Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

Airstrikes Continue in Libya; SEC Seeks to Monitor Wall Street Bonuses; Collective Bargaining Pros and Cons; Pension Crush in the Steel City; Mickey Rooney Reveals Elder Abuse; Countdown to NFL Lockout; Supreme Court Upholds Westboro Church Rights; 'The Secret Soldier'

Aired March 03, 2011 - 07:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

ALI VELSHI, CNN ANCHOR: Gadhafi strikes again. Warplanes pound a rebel-held oil port with bombs. Made a fierce battle for control of Libya on this AMERICAN MORNING.

Good morning. It's Thursday, March 3rd. Welcome to AMERICAN MORNING. I'm Ali Velshi.

KIRAN CHETRY, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Kiran Chetry. Glad you're with us this morning. We begin with new developments in the battle for Libya where now it's beginning to look like an all-out civil war in that country. For the second day in a row, dictator, Moammar Gadhafi has ordered his forces to drop bombs on his own cities. Ajdabiya, as well as Brega, home to Libya's largest oil refineries. One bomb just missed our CNN crew on the ground.

This happened yesterday. Scores of casualties reported on both sides. They also witnessed a fierce day-long gun battle. The opposition was able to hold and drive the government out.

Ben Wedeman was in the middle of all of it. He is on the phone from Benghazi, Libya with more on what's going on there.

What is the situation now, Ben?

BEN WEDEMAN, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (via telephone): Well, actually now, I mean, Ajdabiya where, at the moment, they've calmed. There doesn't seem to be any planes in the sides, but earlier in the morning, one of the Libyan jets dropped a bomb near the ammunition depot which is really supplying a lot of the anti-Gadhafi forces in this part of the country.

Also this morning, local time, jets were over Al Brega, the town where that major refinery is. In fact, they dropped one bomb near the main gate to the refinery. At the moment opposition forces are marching in Brega, preparing for, they say, to start moving ahead, to start taking more territories from the southeast forces. They say their goal is the town where there's another major refinery.

CHETRY: One other question, there's been a back and forth about whether the United States would have any involvement in enforcing a no-fly zone. Some senators like Senator Kerry are calling for it. Our Defense Secretary Gates says it would actually mean us attacking or bombing Libya. Do you know any more about whether or not there is support for outside western involvement?

WEDEMAN: Certainly there is support for a no-fly zone, no question about it. I spoke with one of the commanders of opposition forces in Brega, and he said they desperately need a no-fly zone because at the moment they're completely exposed to Libyan jets.

When it comes to anything more than that, however, his opinion is that there's very differing opinions. Some people are opposed to any sort of air strike that would lead to Libyan casualties. They're worried that might start to split the opposition.

So it might be -- it puts the United States in a difficult position because in order to impose a no-fly zone as Secretary Gates said, they will have to take out the air defenses. And it will be very difficult to take out air defenses without actually causing fatalities among the Libyan forces.

CHETRY: Of course, a tough situation. Our Ben Wedeman in the middle of it in Ajdabiya, Libya, this morning.

VELSHI: Meantime, aid agencies are warning that the situation on Libya's border with Tunisia is at a dangerous point. Tens of thousands of people are attempting to escape the crackdown heading to Tunisia.

Becky Anderson is live on the Libya-Tunisia border. What's the situation like there, Becky?

BECKY ANDERSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: It's relatively calm here, more organized. That is the result of the work of international organization of migrants. Indeed, the military, it's been a result of their word that things are a lot calmer.

Let's just get the facts out here. Who are these guys? Well, the majority of them are Egyptians. There's some 100 -- sorry, there's 1 million Egyptians working in Libya, or they certainly were. Only about 10 percent of those have actually tried to get across the borders, as is Bangladeshis and South Africans.

What they found is relative chaos here. Things now are a lot calmer. But the fear is, as things take off again in Libya, that it's going to get a lot harder to really organize people here.

As far as the eye can see, you've got migrant workers here. They're not refugees. Let's remember that. These are migrant workers. These are the guys trying to get from here, home, effectively. That's the big problem.

What the aid agencies tell me here, they need help from the international community to get these guys here to the city down the road and out of this country. These guys just want to go home at this point. And they are saying they've had very little help from, for example, the Egyptian government.

They're going to be said they're doing their best, these guys want more at this point. The big fear, as I say, things take off on the other side of the border, it's going to get a lot harder to control effectively what's going on here, Ali.

VELSHI: Very good. Thanks for the distinction. They're not refugees. They're migrant workers. Becky, thanks very much.

CHETRY: President Obama is going to be facing reporters today as calls for no-fly zone over Libya are getting louder. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said setting upping a no-fly zone basically means war.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROBERT GATES, DEFENSE SECRETARY: A no-fly zone begins with an attack on Libya to destroy the air defenses. That's the way you do a no-fly zone. And then you can fly planes around the country and not worry about our guys being shot down.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHETRY: Well, Ed Henry is live at the White House this morning. This is an interesting debate that's playing out right now. We heard from Ben in Libya saying that there would be support for that. But, of course, it's a tough call for the United States.

ED HENRY, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: No doubt about it. And it looks a little bit like a contradiction when the administration. Because as you know, secretary of state Hillary Clinton for days now have been suggesting that maybe a no-fly done would be a good option for the U.S. and allies.

But you heard Secretary Gates there being pretty blunt. He also said, look, there's loose talk about a no-fly zone, and he was trying to underscore that point. Look, you don't just institute a no-fly zone. First, you have to attack Libya's own asset, et cetera. Then you substitute the no-fly zone.

And that can be difficult. Number one, difficult in getting allied support. The U.S. can't do this unilaterally. They got to bring allies along for the U.S. Security Council. Members like Russia who have suggested they're not on board with this.

Jay Carney, the press secretary said, no, it's just that they both realize that while a no-fly zone, they know there are other military options may be on the table, that there are also real risks here. And both of them are fully aware of that.

Now, the president has not taken questions throughout this whole crisis, today, when he has his meeting with Mexican President Calderon, it will be the first for reporters to press him on contradictions like that, but also what other military options may be on the table.

CHETRY: Especially with events moving so fast and furious. Perhaps some of this tension is going to be ratcheted up because of what's going on there. Ed, thanks very much.

VELSHI: New developments out of Germany. Prosecutors say the gunmen suspected of killing two U.S. airmen at the Frankfurt airport was motivated by his faith. The two airmen were killed yesterday and two others wounded on a military shuttle bus. The authorities say the suspect a 21 year old Muslim airport worker.

Other news this morning, Wisconsin state senate Republicans turning on the pressure on Democrats who left town weeks ago to prevent a vote on the governor's proposed budget that includes clashing collective bargaining rights of some public service unions. They voted to impose a $100 per day fine on any senator missing absent without leave for two or more days. The Democrats say the threats will not sway them.

And it will be five more years before RFK's assassin gets another parole hearing. The parole board denied parole for Sirhan Sirhan for the crime he committed more than 40 years ago.

(WEATHER BREAK)

CHETRY: The government is proposing a crackdown on hefty Wall Street bonuses. Our Christine Romans is "Minding your Business" this morning. How are they proposing to do this?

CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: The Securities and Exchange Commission says they would like to have the big Wall Street banks while with them so they know whether they're giving bonuses for short-term losses or professionals. What would this do? It would target top executives and rank and file. The goal is to discourage excessive risk taking.

Many on Wall Street would say, wait a second, we're doing this anyway. And there are numerous other rules and regulations that they say are pulling down the bonuses and moving compensation more towards pay and less towards giving somebody a bonus for something very short-term.

For example, look at this year, bankers took home $20.8 billion. The average bonus was $128,000. That bonus is down six down percent, down about a third from where before the financial crisis was, and that is even during a very, very good year for Wall Street.

So Wall Street bankers, some of them already getting it, feeling the political heat. They're moving more of the compensation into things like long-term stock, regular pay. Look at that bonus. For the rest of us that sounds like an awful lot of money.

VELSHI: If it is long-term and tied to benefits that others get. If everybody is getting it, you should too. If turn around the company or do well for them, all get it.

CHETRY: You know this better than I do, but a question is what encourages risk?

ROMANS: Money encouraging risk.

CHETRY: The whole nature, as you said, you eat what you kill. You love to say that with how it is on Wall Street.

ROMANS: Right, you eat what you kill. The more business you do short term, the more money you're going to get paid.

I want to quickly check the market. The Dow managed to eke out an eight-point rise with oil at $102 a barrel. The NASDAQ and S&P up as well. Watch today, oil is one of those things closely tied with how stocks are doing. A lot of people are telling me, you guys, that they're surprised that stocks climb back.

VELSHI: Oil was up $102 a barrel it settled at last night. But stock futures are up this morning.

ROMANS: Stock futures are up. We'll keep watching.

VELSHI: Thank you.

Workers are revolting in Wisconsin and across the country. What is it that they're really fighting for? We're going to tell you what a union does and what collective bargaining means from both sides.

CHETRY: Also, a great city facing financial problems, the Pittsburgh predicament when "American Morning" returns.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: With all of the talk of protests, government shutdowns, and employee rights, one term we keep on hearing is "collective bargaining," negotiations between an employer and a group of employees to determine the conditions of employment. So I want to give you both sides of the argument.

First, let's start with the pros of collectively bargaining. Collective bargaining, wages are one of the big deals. It gives unions the power to negotiate wages. Unions often succeed in getting higher wages for their members than those workers would get if they weren't unionized.

Take a look at another pro. It's employee protection. Collective bargaining helps protect workers from abuses of power by employers. Things like arbitrarily firing them or making workers work long hours without overtime pay or under unsafe conditions. The idea behind collective bargaining is that the relationship between an employer and a worker is unequal. The worker really needs the job more than the employer really needs that specific worker. So by combining workers into a group, it sort of helps even the playing field.

So, really, unions are about power in numbers. Unions say collective bargaining is a safeguard to ensure that everyone's interest are considered. Workers speak together as a body to assert their rights using that strength in numbers. That's the good side.

There are criticisms, though, of collective bargaining. Let's talk about some of those. Those higher wages that I just talked about. Well, for one, what's good for workers isn't always good for companies. Higher pay per hour means less productivity or less work performed per dollar paid, according to some companies or employers. That means a company with a unionized workforce that uses collective bargaining to get their members a higher wage may not be able to sell their product as inexpensively as a company that doesn't have collective bargaining. Ultimately, that could mean that the higher- wage unionized company may lose business and have to lay off its higher paid workers. That's something we've seen in the airline and auto industries. It's something we're starting to see in government too.

Another con of collective bargaining is that it could reward bad behavior. It doesn't reward teachers and other workers who have tenure, for instance. A contractual right based on seniority that in many cases prevents a worker from being fired unless they've done something really bad. Critics argue that tenure and seniority rules are a disincentive to do your job really well because all you have to do to keep your job is not break any rules -- Kiran.

CHETRY: All right. Thanks so much, Ali. A good look at that.

Also, in Pittsburgh, they're priding themselves on a football team that uses discipline to achieve success. However, the Steel City is going to need a Hail Mary pass, I guess you could say, of epic proportions to be able to tackle their own budget.

Jim Acosta joins us live from Pittsburgh this morning. This is a city that is facing some trouble right now with its own employee pension plan.

Hi, Jim.

JIM ACOSTA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Kiran. That's right. You know, if a Democratic mayor and a union city like Pittsburgh is talking about 401(k) plans for public workers, you know they have pension problems and those problems are weighing on the city like a steel curtain.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ACOSTA (voice-over): The fiscal House is on fire in Pittsburgh. Unless the city can get a handle on its out of control pension costs for its firefighters and other public workers, local leaders have said say they are facing financial Armageddon.

(on camera): Is that overstating it?

MAYOR LUKE RAVENSTAHL (D), PITTSBURGH: Well, I think we're heading that way. The reality is the --

ACOSTA: You're heading towards Armageddon?

RAVENSTAHL: Well, we're heading towards very difficult scenarios.

ACOSTA (voice-over): Pittsburgh cannot meet its obligations to its pension system to the tune of $700 million. This in a city that already spends 50 cents of every dollar on pension, health care cost and debt. Mayor Luke Ravenstahl, a Democrat who grew up in a union family blames his city's labor agreements.

RAVENSTAHL: Things have to change. ACOSTA: The city's firefighters and police can retire at age 50, after 20 years of service, landing a pension equal to half of their take-home pay. Firefighters can even boost their pensions by working more overtime in the last three years on duty. A practice called pension spiking.

(on camera): Is that fair?

RAVENSTAHL: It's not. And we've brought it up to the fire union. They're aware of it. Of course, they push back.

ACOSTA: So you're saying pension spiking does not go on?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Not in this bureau. I'm not sure how it does in other cities. But in this way, our overtime is distributed. It's an even rotating list.

ACOSTA (voice-over): Firefighters deny they're engaging in pension spiking. They blame city hall.

WILLIAM GILCHREST, PITTSBURGH FIREFIGHTER, ENGINE 17: Because of fiscal mismanagement, because of the cities, the governments and thing, the working man shouldn't have to suffer for that.

ACOSTA: Ralph Sicuro with the local firefighters union, is open to raising the retirement age, but says this is no job for senior citizens.

RALPH SICURO, INTERNATIONAL FIREFIGHTERS UNION REP: So what am I supposed to do with somebody that reaches the age of 65, and they want you now to work until you're 70? What do I tell them? They can't get up on the rig anymore.

ACOSTA: The mayor the pension system needs more than tweaks.

RAVENSTAHL: If I had my way, we would be able to offer 401(k) plans to city employees and government officials.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ACOSTA: That is a nonstarter for the city's firefighters and police officers. They argue that they don't qualify for social security benefits because they have these pensions. But unless the city gets a hold on these financial problems, the state of Pennsylvania could come in and take over these programs and force the city into some very painful decisions, Kiran. And they're talking about tax increases or massive layoffs across the city. That is something that they don't want to do. But if you go to the unions and present all of this information to them, they will tell you, Kiran, they are not ready to throw in that terrible towel just yet. They still want to bargain and get to the negotiating table and see if they can work out some kind of agreement that will keep everything going the way it is going in Pittsburgh. It's going to be a tough, tough battle, though.

CHETRY: Well, hopefully, they will because they've experienced, you know, a revitalization, a renaissance, if you will, as one of the Rust Belt City is doing new things. So hopefully, they'll be able to get this solved.

ACOSTA: That's right.

CHETRY: And continue to thrive. Jim Acosta for us in Pittsburgh today, thanks so much.

VELSHI: Coming up next on AMERICAN MORNING, a startling admission from a Hollywood legend, Mickey Rooney. You're going to hear his emotional appeal to Congress when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHETRY: Twenty-three minutes past the hour. This is really a shocking admission coming from an icon of Hollywood.

VELSHI: Yes.

CHETRY: Ninety-year-old Mickey Rooney, he testified before a Senate committee saying he was a victim of elder abuse. He claims that his stepchildren abused him verbally, emotionally and financially and that he feels obligated to speak out.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICKEY ROONEY, ACTOR: I'm asking you to stop this of elderly abuse. I mean, to stop it. Now. Not tomorrow. Not next month. But now.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHETRY: That was some of his emotional testimony. He urged lawmakers to pass a specific law that would make elder abuse a crime.

VELSHI: Yes, it's a tough one because it's hard to know what the abuse is. And that's part of why it hasn't emerged into something that's a crime. People know it's wrong. But what's that line between your kids encouraging you to do something versus making a decision -- versus making decisions that are actually harmful to you. It's a good topic.

CHETRY: Exactly.

VELSHI: In Australia, for one day, at least, ATMs stood for "all the money" because an electronic glitch meant that the commonwealth's banking ATMs were dishing out free cash all across Sydney. As you might expect, word spread pretty quickly, although I wouldn't expect that. I would expect to tell no one, right? Just keep on getting machine -- money out of the machine.

Authorities had to issue a warning that anyone keeping the money that wasn't theirs would be in fact committing a crime.

CHETRY: Well, yes.

VELSHI: Because taking money that's not yours --

CHETRY: Is a crime. VELSHI: Is a crime.

CHETRY: How they will find that out, though --

VELSHI: And those ATM have cameras.

CHETRY: Yes. I guess that's how.

VELSHI: And you've got -- a silly story.

All right. Coming up next on AMERICAN MORNING, countdown to an NFL lockout. Owners and players have until midnight to reach a new labor agreement. Why can't these rich folks all get along?

CHETRY: They're just simply not making enough money.

VELSHI: We'll talk to a sports attorney about the pending work stoppage.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: The clock is ticking this morning towards the Super Bowl of showdowns. The collective bargaining agreement, in other words, the contract between the National League, the National Football League owners and its players expires at midnight. The two sides are still working with a federal mediator but can they avoid the NFL's first work stoppage since 1987? Joining me now is sports attorney Richard Roth who's represented Peyton Manning and NFL Hall of Famers.

Richard, good to see you. Thanks very much for being here.

RICHARD ROTH, SPORTS ATTORNEY: Good morning. Thank you very much.

VELSHI: Clearly, this is about money, these negotiations most of the time are. What in particular are the sticking points here?

ROTH: There are a few. The first and foremost is that there's a $9 billion pie which has to be carved up. The owners want to take the first billion off the top. The second is whether or not they're going to add two more games to the actual season. There's an issue involving the rookie's salary cap or salary scale. There are issues involving the owners opening up their books to show the players the revenues as well as their expenses. And then there's issues about the building of a new gigantic stadium and who's going to pay for them.

VELSHI: Right.

ROTH: A lot of issues.

VELSHI: Ultimately, would you say that the biggest one is that pie and how it's broken up and these players wanting to know, wanting to see these books. The idea is that these players say we're making you lots of money, we want to share in increased revenues.

ROTH: Which is very typical, that is correct. The $9 billion pie is the big issue, absolutely. VELSHI: All right. Where are we now? I know there've been a flurry of meetings. They're meeting with these federal negotiators. I assume today is a very busy day that everybody is working, trying to work toward a settlement as opposed to a lockout?

ROTH: That's correct. It's really a high-stakes economic chess game. And you have two things going on. On one hand, in Washington, D.C., you have the mediator sitting down with the players' association and with the NFL, trying to work it out by before the clock strikes 12:00 tonight. On the other hand, you have, if you will, huddling. The owners in their own room as well as the players in their own room trying to figure out if the mediation is not successful, what's the next move. And they have a couple options.

VELSHI: OK. Tell me about those.

ROTH: OK. The NFL can lock out the players.

VELSHI: Right.

ROTH: And that is a very strong - a very draconian measure but they can actually lock out the players.

VELSHI: It's a very strong bargaining position. It's also very risky in terms of the money they make and the fans they can alienate.

ROTH: Very risky. That's why I say it's high stakes.

VELSHI: Yes.

ROTH: Because the players as well can either strike, which they've announced they won't do, or they can decertify the union, which they very, very (INAUDIBLE)

(CROSSTALK)

VELSHI: We were talking about collective bargaining with respect to the state battles going on with union. The last thing that unionized workers typically want to do is typically decertify and start bargaining for themselves. But in this particular instance, the players are using that as a threat and saying, hey, wait a second, maybe we'll not work through the union and you'll have to deal with every one of us individually. That's not a good thing for the owners.

ROTH: Generally, it's not a good thing for the owners and generally not a good thing for the unions. But what happens here is that if they decertify, which is a process, you need 30 percent of the actual employees to file a petition. Then in fact that gives them a ticket, if you will, to go to federal court and create an anti-trust litigation against the NFL, which would give the NFL onerous significant risk because you get (INAUDIBLE) and attorney's fees.

But the risk to the players in decertification is grave. It's very serious. Number one is there's a fight. The NFL has already peremptorily filed, if you will, a claim at that decertification is a sham. It's not really an actual decertification.

VELSHI: It's a technique?

ROTH: Exactly. More importantly, in these instance, litigation is not necessarily the answer. It is very expensive. It's very time consuming. There's tremendous risks. I will tell you that in the anti-trust field, the majority of cases are won by the defendants, in this case, the NFL.

VELSHI: OK.

ROTH: And they take a long time. As well as the fact that the unions will no longer, the union is not around, so the pensions and the benefits and the medical insurance is not there anymore.

VELSHI: Right.

ROTH: And if the NFL and/or the owners lock out the players then they're not working. They're not receiving benefits. And they're sitting, waiting for a federal court judge two years down the road to make a decision.

VELSHI: It is complicated. A quick handicap. Are we going to see a lockout or are we going to see a deal?

ROTH: I think what's going to happen is this - I believe the mediator is very effective. I think that today, there's not a crisis. I'm optimistic as a fan and a lawyer that there's going to be a delay. I believe the mediator will at least set tonight's deadline off for a week. And then during that time, I do not believe there's going to be a lockout. I'm optimistic this is going to work out.

VELSHI: Richard, thanks for clearing it up for us.

ROTH: Thank you very much.

VELSHI: Sports attorney, Richard Roth. Kiran.

KIRAN CHETRY, CNN ANCHOR: All right. Thanks. We're going to check in on our top stories now.

New air strikes in Libya this morning. Bombs being dropped on two eastern Libyan towns by Gadhafi forces and the opposition was able to hold at least after a fierce battle yesterday.

President Obama is going to be facing reporters today and likely having to answer some questions about a tough decision on whether or not to set up a no-fly zone over the country. Defense secretary Robert Gates says setting up a no-fly zone essentially means war.

Well, the Ohio State Senate passes a controversial bill that limits collective bargaining for state workers. And among other things, the measure eliminates the worker's ability to strike and also prevents them from negotiating healthcare costs. Democrats describe this as union busting. Republican said it's need to cut costs. It now heads to the Republican controlled House. Also expect some more pain at the pump, I guess, you could say. According to AAA, the price for a gallon of regular gas jumped four cents overnight to $3.43 a gallon. It is the ninth consecutive increase. Drivers in Hawaii continue to pay the highest price in the nation, about $3.82 a gallon, on average. Although many report prices topping $4 a gallon in many places in Hawaii.

VELSHI: Well the leaders of a controversial Kansas church are vowing to quadruple their protests on the number of protests that they hold at military funerals now at that U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that those demonstrations are protected by the First Amendment.

CHETRY: Members of the Westboro Baptist Church have picketed many military funerals. You've probably seen video of them holding up signs with anti-gay slurs. And there are, of course, cheering yesterday's 8-1 Supreme Court vote. The justices upheld the lower court decision which threw out the lawsuit, a $5 million judgment for the father of a fallen Marine who said the protests inflicted emotional distress.

Joining us to breakdown this highly charged ruling is CNN's senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Good morning.

CHETRY: Thanks for being with us. So, I mean, essentially, at the end of the day, if you take the emotion out of it, which is quite a difficult thing to do, the Supreme Court was simply upholding the First Amendment.

TOOBIN: You know, this is a maddening case. This is a frustrating case but it's actually a pretty easy case when you look at the history of the First Amendment. This was political speech. It was speech that did not interfere with the ceremony. It was well at a distance from this funeral. And under those circumstances, that's at the heart of what the First Amendment is supposed to protect.

VELSHI: So however, easy though it was, in an 8-1 ruling, the Supreme Court has particular standards that it applies when looking at First Amendment cases. Do these protests - did they do certain things that infringed upon other people's rights? Give me some distinctions here. What are some of the things that might have led the Supreme Court to vote differently on this? What are some of the things the protests might have done that would have seen a different ruling?

TOOBIN: OK. I'll give you two things. One is the content of the speech. Because the content of the speech was about political matters of national importance. It was about gay rights. I mean, it was hateful, it was awful. But it was a political position on a political issue. So that's one thing. It could have been specifically targeted at one person, that might have been somewhat different, if it would have been personal. The other thing was the nature and location of the protests. They were 200 or 300 feet away from the funeral. They couldn't be heard at the service.

CHETRY: This is the one particular case that they were addressing. TOOBIN: Right, the Snyder family, poor Matthew Snyder was killed in Iraq. You can you only imagine the pain his parents were going through. But the protest here was on public property at a significant distance from the funeral itself. That made it much harder for the court to say, look, this was a harassment of any kind. Because there was no direct contact during the service between the protesters and the - and the people who were mourning. That might have made the case different if there was some sort of confrontation.

CHETRY: So, this is the other interesting issue. Does this set precedent for certain things at the state and local level? What I mean by that is that in some places and in some states, there's a 500- foot buffer zone that they're forced to adhere to between protesters and let's say abortion clinics. There have been some local laws in place to try to keep these protesters, denying permits and such. I mean would all of that be subject to change or it could be fought in court because of this ruling?

TOOBIN: You know, I don't think this changes the law very much. This case really reinforces what the law has always been. It has always been permissible for government to impose what are called time, place and manner restrictions on speech. You can't hold a political protest in a residential neighborhood with bull horns in the middle of the night. I think everybody recognizes government can limit that. But if it is a public place. If it is in the middle of the day. If it is in an area where they are not disturbing individual families, it's very hard for the government to restrict that kind of speech. Painful though it is.

VELSHI: Would standing make a difference? If the complainant, if the person who brought this - the plaintiff, was gay and felt that this was harassing to them or endangering their safety because these rallies that they're really talking about, ultimately, at their core, they're anti-gay rallies? Would that change things?

TOOBIN: Probably not. Because unless it was "I want to kill you, John Doe, gay person."

VELSHI: Got it.

TOOBIN: The fact that - some people talk about a doctrine of fighting words. That doctrine is dead. There is basically no such thing as fighting words anymore. If you want to talk about any sort of political matter, you pretty much have an absolute freedom to do so. And the idea that you might incite harm against someone else. The court is not interested in that anymore.

CHETRY: Interestingly enough, Samuel Alito was the only dissenter. And in his defense of that, he said public issues can be openly and vigorously debated but it's not necessary to allow the brutalization of innocent victims like the petitioner. But he was the only one.

TOOBIN: He was the only one.

You know, I think it was good that there was one dissenter. Because, you know, the family needed some voice here. CHETRY: Right.

TOOBIN: And Alito's dissent is very passionate and very well-written. But Chief Justice John Roberts' opinion, I think, it's not surprising, it carried the day. It's also very eloquently written.

VELSHI: Jeff, thanks. Good to see you.

TOOBIN: Good to see you both.

VELSHI: OK. Just ahead, life imitating art. We'll talk to the author of a new novel. It's a thriller about a Middle East ruler who is losing his grip on power. Interesting, huh.

It's 39 minutes after the hour.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHETRY: 42 minutes past the hour.

You know, Oscar Wilde once wrote that "life imitates art far more than art imitates life." And that certainly appears to be the case with our next guest in his new novel. Alex Berenson has traveled all over the world as a reporter for the "New York Times." He's just back from Afghanistan yesterday. And he has his new novel out "The Secret Soldier."

In it, the main character is John Wells, a fictional former CIA agent, and the story revolves around a ruler in the Middle East who happens to be under attack and losing the support of his people. Not unlike what we're seeing playing out in real life right now in many Middle Eastern countries. Great to have you with us this morning, Alex.

ALEX BERENSON, AUTHOR "THE SECRET SOLDIER": Thanks for having me on.

CHETRY: It's interesting to see the similarities between the novel and what's happening. What do you make of the real world version with Egypt and now Libya?

BERENSON: Well, I think that, you know, I've never been to Libya, but I have been to Egypt. And the level of poverty, the level of desperation that was on the streets was so clear that it was not a question of something like this happening. It was only a question of when it was going to happen.

Now "The Secret Soldier" is set in Saudi Arabia, it's the real Saudi Arabia and the real King Abdullah. Some people have said to me, is it going to be or will there be a revolution in Saudi Arabia? The truth is I don't think there will be. Saudi Arabia is a much richer country than Egypt or Libya. And I think the average Saudi has a lot more to lose.

CHETRY: Right. Which is why Bahrain's situation was interesting as well because they also enjoy a higher GDP than what we've seen in Egypt and in Libya and is some of the other countries that experienced this. And they've had a very strong uprising that's now leading to reform?

BERENSON: Yes. Well, in Bahrain, there's a lot of Shia. It's majority Shia. And yet it's a Sunni controlled - the kind is Sunni. In Saudi Arabia, there's also a Sunni-Shia split but most of the population is Sunni so the king really and the family does have really good control.

CHETRY: And the reason that we're asking about this situation is because there are concerns, of course, the $100 a barrel oil. Saudis saying, "Listen, we can up production right now to make up for some of the disruption we've seen because of the unrest." And at the same time, they're calling for a day of rage, people in Saudi Arabia in March. And I know that you said that it is unlikely but there is a scenario out there where some sort of uprising could take place. There are a lot of rights in Saudi Arabia that people certainly do not enjoy.

BERENSON: Oh, that's absolutely true. I mean, fundamental rights. Freedom of the press. Of course, freedom of religion. Women have very few rights. The question is, can there be any - will there be reform incrementally? Will there be some sort of revolution? I just don't see how the Saudi people would come together against the family, especially because the clerics, and you know, most Saudis are very religious, support the family. By the way, if it does happen, we will see $200 a barrel oil.

CHETRY: And that's something that is quite scary.

BERENSON: Yes.

CHETRY: -- on the international stage, as well.

When you have a look inside of the kingdom, though, in Saudi Arabia, and where you have done all of this, what -- would there be any willingness on the part of the king to -- and on the part of some of the clerics to ease some of the restrictions on people's lives?

BERENSON: Well, I think Abdullah is walking a fine line. You know, and I think he's done a fairly good job, most people would say. In the "Secret Soldier," I try to bring this out and sort of try to bring out the pressures that he's under from the left and the right.

As for the clerics, the clerics are who they are. They're Wahhabi, they believe in a very fundamentalist interpretation of the Koran and of Islam. And, you know, it's not really about reform for them. It's about what does this book say, and are we holding to it?

CHETRY: I want to ask you about Afghanistan as well, because actually you're just back from a two-week imbed, correct?

BERENSON: Yes.

CHETRY: And you just got back yesterday.

BERENSON: Yes.

CHETRY: So more power to you for showing up with us this morning.

But, how are officers there, how are soldiers feeling about the war?

BERENSON: Well, you know, it's a very interesting question. Soldiers do their jobs. We have a great military. We have the greatest military in the world, the United States. We -- sometimes, I say the United States has a better military than it deserves. So, if you told them to build a bridge to the moon, they would try to do it.

That's sort of what they're trying do. They're trying to build a country and reform a country that may or may not have any interest in what we're trying to do for it. That said, they go out every day, outside the wire, and do their very best.

CHETRY: That's a distressing thing to hear, though. And there was a story that sort of highlighted what you're talking about, about the billions of dollars, or tens of billions of dollars being wasted by contractors and some of the reason behind it. They talk about waste fraud and abuse (ph).

But they say that some of it may be well-managed but doesn't fit culturally, politically, or economically into the society it's meant to serve. And this is to the tune of tens of billions of dollars as we're talking about these austerity measures here back at home.

BERENSON: Oh, yes. I mean, the war is a massive, massive enterprise. And clearly there are a lot of people making a lot of money off it. Not the front line guys, by the way.

CHETRY: Right.

BERENSON: They make the least money of anybody. But, you know, even -- if you read the reports that have been written about corruption at the top of the Afghan government, it's very distressing.

And yet, our guys -- they're fully aware of this. They're smart. They see what he see. But they go out every day, put their helmets on and do their very best.

CHETRY: Well, it's a great book. "The Secret Soldier." A new novel, it's out. Alex Berenson, thanks so much for joining us this morning.

BERENSON: Kiran, thanks for having me.

CHETRY: We're going to take a quick break. It's 47 minutes past the hour.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELSHI: Forty-nine minutes after the hour. Let's get a quick check of the morning weather headlines with our tuque mater, Rob Marciano in the Extreme Weather Center.

(WEATHER REPORT)

VELSHI: Top stories minutes away, including brand-new developments of the killings of two U.S. Air Force members in Germany. It wasn't just an argument, it may have been an act of terror.

CHETRY: Also we're live from space. The crew of the shuttle Discovery on its final mission. They'll be joining us after finishing one of the biggest to do lists in space ever. Fifty-one minutes past the hour.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHETRY: Fifty-four minutes past of the hour. Tennis star Serena Williams is recovering this morning after a healthy scare. Doctors at Mt. Sinai Center found a pulmonary embolism, basically a blood clot in her lungs after she flew two Los Angeles from New York last week.

VELSHI: Our chief medical correspondent Sanjay Gupta joins us from Atlanta now with more on the story.

Morning, Sanjay.

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Good morning.

VELSHI: Let's talk about this. Serena is 29-years-old. She's in, what I would assume very good health. What causes a pulmonary embolism to develop?

GUPTA: Well, this can be a significant problem for just anybody of any age. But, where these embolisms, these blood clots typically come from is the veins of the lower leg.

Let me show you something here because this is important. When you talk about the deep veins of the lower leg. These are not veins that you can necessarily feel. But take a look in blue there. That's the valve around one of these deep veins. You see a clot starting to form over there.

The concern is, after some time, that clot could essentially break off and start to travel throughout the entire body. And specifically it goes through the blood system and lands up in the lungs. That's what a pulmonary embolism it. Blocks one of the small blood vessels in the lungs and that's what can cause problems, shortness of breath, rapid heartbeat.

If that clot is big enough, it can cause death within just a few minutes of that clot actually breaking off. So again, this can be a significant problem. Obviously, in her case, it was able to be recognized and able to be treated.

Now, the question, what puts you at risk for the clot in the leg in the first place? Well, you know, she's been wearing that walking boot sort of cast thing for some time. Immobilization can be a problem. That long flight you mentioned, Los Angeles to New York, sitting in one position, that can be a problem. Dehydration. Also women who are on birth control pills, women who smoke, anybody who smokes really. Those can all be risk factors. But that's a little bit of an idea of how a process like that starts and what can happen.

CHETRY: So she was treated for this early last week, just a day or two later she was spotted out at some red carpet events. Are patients typically able to get back on their feet so quickly after setting surgery for a blood clot?

GUPTA: Well, this is interesting because what we know and what I think has happened here is that at the time that she had this pulmonary embolism sounds like she had symptoms but it was a relatively small clot.

What you typically get are blood thinners. You get your blood thinners in the hospital through the I.V. for a couple of days and then you can switch those blood thinners over to oral medication. You need to be on those blood thinners for some time -- several months.

Don't know that she got surgery specifically for the pulmonary embolism but then she got later on where she got a procedure for a blood clot that developed maybe as a result of the blood thinners. You see the process here. You get the blood thinners to make the pulmonary embolism clot go away, but that makes your blood thin and you could develop a hematoma or a blood clot somewhere else in the body as a result of that thin blood. That's one of the consequences of these medications. So that's probably the pattern of things that happened.

VELSHI: All right. So I guess what I want to do is prevent this in the first place. You and I both travel a lot, we spend a lot of time on planes. That kind of worried me because I've heard this developing when you sit on a plane a long time.

Tell me what people like us are supposed to do to prevent blood clots from forming in the first place.

GUPTA: Well, first of all the good news is that a very small percentage who do develop blood clots are ever going to have a pulmonary embolism. So that's some good news.

But some of the basic risk factors you got to try and mitigate. So, if you're on a plane for a long time, Ali, or Kiran, you got to get up and walk around to some extent, get that blood moving. Make sure you stay very well hydrated on those planes. Those are really the biggest thing. If there are certain medications you're taking that can thicken your blood, like I said birth control pills or hormone pills, those things can be risk factors. Also smoking is a big risk factor.

So, for the most part, it's common sense sort of things. But if you're having leg pain and you've had those risk factors it may be something you want to get checked out.

VELSHI: All right, Sanjay. Thanks very much for the good advice. Sanjay Gupta MD in Atlanta.

CHETRY: All right. We'll check in with you in the next hour for (INAUDIBLE). Meanwhile, our top stories coming up in just a moment. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)