pico's public information officer.
SPENCER: For the PIO of this town, not to speak Spanish is probably not a good thing. But I speak Australian, so they tend to listen to me because of that.
O'BRIEN: As the demographics of our nation change, we wonder whether a place like this could be a window into the future. So I ask Bob for a tour of the nine square miles known as Pico Rivera.
(on camera): It looks like a movie set.
SPENCER: A little bit. It does.
O'BRIEN: Doesn't it?
SPENCER: You can see American flags. There's an American flag.
O'BRIEN: A lot of them down there.
SPENCER: On a lot of houses. There's one there, there's one here.
O'BRIEN (voice-over): In fact, Pico Rivera is solidly middle class.
LUPE ONTIVEROS, ACTRESS: Welcome to the dollhouse.
O'BRIEN: It even has it's own Hollywood star, Lupe Ontiveros. You've seen her as the stereotypical Latino maid movies like "As Good as it Gets"...
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "AS GOOD AS IT GETS")
ONTIVEROS: You're a wonderful man.
(END AUDIO CLIP, "AS GOOD AS IT GETS")
O'BRIEN: And "The Goonies."
(on camera): How come you don't live in Beverly Hills?
ONTIVEROS: What for?
O'BRIEN: Because you're a movie star. That's what for.
ONTIVEROS: No, no, no. That's not me. I'm just a real person, and Pico Rivera is mi gente.
O'BRIEN: Your people.
ONTIVEROS: And I don't have any pretensions of any sort. Plus, they consider me their most famous resident.
O'BRIEN: So you want leave.
ONTIVEROS: No. They'll probably ask me to clean their house.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SANCHEZ: It's funny. You know, in my hometown, it's Hialeah, in south Florida. In Chicago, there's parts of it. There's Probably The Heights, Washington Heights in New York City.
There's neighborhoods like this all over America, and you don't get to know them until you go in there and ask some questions.
Soledad O'Brien has been doing that. I am so proud to have my colleague on with me today to talk about this.
You know, I guess the point that, you know, you and me as Latinos, Hispanics, whatever we want to call ourselves today, lacka (ph), lacka (ph), lacka (ph) talkers, as I always say, it's not like we're trying to say, look, we're here, because I think everybody knows that already. I think the important thin that we're trying to do, that you're trying to do, and have done so well so far, is to say, this is who we are, just understand us.
Right? That's it.
O'BRIEN: I think that there has been a real dearth of nuanced stories and a dearth of a range of stories about Latino. And when I would travel across the country -- and I mean literally across the country, north to south, east to west -- people would say, why are we invisible? Why are we invisible? We don't really show up anywhere on TV.
And I don't know how to answer that question, but I think there's so many interesting stories in all those communities you mentioned. And every community has its amazing parts and its struggles. And to be able to try to capture some of that has been both a challenge, but also a pretty incredible thing to do opportunity-wise, for me, at least.
SANCHEZ: We can't talk about this without you and I doing justice to the level of frustration out there for many Hispanics. You have heard it in conversations, I hear it in my own community, almost a sense that maybe unappreciated, maybe taken for granted.
Did you sense that that resentment has gotten worse or better? What are people telling you out there? O'BRIEN: No, I think there's the sense -- I mean, what is the picture of Latino in America? You know? Because Latinos are black and Latinos are blonde and Latinos speak Spanish and Latinos speak no Spanish at all. Latinos live in Texas in large numbers, and also in Charlotte, North Carolina, in decent-sized numbers.
SANCHEZ: Yes.
O'BRIEN: So, there is no face of a Latino I can hold up and say, here it is right here. It's a lot of things.
And so, we attempt to sort of scratch the surface, really, and say here's a range. You know, night one, tonight, we're going to show the Garcias. And we show just a number of Garcias who do a range of things.
Some Garcias are struggling, are having challenges at school, trying to figure out how to graduate. They make up a school system in California where they've had huge budget cuts.
Some Garcias are -- you know, one is a CEO of six companies who is trying to be a TV chef. The range is there.
And I guess my point is, as "Garcia" is the eighth most popular name in America today, that's a metaphor for we're all of those things. We're all of those things.
SANCHEZ: You know, and that's important, and that's why it's good. I saw it in the preview. I'm looking forward to it. And I think a lot of folks are going to enjoy this tonight.
Soledad, muchas gracias.
O'BRIEN: Oh, of course. De nada.
SANCHEZ: All right.
"Latino in America" is going to air tonight and tomorrow night, right here at 9:00 Eastern.
By the way, if you want to watch it in Spanish, our sister network, saying en Espanol, (SPEAKING SPANISH).
What did I just say? I said that you could watch the thing on CNN en Espanol if you go over, and you'll have the audio and the video on it as well.
One last programming note. This is interesting.
Thursday and Friday morning at 9:00 Eastern, I'm going to be leading a national conversation about Latino in America, just an open discussion, nothing preachy. All right? Go to CNN Radio or CNNn.com, and you click on the radio button and I will be taking your calls.
All right. A popular movie director convicted of raping a 13- year-old is told, no way. No way what? We'll tell you exactly what we're talking about when we come back.
And I'm also being told there's a story that's moving right now. I'm going to try and get the details on it and share it with you when I come back.
Stay right there.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: All right. We've got a developing story that we're following for you right now. Let me take you through what's going on right now.
This is in Edmonton, Alberta. I'm going to read you the details.
We haven't been able to get any pictures out of there now, but it looks like a pretty dire situation, as far as we can tell.
An armed man is believed to be holding hostages in a workers compensation board building. This is in downtown Edmonton.
A board spokesperson confirmed the hostage-taker is a disgruntled workers compensation claimant. An employee was evacuated from the third floor of the building.
He's taken nine hostages. Nine hostages are being held right now on the eighth floor.
We -- let me check and see if he's armed. I think that's the question we need to ask.
Yes, here we go. We have received a call that a man with a rifle has walked into the workers -- a man with a rifle has walked into the compensation building and has taken nine people hostage.
All right. That's serious.
Hey, Chad? Chad Myers, are you out there?
I was wondering if Chad was able to put something up for us to show us exactly what was going on.
CHAD MYERS, CNN METEOROLOGIST: Yes, Rick.
SANCHEZ: All right. I was just wondering, could you give us a geographic sense of what this is? You know, as Americans, when we talk about Canada, we see a big giant space, but we don't know a lot about it. Where is this?
MYERS: Well, it is in Alberta, so we're talking about British Columbia, Alberta, and then Saskatchewan -- so this is way out west, almost like in the mountain areas. If you go a few miles west of here, you would be in the Canadian Rocky Mountains.
So, let me zoom this building all the way back out for you here.
SANCHEZ: All right.
MYERS: There's the U.S. There's Florida and Texas.
Now, as we come down and zoom closer in, you notice that we're over the border. We're well north of the border into Edmonton. Beautiful town, I have been there many times, also into Calgary as well.
SANCHEZ: Big city. Big city, right?
MYERS: Big city. Big city. They have even had tornadoes there. The story that I covered up there was a tornado there. And they go, how can there be tornadoes in Canada? Well, it does happen.
Well, this is where this workers compensation board building. It's, I don't know, six or seven, eight stories here, and they said somewhere on the third or the fourth level is where this hostage situation is taking place.
SANCHEZ: Nine hostages, and they say the guy's got a rifle. Obviously, we're going to stay on top of it.
Chad, you're like they say in the Coast Guard, semper paratus, always prepared.
Thanks, man. We'll get back to you. All right?
SANCHEZ: Nine hostages and they say the guy's got a rifle. Obviously, we're going to stay on top of it. Chad, like they say in the Coast Guard, "semper paratus," always prepared. Thanks, man, we'll get back to you, all right?
CHAD MYERS, CNN METEOROLOGIST: Thanks, dude. I'll be here.
SANCHEZ: We're going to have more news in just a moment.
We promised that we'd be telling you what's going on with Roman Polanski, the guy who raped a 13-year-old little girl. And he thinks he can get out of jail. We'll tell you whether he's going to be able to get out of jail or not. Stay right there.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: All right. Welcome back. I'm Rick Sanchez here in the world headquarters of CNN.
You might even be able to hear in the background the announcement that's being made in the CNN newsroom now that we're just now getting our first live pictures out of Edmonton, Alberta. And this is a dramatic scene, folks. You'll see it in the expressions in the faces of some of the people who are running out of this building.
Let's go to that video.
Big Dan, if you've got that video, let's go ahead and start rolling it now. We're going to cue this up again.
Let me tell you what's going on. A guy with a rifle has walked into a workman's compensation building and he's apparently taken nine people hostage. He's evacuated himself on the third floor. That's the shot.
It's router 33, by the way, guys in there where this was coming in, I think. I'm looking at it now on my monitor.
I'm seeing -- OK, here we go. Here we go. Here are some of the pictures now. These are the people apparently that are being taken out of this building. Some of them -- I don't know if you want to call that a jog, a brisk pace.
This is the workman's compensation building in Edmonton, Alberta. Hostage taker is, according to police -- there we see some of the police with their arms out, with their guns out, I should say -- confirmed that a hostage taker is a disgruntled workers compensation claimant.
We don't know exactly who these people are, if they are people who have just been evacuated from the building. We're now trying to figure out if perhaps those are their co-workers who are still inside the building, nine of them being held hostage by this man who apparently had some kind of claim.
There some more pictures we're turning around now. There you see the police officers going in and some of the police officers in the area, obviously trying to stake this out. While you see some of the people who were in the building, either running out and then some of them stopping to watch what's going on now.
This is a drama that's unfolding. For those of you who joined us late, what we understand is that the man has nine hostages, CBC news reporter Trish Estabrooks is reporting that at least nine were being held on the eighth floor of the building, despite the fact that the hostage taker had originally gone in and evacuated from the third floor. The last report we received is that there was a call that the man with a rifle had walked into the building. And they don't know at this point exactly where he is.
So -- all right, while we watch this, we understand that there's another breaking story right now that we want to get you caught up on. Ali Velshi is standing by to bring us up-to-date on this.
Ali, what do you got?
ALI VELSHI, CNN CHIEF BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: We're still working our sources to get confirmation on this but it's being widely reported by "The Associated Press" and "The New York Times" that the administration is going to put some bite behind its bark and step in to claw back some of the bonuses at the companies that have received the most government money.
Let me tell you what we've got right now. The top 25 highest paid employees or executives at the seven companies that have received the most government money will have their total compensation package -- that's their salary, their bonuses and perks -- taken down by about 90 percent, an average of 90 percent.
Rick, here's the companies we're talking about, they're going to be obvious to everybody: Bank of America, Citigroup, AIG, General Motors, Chrysler, and the financing arms of General Motors and the Chrysler, GMAC and Chrysler Financial. Those are the companies that "The New York Times" is reporting will be affected by this decision being made by the pay czar. It follows from the stuff that the president was talking about yesterday and the outrage about those bonuses, Rick.
SANCHEZ: But, look, this is -- and the outrage over the bonuses I think is legitimate. Most Americans would appreciate the fact that because it's our money that's being used to stand up these companies...
VELSHI: Yes.
SANCHEZ: ... then why should these guys be getting bonuses, and I know your argument. Your argument is, a deal is a deal. They had a contract that said they were going to be paid and they have to be honored, right? So, this is real like a catch-22.
VELSHI: Yes, you know, whether a contract needs to be honored and whether something is right are two different things. And there's been a real sense and I've shared this view, Rick, that while a deal might be a deal and it is not great when governments change deals on whims because of political mood, the bottom line is: there has been a mystery out there as to why Corporate America has not taken some of these decisions on themselves. And now, the government has said, "You know what, the outrage is too great. We have to do something about this."
So, we do not have confirmation, but we don't have outright denials, either. This will be probably announced fairly soon.
I'll tell you, Rick, the average -- cut as I said -- for the highest paid employees, 90 percent. Some of their cash payouts are going to now become stock. AIG, remember the division at AIG...
SANCHEZ: Yes.
(CROSSTALK)
VELSHI: ... that started this whole thing, the financial products division?
SANCHEZ: Yes.
VELSHI: Total compensation for the highest paid people there is going to be limited to $200,000. That's total, and for these companies that have received the government money, any perks that their executives get, anything at all, is going to now have to be approved by the government directly.
So, these are companies, Rick, that the government -- the taxpayer is heavily involved in. The government is saying, "You know what, we're keeping you people afloat. We're stepping in now to try to at least make it look like the right thing is being done."
SANCHEZ: That's a great report. Ali, thanks for being all over this, as usual. Appreciate it.
VELSHI: All right. And we're going to continue to do this. The minute we get absolute confirmation, I'll let you know.
SANCHEZ: Yes. If you get anything else, just come on back. I'm going to have Roland on. He's coming on just a little bit. He and I may talk about this.
But, Dan, if you can...
VELSHI: Sure. I'll be around. I'll be right here, we're working on it.
SANCHEZ: Perfect, hang tight.
VELSHI: Yes.
SANCHEZ: Dan, if you can, switch back to that -- I think it's router 33. I'm looking over my shoulder now, and I'm seeing that there's interviews coming in out of Alberta. And apparently people are starting to talk.
So, if we get a chance, and I know you guys -- I know you guys are working in control -- thanks, perfect, Dan. Good, good, good. We're going to try and turn this around for you, try and get a sense of what's going on in there in the street there in Alberta -- Edmonton, Alberta.
Let's get a quick break in. I'll be right back. Stay right there.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: All right. Welcome back.
We actually are following two breaking news stories. First of all, let me take you to Alberta -- Edmonton, Alberta, and these are the pictures that we've received just moments ago. This is a story about a man who walked into a workman's compensation building and worked his way up to the ninth -- eighth floor, pardon me, with nine people that he's now holding hostage.
As you can see, it's a tense scene with people who apparently have left the building, with police in what appears to be at this point a standoff with this -- with this gunman.
By the way, he had argued about a claim with workman's compensation. That seems to be his M.O. here, or his reason for being disgruntled, according to some of the original reports that we're getting out there.
Angie, do you think we can turn around any of the sound that we've been getting on this? We do? All right. Let's do that. Let's listen to what some of the people there are telling reporters on the scene.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, GLOBAL NEWS NETWORK)
DYNA THERIAN, WITNESS: Of course, it's awful. This is something you never want to have happen and we're concerned for the man that's in there as well because he's obviously having some difficulties and you never want to see that happen.
REPORTER: Are you in...
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: All right. As we watch this, and obviously we're going to continue to keep an eye on it, there's another huge financial story.
Listen to this: The Obama administration, according to "The New York Times" and "Associated Press" -- and we're working this for you as well -- the Obama administration is going to put kaputs on some of these big-timers, with some of these Wall Street firms, like AIG, and they are apparently going to ask them to take a cut in annual salaries of their 25 highest paid executives by an average -- here's the dramatic number -- by an average of 90 percent from last year.
Roland Martin is joining us now for our "R&R" segment which is getting delayed because of all the breaking news that we got going on.
But, Roland, man, 90 percent, that's a lot of dough.
ROLAND MARTIN, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: It's a lot of man, but also, it's about damn time. The White House, frankly, has been slow in actually making this happen. They have been making all these pronouncements, talking about "Oh, you guys should watch it," but there's been all bark and no bite.
In fact, I do a daily segment on "The Tom Joyner Morning Show" and I had Ali on just yesterday talking about this. And that is, they have the opportunity, frankly, earlier this year to really put some teeth behind it. But what Wall Street did was, they bought themselves some time.
So, what you, in fact, saw -- you saw all these people giving the money back, saying, "Oh, no, we don't want you guys to mess with pay." The bottom line is this here: These companies have been reporting strong earnings because they have been cutting staff, they have been cutting expenses. They have not been growing revenue.
So, when the Dow hit 10,000 last week on the strength of those reports, it was because of the cuts they were making. So, the people who have been laid, of course, they've been losing their jobs, they are the ones paying the price while these fat cats are sitting and getting our money, and you're sitting here saying you're getting these astronomical bonuses, awarding more money in bonuses in 2009 than they were awarding two and three years ago? Nonsense.
It's about time the White House finally stepped up and said, "We are going to go after you guys because this is ridiculous."
SANCHEZ: What do you say to the people who say, "You know what, a deal is a deal. We had a contract." If I sign a contract with you, Roland Martin, that says that this year you have to pay me a certain amount. Don't you have to pay me a certain amount no matter what?
MARTIN: OK, OK. Here's also the deal. You guys also were in business. You made some bad decisions. Then you should go out of business.
See, that's the deal. They don't want to go out of business. We had to bail them out. We had to bail out Citigroup. We had to bail out Bank of America. It changes.
SANCHEZ: So, what you're saying...
MARTIN: It changes.
SANCHEZ: What you're saying is, if we hadn't come in and saved their butts to begin with...
MARTIN: They are gone.
SANCHEZ: ... they wouldn't have had these bonuses...
MARTIN: No.
SANCHEZ: ... or any other bonuses. So, the argument is null and void.
MARTIN: Right. I mean, it's sort of like sitting here saying, "Oh, well, let's see, I'm getting a bonus because you gave me money so I can keep my job."
SANCHEZ: So, you're speaking of the president, by the way. I know you're quite critical of him there moments ago, saying that this is something he should have done a long time ago.
MARTIN: Why have a pay -- why have a pay czar, Rick, if you're not going to move? We -- this is now October. We have been hearing about bonuses since February over and over and over. So, why do you wait now? Let's just be real here, Rick.
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: Well, let me toss you -- let me just toss a possibility out there for you, all right? And it's not just this president, but, by the way, since we're going to name names, this president has taken about as much money from some of these Wall Street guys for his campaigns as just about any other politician out there.
MARTIN: Politicians take money. You're right.
SANCHEZ: OK, fine. But do you go and punish yourself that way by going after the Wall Street guys when these are the guys who basically fund your campaign?
MARTIN: I don't care if they fund your campaign. The bottom line is this here: They got taxpayer money.
You cannot sit here and say, "Oh, we're going to keep laying off the American worker but I'm still going to get a big fat bonus. That's how we do it."
SANCHEZ: I just notice the time is running on us.
Wolf Blitzer is picking up on this now in "THE SITUATION ROOM."
Wolf, over to you.
