Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Anti-Muslim Groups March in Germany, Europe; Judge Won't Delay Tsarnaev Trial; Will Sold-Out "Charlie Hebdo" Come to U.S.; White House Refuses to Call Attacks "Radical Islam"; Questions over D.C. Subway Response

Aired January 14, 2015 - 14:30   ET

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

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: It's not so much immigration. These are anti-religion rallies in a way.

PHIL BLACK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: These are really focused against Islam and a fear of it to a significant extent. It's the pillar of this movement. It's interesting to note it has taken route in this country, in Germany, in particular, in this region where there is a low immigrant population, less than 2 percent. Group of Muslims even smaller. The fear is real and concern is very real.

What set this apart from other populist and nationalists, there's movements across other parts of Europe. What makes this different is they're able to get huge numbers on the street. This predates the events here in Paris. The organizers, people speaking to this crowd, the other night, said events here in Paris show they have the right to raise concerns.

BERMAN: The question is, will it spread to other places in Germany and other cities in Europe?

BLACK: It has spread to some degree but not the same success. There have been smaller protests under the same name and banner trying to achieve the same goals. It's worth noting, the protestors against these guys, they've come out in big numbers too. Big, if not greater in some places. What it does represent -- it's not a unanimous view. There's a split in German society. There is a divide that will not easily be healed.

BERMAN: We talk about the European community, European Union. Germany is at the forefront. Whatever happens there has changes all over this continent.

Phil Black, great to see you here.

BLACK: Thank you.

BERMAN: Thanks for being with us.

Brooke?

BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN ANCHOR: I'll tell you. Berman, it's incredible seeing the memorial behind you. It's been one week now. Each time we talk, it continues to grow. John Berman, thank you so much.

Terror attacks in Paris have revived horrific memories of deadly bombings of the Boston Marathon. In fact, the attorneys for the defendant, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, have argued that this global outcry and the attention and the raw emotions could really taint potential juries in the Boston trial that's upcoming. With jury selection underway, the defense team in Boston was hit with a setback today. The trial judge denied its request to delay the case a month, saying an impartial and fair jury can still be found, despite the terrorist attacks.

One potential juror, who has been excused, described what it was like sitting in that courtroom during the selection process and laying his eyes on Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TED WAYMAN, POTENTIAL JUROR: He wasn't listening to attorneys or the judge. He was there as he was required to be. All 400 eyes of all jurors were on that defendant the entire time.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: We will talk to that now-excused juror next hour. A lot of parallels are being drawn between the Kouachi brothers and Tsarnaev brothers.

Richard Gabriel is joining me, a jury consultant and author of "Acquittal," which looks at the strategies behind today's most infamous verdicts.

Richard, welcome.

And of all the cases you're familiar with, how often do judges grant delays in a jury selection process based upon current events?

RICHARD GABRIEL, JURY CONSULTANT & AUTHOR: It's extremely rare. It does happen occasionally. Usually those events they delay trials on have to do with the actual events of the trial. When a news article or expose is published, which has direct evidence. The difficulty here the judge grappled with saying although there's a resonance and comparison that's inevitable with the brothers, and the bombing, the citywide man hunt, the press involvement did not have to deal with this trial itself, which is why he chose not to delay the trial.

BALDWIN: What about the judge here? The judge said he has seen the juror questionnaires, more than certain an impartial jury will be seated. My question is, how can you insure impartiality? So many in Boston know someone who knows someone who was there that day. It's one thing to say you're impartial, but it's another thing to feel that impartiality.

GABRIEL: That becomes the huge difficulty in the jury selection process. In the abstract, everybody thinks they can be fair and impartial. It's not an on/off switch. Bias is a mechanism and it can be operated and it can be enacted by a lot of things. People that sat in their living rooms and couldn't go out and experience the lockdown of the city that night, who know somebody involved in that bombing, who knows when a testimony is going to be on the witness stand or somebody is going to come up and the victim will be in the audience, when that feeling will a rise in them. It's not something you shelf and sit a side for the entirety of a months-long trial. The process of sitting down with jurors and really probing into how they're going to be able to set things aside and just listen to evidence is a process. Who knows if the judge is going to be able to do that?

BALDWIN: What about the now-excused juror's description of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. People are walking in this room, see him, it's such a huge deal in their city, and to see his indifference, according to this one man and process. Fast forward to the trial, how will his physical presence affect things?

GABRIEL: Well, Brooke, as you just heard, jurors start making their impressions of the defendant immediately. It's very quick. One juror said he seemed indifferent. That's obviously not good. You want a defendant to look engaged and appear like they have a defense. If they look indifferent, the juror goes, why should I care about him? One appearance aspect that could work in his favor is he looks relatively young, even with the beard. Sometimes that factor by itself may sway jurors to say he might be young, might be impressionable, and it's hard for me to somehow vote to end the life of somebody who looks seemingly like a young kid.

BALDWIN: I'm glad you brought that up. These aren't just jurors sitting on this high-profile trial. This could come to death.

Richard Gabriel, thank you.

Coming up next, we are just getting word about how many copies of the controversial "Charlie Hebdo" magazine are coming to the United States. Hear about the demand from other countries to get their hands on those copies.

And the White House refusing to call these attacks "radical Islam." A refusal getting a lot of backlash. Hear the Obama administration's explanation. Stay with me.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BERMAN: In Paris today, the lines were around the block. Every newsstand, every press shop you went to, you would find dozens and dozens waiting in line to get their hands on the new copy of "Charlie Hebdo." The satirical magazine putting out the first issue since the attacks at their offices one week ago. This was a survivor's issue. As we went to newsstand, no one was getting one. They sold out early. The publisher said they printed three million copies. Clearly, not enough. Now they will put out one million per day until the demand is met here in France. What about beyond the borders? How many copies will make it to shores of the United States? We have new information on that.

Let's bring in our senior media correspondent, Brian Stelter. How many getting to the U.S.?

BRIAN STELTER, CNN SENIOR MEDIA CORRESPONDENT: Only 300 are coming to the U.S. this week. This speaks of unprecedented demand for this magazine. So many copies are sold in France, so many more printed. There's only 300 the distributor can send to the U.S. They'll be on an Air France flight tomorrow so they get to the U.S. on Friday. Canada is getting more. Canada is getting 1500 this week, John. That's because of French-speaking Quebec, a bigger audience in Canada. There's a lot more than 300 in the U.S. that want this magazine. They're going to be waiting a while.

BERMAN: Where can you get it in the United States? If they're sending 300 copies --

(CROSSTALK)

BERMAN: -- 300 would have gone this morning in 10 seconds.

STELTER: "CNN Money" just got off the phone with the distributor. They're going to specialty shops, in D.C., L.A., San Francisco and Chicago. Tht will be the first run. But in future weeks, we'll see more as it gets to the U.S. But it's going to be a collector's item, no just in France, but in the U.S., as well.

BERMAN: When I was at the news conference with the "Charlie Hebdo" survivors yesterday, they said their aim was to put it out in many different languages. But these first issues going to the U.S., are they in French?

STELTER: They are, for now, in French. They're going to specialty shops that already sell international formats of magazines. There's demand in other countries. Germany is especially eager. Every four hours, distributors in Germany are asking for 4,000 more. We've only seen the beginning. We're going to see many more requests in days to come.

BERMAN: A publishing event generating great interest around the world.

STELTER: Yeah, it sure is.

BERMAN: Brian Stelter, great to have you with us.

STELTER: Thanks.

BERMAN: Appreciate it.

When we come back, "Radical Islam," two words the White House is trying not to say when it comes to the terror attacks in Paris. Why is that? Is it a fair way to describe what happened? Is this a matter of semantics?

Plus, the rise of female jihadists. CNN goes one on one with a French woman who explains her desire to join forces with ISIS.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BERMAN: The words "radical Islam" have been used to describe what we witnessed in Paris. But you don't hear that phrase uttered by the White House. The White House prefers a different label, not "radical Islam" but "violent extremism."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOSH EARNEST, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: We have not chose to use that label because it doesn't seem to accurately describe what happened. We also don't want to be in a situation where we are legitimatizing what we consider to be a completely illegitimate justification for this violence, this act of terrorism.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: So, is this semantics, not using the word "Islam" or "Muslim" to describe what happened here, or is it an important distinction?

Harris Zafar is vice president of Ahmadiyya Muslim Youth Association, one of the oldest and largest American-Muslim organizations in the world, and the author of the book, "Demystifying Islam, Tackling One of the Tough Questions."

And this is one of those tough questions.

And Michael Smerconish, a CNN political commentator and host of his show at 9:00 a.m. eastern on Saturdays.

Michael, I want to start with you. You are not pleased with the White House decision not to use the word "radical Islam" or "Muslim extremism." I think that's probably putting it lightly.

MICHAEL, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR & CNN HOST, SMERCONISH: I think it's dishonest by omission. Nobody is suggesting we describe these terror acts as having been committed by Islam. That would be ridiculous. They're not committed by Islam. They're committed by individuals that represent a violent strand of radical Islam. I think to not say so is frankly to be misleading. To me, John, it would be like discussing pedophile priests but saying don't utter the word "Catholic."

It would be like saying we're going to have a conversation about the mafia but never going to mention individuals of Italian heritage. I don't like this censorship. I think the censorship assumes if you say these words, there will be a revolt among all followers of the Islamic faith. That's as bad as individuals that say in the aftermath of one of these attacks, it's representative of the entire faith, when it's not. I'm for transparency and honesty.

BERMAN: Harris, what do you make of that? Does the word "Muslim" or "Islam" have to be included to accurately describe what happened?

HARRIS ZAFAR, VICE PRESIDENT OF AHMADIYYA MUSLIM YOUTH ASSOCIATION & AUTHOR: That's a fair point that your other guest brought up. For us, it's not a matter of being offensive. I don't take offense if somebody calls it Muslim extremism or Muslims terrorists. But some people do take it forward. On other networks, the called this an Islamic attack. So the word "terrorism" is removed. For us, instead of validating the assertion that this is Islamic and empowering those groups that claim this is Islamic and saying, see, this is, we, at the Ahmadiyya Muslim Youth Association, a worldwide organization, our effort is to save youth from becoming radicalized. We stop it at the core and say, if you want to know what Islam is, no matter what your beliefs are, come, we'll teach you. Don't get duped into thinking that's Islamic.

For me, the far more offensive thing is the manner in which Muslims react, and like this terror attack. When bad things happen, we have to be out front in condemning it in word and, indeed, like the youth association. We hit the streets to condemn these types of acts.

BERMAN: We, as in all of you, think that Muslim, moderate, not radical -- I used the word "radical Islam" there, even though the White House didn't -- everyone needs to condemn, even if they have no involvement or connection to it, Harris?

ZAFAR: I think any time people behave badly, the human decency is to feel bad about those that suffer and to say this is not right regardless of who that is. I don't think it's fair to ever expect a Muslim to have to apologize or condemn an act, especially when we have a 10, 20 year track record of doing that every time. Part of us has to be able to push back. The stop the crisis campaign is push back on ISIS and those types of groups to say we need to have a war of ideas to prove that Islam does not sanction what you're saying. We need to save Muslims from becoming targets of recruitment.

BERMAN: It's easy to say any person of any faith, any human can freely speak out about things that a happened here.

Michael, there's an interesting quote from Kareem Abdul Jabar who talks about this idea -- and Harris voices this -- that many moderate Muslims need to go out of their way to speak out.

Listen to what Kareem Abdul Jabar wrote in "Time" magazine. He said, "When Ku Klux Klan burns a cross in a black family's yard, prominent Christians aren't required to explain how these aren't really Christian acts. Most people already realize that the KKK doesn't represent Christian teachings. That's what I and other Muslims long for, the day when these terrorists, praising the Prophet Muhammad for Allah's name, as they debase their actual teachings, are instantly recognized as thugs disguising themselves as Muslims."

Michael, your reaction?

SMERCONISH: Well, I think it's an apples and oranges comparison. I'm no expert KKK, thank god. To the extent the KKK ever acted in the name of the Bible or under the name of Jesus Christ or one of the apostles, then I think it would be fair to call out the KKK and say these are lunatics who are acting in the name, some perverted notion of their faith. As far as I know, that's not the basis on which they were conducting themselves. If it were, I'm for disclosure of whatever the facts are. I think unless you're transparent, you're never going to get to the root of the problem and deal with it. That's what I'm trying to say.

BERMAN: The fact is what you're saying is these people are doing it in the name of Islam even if it's only in their perverted view of what Islam is, correct?

SMERCONISH: That is what I'm saying. If they said they're going to undertake acts of terror in the name of Walt Whitman, I'd say we've got to tell that part of the story. To not share that is playing a censorship role, which I think is unhealthy precedent for us to set. I'm by no means trying to equate what these individuals did at "Charlie Hebdo" with the faith at large. Let's single them out. They're individuals acting with perverted interpretation.

BERMAN: Michael Smerconish, Harris Zafar, appreciate your input here. Thanks so much.

Brooke, let's go back to you in New York.

BALDWIN: All right, John Berman, thank you very much.

One person is dead, more than 80 people injured after smoke filled a tunnel in the D.C. Metro. This is the subway system. Passengers had to evacuate themselves, raising a number of questions about the city's emergency response. We'll take you to D.C. next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BALDWIN: A fairly serious incident Monday is raising questions about the city's emergency response. One person died, and more than 80 others were treated after this tunnel filled with smoke. It happened at the busy Metro station near the National Mall. A lot of federal employees hop off there as well. A number of passengers had to escape walking along the tracks.

Let's go to Washington to Joe Johns.

Joe, as far as the city and response go, what have you learned?

JOE JOHNS, CNN SENIOR WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: Well, Brooke, this was far and away the worst incident in years on the D.C. subway system caused by thick smoke produced by something authorities call an electrical arcing event. The National Safety Board is investigating. One dead and 80 taken to the hospital for smoke inhalation. Political leaders are asking for answers, including Mark Warner, of Virginia. He called it a nightmare situation and, in a letter, demanded a full letter from the Washington Metro Rail Administration, so it's probably going to be a long investigation -- Brooke?

BALDWIN: What are people saying? If you're saying this was an electrical arcing event, heaven forbid, what it could be the next time. I hear you on this letter from Senator Warner, but what are other concerns?

JOHNS: The question that was asked at the scene, still asked today, the system's evacuation plan. What took so long for people in one of the trains to get out of the tunnel and into fresh air where they could breathe again? By some estimates, it could have taken 20 to 40 minutes for people to evacuate.

BALDWIN: Wow.

JOHNS: There were reports people were told by the operator of the train to remain on it, even though they could have walked to safety. There also appears to be a communication problem with first responders, too. There's some suggestion firefighters arriving on the scene were not actually told immediately that there were still people down in the tunnel. So it raises a question of whether the subway system is prepared in the event something even worse jumps off. There would be implications for other subways around the country.

BALDWIN: Incredibly scary.

Joe Johns, thank you.