Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Plot to Bomb Pentagon, U.S. Capitol; Interview With Michael Jackson Biographer Stacy Brown; Screensavers & the Fourth Amendment; Eight Troops Killed in Afghanistan; Mexico's Drug War; App Asks: 'Is My Son Gay?'

Aired September 29, 2011 - 14:00   ET

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

RANDI KAYE, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everyone. I'm Randi Kaye.

I'm in Los Angeles for the manslaughter trial of Michael Jackson's doctor.

But I want to begin this hour with a different case, an alleged terror plot on the other side of the country, in fact. A 26-year-old Massachusetts man, a U.S. citizen, is accused of plotting to bomb the Pentagon and U.S. Capitol with remote-controlled model airplanes.

My colleague Brian Todd is on this story in Washington for us.

Brian, the details are really incredible. Tell us exactly what the suspect allegedly wanted to do here with these model airplanes.

BRIAN TODD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Randi, the details are extraordinary. First, I wanted to just get to this indictment that we just obtained.

This is a six-count indictment that just came down against Mr. Ferdaus. His name is Rezwan Ferdaus. And six counts he has just been charged with.

Among them, attempting to damage and destroy a federal building by means of an explosive. Also including attempting to provide material support to terrorists. This indictment just handed down to him. We have tried to reach his attorney through phone calls and e-mail, have not been able to get a response to these charges yet.

Randi, what the federal authorities believe he tried to do was to rig model airplanes that were about one-tenth the size of actual fighter jets. One of them is a model of an F-4 Phantom that you see there. Another is a model of an F-86 Sabre jet. Rig those with C-4 plastic explosives and fly them into the Pentagon and the Capitol by remote control, essentially using them as drones and using GPS.

That is what the affidavit filed in this case says. A lot of detail in that affidavit about how he planned on doing this, but basically that's what he planned on doing.

In addition, the affidavit says that he planned on launching some kind of a ground attack with two teams comprising of about six people total to fire on people as they tried to evacuate those buildings. So, that, in a nutshell, is really the nexus of this alleged plot. KAYE: You can't help but be impressed that they managed to track this guy down and catch him. How did they do that?

TODD: Well, they used undercover operatives posing as al Qaeda members. They used at least one cooperating witness who recorded conversations with him.

They were tracking him in this undercover operation at least since the beginning of this year, possibly extending back to last year, but that's a little unclear. What they do say in the affidavit is that they know that he started thinking about doing this as early as last year, but they actually started tracking him in January of this year in this undercover operation. So it was pretty elaborate, pretty extensive. They had cultivated him for obviously the better part of nine months.

KAYE: Wow. It's certainly fascinating.

Brian Todd, thanks for giving us the details. Appreciate that.

And if you're as fascinated as we are about the way that these schemes are uncovered and foiled, well, you'll want to stick around. In our next segment, I'll speak with former FBI assistant director Tom Fuentes. We'll talk much more about this case.

All right. Now back to the People versus Conrad Murray.

Day three of testimony in the manslaughter trial of Jackson's private in-house physician is focused on June 25, 2009. You're watching live here from inside that courtroom.

Late that morning, June 25, 2009, after a night filled with sedatives but no sleep, Murray gave his one and only patient the surgical anesthetic Propofol. And soon after, Jackson slipped into cardiac arrest and died.

On the stand already today, Jackson's former head of logistics, Alberto Alvarez, who described Murray's amateurish attempts at CPR and his orders just moments later.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAVID WALGREN, DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY; Going back to what was physically what happened, so you kind of indicated to the children on leave the room. Is that accurate?

ALBERTO ALVAREZ, MICHAEL JACKSON'S LOGISTICS DIRECTOR: Yes, sir.

WALGREN: OK. Conrad Murray then, as you're coming back to approach him, tells you Michael had a bad reaction.

ALVAREZ: Yes, sir.

WALGREN: Did he then instruct you to take some vials or do something with some vials? ALVAREZ: Yes. While I was standing at the foot of the bed, he reached over and grabbed a handful of vials, and then he reached out to me and said, "Here. Put these in a bag."

WALGREN: Why were you following these instructions to assist in collecting these vials and the saline bag?

ALVAREZ: Well, in my personal experience, I believe that Dr. Conrad Murray had the best intentions for Mr. Jackson, so I didn't question his authority at the time. I knew it was a medical emergency. So I proceeded to follow Mr. Conrad Murray's instructions.

WALGREN: OK.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KAYE: We'll keep an ear on this afternoon's testimony and cut back live if events warrant.

In the meantime, I hope you'll catch my live interview with Michael Jackson's friend and biographer, Stacy Brown. That is at quarter past the hour, right here in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(NEWSBREAK)

KAYE: Coming up, the plot to attack U.S. targets with model planes. I'll speak with a former FBI assistant director coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAYE: More now on our top story, what the FBI is calling a terror plot to use model airplanes to attack the Capitol building in Washington and the Pentagon.

As we mentioned, a Massachusetts man with a physics degree has been arrested and charged with plotting to carry out the attacks using remote-controlled model airplanes packed with explosives. Officials say he was arrested in an undercover operation, and they stress that he posed no immediate danger to the public.

Joining us now with special insight on this case, former FBI assistant director and CNN contributor, Tom Fuentes.

Tom, thanks so much for joining us to discuss this.

TOM FUENTES, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Hi, Randi.

KAYE: First, what do you make of this plot?

FUENTES: Well, I think it's interesting. When I first heard model aircraft, I was thinking of these little toy planes that people fly in the park and didn't realize the size and capacity.

You have a plane that's more than six feet long, can carry 50 pounds of explosives, fly at 100 miles per hour, and you can plug in GPS coordinates. So it's a pretty sophisticated and very dangerous device just by itself. The fact in this plot, where he wanted to use that, combined with a group of individuals firing automatic weapons and using grenades, he could launch a pretty serious attack.

KAYE: And how concerning is to you that -- I mean, this can be done remotely.

FUENTES: Right. It's very concerning.

His intention -- and he had traveled to Washington to decide which park he was going to have the plane take off from and how far he could control it to fly it into the Capitol building, or another plane into the Pentagon, or several planes into the Pentagon, so it is concerning. I don't know personally the capacity to shoot one of these things down. Once it takes off, and if it can go 100 miles an hour, I don't know if there's anti-aircraft devices at the Capitol, at the Pentagon, or anywhere else that could shoot something like that down before it actually hits the target.

KAYE: Yes, that's what I was going to ask you, because I'm just wondering, once this thing is in the air, it's controlled remotely, I mean, is there really anyway to stop it? Would they even want to shoot something like this down?

FUENTES: Well, that's the other question, too, because to fire on it means that whatever weapons they use against it, those rockets and bullets are going to be landing somewhere in the D.C. metro area and could do even more damage on their own. So it's a very difficult challenge to determine how they would stop it. And you have other situations where even those aircraft without explosives, if you flew that into a crowded stadium, or into the Mall, when you have inauguration or Fourth of July celebrations, you could do a lot of damage even without the explosive devices.

KAYE: Yes. And also, we know that the suspect in this case had a degree in physics. But really, how smart do you really need to be to buy one of these online, load it up with some explosives, and get it going?

FUENTES: Actually not that smart. So he'd be smart enough, no question about it.

He had already demonstrated that he had the ability to take a cell phone apart, sodder in the necessary wires, and turn that cell phone into an IED detonating device. So he had enough technological background to do that.

And with a physics degree, and whatever else he may have studied in connection with that degree, you don't know exactly how far he could have gone. Could he take Internet recipes for explosives and make his own?

Luckily, in this case, he decided to purchase C-4 from individuals that he thought were members of al Qaeda. Fortunately, they were members of the FBI. But in so doing, he wasn't actually concocting his own IED or his own explosive device. He was using commercially available -- or not commercially available, but at least somewhat available military weaponry.

KAYE: Right. Tom Fuentes, appreciate your expertise, as always. Thank you.

FUENTES: Thank you, Randi.

KAYE: Coming up next, a close friend of Michael Jackson's family. I'm going to ask him what he thinks about the argument that Jackson may have given himself that fatal dose of Propofol. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAYE: Welcome back, everyone. We're reporting live from Los Angeles this week. So let's get back to the Michael Jackson manslaughter trial now, where this is taking place, right here in L.A. And it is day three of testimony on the stand.

Right now, the head of Jackson's security team. Later today, we expect to hear from the paramedics called to the house and Jackson's chef, as well.

Joining me now is a very close friend of Michael Jackson's family. Stacy Brown also helped write the biography, "Michael Jackson: The Man Behind the Mask," with Michael Jackson's former publicist, Bob Jones.

Stacy, thank you so much for joining us.

Let me ask you, first -- I'm sure you've been paying close attention to this trial -- I want to ask you about the defense's argument that Michael Jackson may have called his own death by giving himself that fatal dose of Propofol after Dr. Conrad Murray had left the room.

What do you make of that possible scenario?

STACY BROWN, MICHAEL JACKSON BIOGRAPHER: Well, first, Randi, let me just say I no longer consider myself a close family friend of the Jacksons. I think that misrepresents things a little bit, and that's not your fault.

But to answer your question, I just think that in the case of Dr. Murray's defense, he's still a doctor. He has a taken a Hippocratic Oath that he's taken, as every doctor, ever physician has taken. And Dr. Murray apparently -- and you listen to the first couple of days and in today of testimony, he totally disregarded his responsibility. And it was very much negligent in this, and perhaps an argument, as we see in court is being made, perhaps he even caused the death of Michael Jackson.

KAYE: I do want to point out that Dr. Conrad Murray has pleaded not guilty to this involuntary manslaughter that he's charged with. But I also want to ask you about this suggestion in court.

There's a lot of talk about Michael Jackson visiting many doctors' offices, but specifically the office of Dr. Arnold Klein, his dermatologist, where he apparently got Demerol. And Dr. Murray wasn't even made aware of that, the defense is saying.

But what do you know about those visits? I mean, we've heard this recording of him actually made by Dr. Conrad Murray slurring his words, in court. Do you know anything about those visits to Dr. Arnold Klein or to other doctors, and sort of doctors shopping, if you will?

BROWN: Well, yes. Prior to Michael Jackson's death, I would say two months leading up to Michael Jackson's death, Michael was daily, almost daily, going to Dr. Klein's office. And, in fact, paparazzi was there when he was going in and out of Klein's office.

To be specific, I know that TMZ was there just about every day filming Michael going in and out of there. And when he would come out, it was pretty obvious that Dr. Klein or someone in that office had given him something that made him appear to be drugged. And this was a daily thing. And apparently, he was getting, from what we understand, Demerol from Dr. Klein.

Dr. Murray, as his doctor -- now, we all have doctors in our lives, and most of us have more than one doctor. Any time you go to a new doctor, they generally order the records from the past doctor.

Michael Jackson also made it clear in 1993 that he had a problem with prescription drugs. He was an addict. So, Dr. Murray, armed with this information that the rest of the world was armed with, and certainly everyone -- especially given the attention that the "This is It" concert was already getting -- everyone knew Michael was going to Dr. Klein's office every day, being given medication for something. Dr. Murray had the responsibility to know this.

KAYE: I want to ask you about Michael's children, because there was some really emotional testimony while I was in court yesterday about his two older kids, Prince and Paris, who were standing at the bedroom door as Michael appeared lifeless. I want to play that sound very quickly and just ask you about the kids in a moment.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FAHEEM MUHAMMAD, HEAD OF MICHAEL JACKSON'S SECURITY DETAIL: Paris was on the ground balled up crying, and Prince was just -- he was standing there and he just had a real shocked -- just slowly crying type of look on his face.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KAYE: And Paris was apparently later on curled up in a ball on the floor crying.

How are the kids doing?

BROWN: You know, from all I've gathered, from those I've talked to that are close to the kids in the past several months, they're doing spectacular. It doesn't surprise me, though, because long before Michael passed, I always heard -- and when I was around the family on a regular basis, I always knew that Michael cherished these kids and was raising them to be strong individuals.

And this doesn't surprise me that I hear that they're doing great. They're doing -- especially given the circumstances, they're doing very well.

And, in fact, we keep hearing that Prince Jackson may testify in this trial. And I know that kind of puts people off a bit, but from everything that I have gathered about Michael Jackson and the way he raised his children, Prince will probably be a powerful witness in this case.

KAYE: Yes. Stacy Brown, appreciate your time. Thank you so much.

And still ahead today, social media and the digital age now testing centuries-old laws. We'll tell you about one recent case that has even tested the 4th Amendment.

We'll be right back after this quick break with much more from Los Angeles.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAYE: Welcome back.

The explosion of social media really is transforming the way we live from how we communicate with each other to how we travel, even to how we do business. But it's also changing laws.

Case in point, a recent federal ruling that we thought you might find as fascinating as we did. The case, the United States versus Musgrove. That's the name of it.

The question: When a computer is in screen safer mode, does a police officer's touching a key or moving the mouse pad in order to reveal the contents of the screen violate the Fourth Amendment against searches and seizures?

The answer the court found is yes.

Here to discuss the case with me, CNN Senior Legal Analyst Jeffrey Toobin.

Jeffrey, thanks for joining me.

First, let's explain what led to this case. OK?

We have the local police. They receive a complaint about this threat posted on Craigslist regarding a possible planned violence or violent attack at a local shopping mall.

Police find the man who made the post, they go to his home. The man invites them inside.

And then, Jeffrey, while they're there, an officer sees this laptop that was in screen-saver mode, he moves the mouse pad, the computer game out of screen-saver mode. Now take us through what happens next. What did they then discover there and how it led us to where we are now?

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SR. LEGAL ANALYST: OK. So what happens at that point is he touches the mouse, getting rid of the screen saver to show what's on the screen. It's not Craigslist, but it is his Facebook page.

And on his status, he sees something called -- there's a reference to possible violence at the mall. Again, corroborating the tip that they had gotten. And based on what the police officer sees on the Facebook page, he gets arrested.

KAYE: So let me ask you this. I mean, if the computer had been up and there hadn't been a screen saver on, could police have just looked at it and looked at its contents? I mean, would it have been the same situation?

TOOBIN: Well, no. I think that's different.

I mean, the rule is, if the police are legitimately in a place like a house -- and clearly they were invited into his house, there's no dispute about that -- if something is in plain view, if there's a big knife on the table, that is clearly something the police can look at and investigate and arrest, if necessary. The question is, does moving a mouse to get rid of a screen saver -- is that something in plain view? And the judge in this case said, no, that's not plain view because you had to move the mouse.

Now, among the many questions raised by this case is, who still uses a screen saver? It feels very 1997 to me, flying toasters and all that. But we all still know what a screen saver is.

And what the judge said was this was like looking under a bed. He didn't have -- the police officer didn't have permission to search in the house just to see what was in plain view, and that was an illegal search because he had to move the mouse.

KAYE: But couldn't these officers have just maybe checked the guy's Facebook page from another computer and found the same damaging information?

TOOBIN: See, that's what makes the case so interesting, is that it wasn't just what was on the screen, it was that what was on the screen also circulated in social media. You know, one of the key issues always in law is, do you have an expectation of privacy? The argument is, by putting something on Facebook, the whole point of Facebook is to communicate with other people, so you don't have an expectation to privacy.

So, the decision suggests, if the police had gone on Facebook back at the police station and looked up this guy, and it was in public, they had legitimate access to it. But because they moved the mouse inside the guy's house, that made it different, that made it more like a search, that made it an illegal search.

KAYE: So what is the takeaway from this, do you think, besides don't use a screen saver? TOOBIN: Get rid of the screen savers. Come on. That's like ancient history now.

No, that's not it. It's that we're in a new world. And to pretend that there is one rule that applies across all of these things is foolhardy, because the law is just catching up with the technology. But the cautious, smart decision to make is, don't put anything on Facebook, don't go on social media with any sort of expectation that you can keep it private from anyone, including the police.

KAYE: Yes, it's amazing that this still continues with all the cases that we've seen and all the warnings.

Jeffrey Toobin, thank you so much. Appreciate it.

TOOBIN: All right.

KAYE: Straight ahead, we are live in Afghanistan, where eight more NATO troops are dead in new attacks. We'll have the details for you.

But first, East Africa is crippled by famine and that's not always in the headlines. Actress and Oxfam Ambassador Scarlett Johansson travelled to Kenya to witness the pain of thousands of refugees in this "Impact Your World."

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SCARLETT JOHANSSON, ACTRESS: Hi, I'm Scarlett Johansson. You, too, can impact East Africa.

How are you?

I was first struck by the mass of it, largest refugee camp in the world. People are just surviving.

Basically I was there as an ambassador of Oxfam to hopefully highlight not only the crisis, but also to highlight all of the work that Oxfam is doing and what they're providing for people.

It doesn't need to be this way. There is enough food in the world to feed everyone.

Join the movement. "Impact Your World." Go to CNN.com/Impact.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAYE: NATO troops in Afghanistan are taking more losses in a week of conflicting reports on violence versus stability after 10 years of war.

Our Nick Paton Walsh is live this hour in Kabul.

Nick, what is the very latest from there? NICK PATON WALSH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, we now have learned that yesterday, a total of eight NATO troops died in a variety of incidents across the country, three killed in a blast in the south, three killed in a blast in the east, and two other dead in various other incidents. That's an awfully bad day, of course, tragic numbers. It doesn't suggest necessarily that something changed for the whole campaign yesterday, but things like this focus minds on exactly what's happening with the violence here and actually comes as there's a huge debate going on about really how stable has Afghanistan become.

The United Nations yesterday releasing a controversial report in which they said violence had shot up by 39 percent year on year. That's what they call security instance.

Now, that prompted NATO to come out and say their own southwest figures suggesting that they believe in their own count different rules, different ways of accounting, that violence has in fact gone down by just 2 percent.

So, clearly, very different perspectives here from the United Nations, supposed to be objective, and, of course, NATO here, who are very clear about the narrative they're trying to explain, the violence is going down, it's possible to hand over parts of the country to Afghan security forces so American start to withdraw. It seems (INAUDIBLE) to reduce the war here after 10 years, to kind of about numbers really. But at the end of the day, that's how people are trying to deduce, exactly how calm and stable it is here or is it the U.N. says, violence just getting worse -- Randi.

KAYE: Yes. Nick, I mean, really, when you talk about these conflicting reports and conflicting numbers, I mean, can you get a read on what's what and who might be more accurate here?

WALSH: Well, I mean, this basically explains who counts what. The U.N. looks violence across the country, that's violence initiated by NATO and violence initiated by the Taliban. They count things that NATO don't count. NATO today released violence which they consider to be attacks initiated by the enemy, which they say is down 2 percent.

It's a very complicated set of accountancy figures, to be honest really here. I witnessed today NATO officials trying to explain how they come to the much more positive numbers.

I think it's fair to say that there is a huge a discrepancy between the numbers and it's hard to reconcile them. Frankly, the U.N. just putting out what they consider to be a fair count I think of exactly how these numbers are seeing a rise year on year, and I believe that does tally with many feelings of Afghans across the country who aren't necessarily, when you talk to them, noticing a marked improvement in the stability across the board -- Randi.

KAYE: All right, Nick Payton Walsh from Kabul for us -- Nick, thank you. Be safe there.

Coming up, nearly every day, more victims of Mexico's deadly drug war. Is it time to change the government's strategy in fighting the drug cartels? We'll have a live report for you right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAYE: In Mexico, there is growing fear, frustration and anger over the drug war and its mounting victims. Many Mexicans say that they're fed up with the nearly daily violence. And many are venting their anger at a government strategy aimed at defeating the cartels that they believe have failed.

Rafael Romo reports.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RAFAEL ROMO, CNN SENIOR LATIN AMERICAN AFFAIRS EDITOR (voice-over): It's not only that the five severed heads were dumped in the middle of the morning. What's shocking people in Acapulco, Mexico, is that the sack containing the heads was left right next to an elementary school. Teachers of that school refuse to work because they're terrified, and thousands have taken to the streets to say enough is enough.

ELISABETH MALKIN, NEW YORK TIMES: I think what has really caught people's attention in Mexico is how the violence now has reached ordinary people, working people.

ROMO: At least 140 Acapulco schools closed after criminals left messages saying that teachers who refuse to pay kickbacks will be attacked.

MALKIN: When I was in Acapulco last week, people were saying it's everybody -- it's taxi drivers, it's doctors, it's people who sell in the markets there who live hand to mouth. They're all receiving threats.

ROMO: This year alone, drug violence in Mexico has claimed the lives of more than 9,500 people. According to "Reforma," a Mexico City news paper that tracks violent deaths, there have been almost 500 beheadings.

REP. CONNIE MACK (R), FLORIDA: It's important to recognize that the actions of the cartel have changed in Mexico. At one point a while ago, it was just the shipment of drugs for profit. Now, they've changed their tactics into an insurgency

ROMO: Another concern is that Mexicans are so fed up with violence that they're willing to take justice into their own hands.

A vigilante group that claims its only goal is to kill drug traffickers posted a video on the Internet last weekend stating its intentions. The legitimacy of the video hasn't been verified.

Time is running out for President Felipe Calderon to reduce drug violence. His six year term in office expires in 14 months.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KAYE: Rafael Romo joins us now in Atlanta. Rafael, what are the people in Mexico saying? I mean, do they think that it's time to change the strategy that the Mexican president has been using so far?

ROMO: Well, Randi, interestingly enough, in spite of everything that we've seen, the beheadings, the shoot-outs, murders, a full 67 percent of Mexicans, two-thirds, say that whoever wins the presidency next year should continue the same strategy of fighting the cartels head- on. This is a survey published this week and only 27 percent of the people who participated in this survey said it's time to change the strategy. So in spite of all that, they still want the government to fight the cartels, Randi.

KAYE: And when you hear about the frustration and the anger over what really seemed to be endless killings, I mean, what are the odds that President Calderon can get reelected?

ROMO: He's finishing a six year term next December in 2012, and according to the Mexican constitution, he can only be a president for one term. So, it's going to be a different person and the big question right now, Randi, is whether the person who succeeds him, whether it's somebody from his own party or a different party, is going to continue the same policies. But then again, based on the survey, it's apparently what most Mexicans want at this time, Randi.

KAYE: All right. Rafael Romo from Atlanta -- Rafael, thank you.

And still ahead, a controversial new app for Androids. Its makers say it's supposed to be funny, but several gay and lesbian groups aren't laughing and they want Google to do something about it. We are in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAYE: Is your son gay? Do you know? Do you even care?

Well, if you don't know and you do care, there is now an app for that. Did you know that? Yes, believe it or not, it's true.

A French developer has released a new Android app called appropriately enough, "Is My Son Gay?" It purports to decipher whether or not your son is, in fact, gay by answers that you gave to a series of 20 questions -- questions that really play on gay stereotypes, like, does he dress well? Is he a fan of divas? And does he like musical comedies?

Can you believe this?

But several folks don't find anything about it. Gay advocacy magazine "Instinct" blasted the app for employing a science of tired and offensive stereotypes.

Joining me to discuss the app, Corey Johnson, deputy director of programs for GLAAD, Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation.

Corey, thanks so much for coming on the show. I'll tell you, this one I'm still shaking my head over it. Your reaction to this app. Funny or not?

COREY JOHNSON, GLAAD: Well, sadly, there's nothing funny about an app that unnecessarily trivializes and promotes outdated stereotypes of gay and lesbian people. Sadly, we still see parents who reject their children -- more and more parents are accepting their children and unconditionally loving them. But an application like this really sets up bad stereotypes, and gay and lesbian young people that are rejected face higher rates of homelessness, mental illness and, you know, ultimately are eight times more likely to commit suicide.

So, this really isn't a laughing matter. It's very own offensive. And, you know, we hope that this app will be removed.

KAYE: Well, let me share -- we did share the beginning just a few questions that are on the app. But I want to share a few more so you can really get a feel for this. Some of the questions include -- does he like football? Does he take a long time to do his hair? Does he have a complicated relationship with his father?

I mean, Corey, I would imagine there's been quite a backlash in the gay community over this.

JOHNSON: Well, that first question, does he like football, is a little outrageous. I was actually captain of my high school football team and I am a gay man. This app just that first question and the other really bizarre questions, the 20 questions that are part of this application, just show how, you know, outdated these stereotypes really are.

It's 2011. We've seen tremendous quality on marriage equality. Last week, the United States got rid of "don't ask, don't tell." There's been significant progress for gay and lesbian Americans.

An app like this really just doesn't have any place in this day and age and it could be harmful to gay and lesbian young people who are being bullied in school.

KAYE: I want to share with our viewers the French developer -- they certainly responded to this controversy, issuing a statement saying the app was conceived with a playful approach, it is not based at all on scientific research. Through humor, "Is My Son Gay?" and the forthcoming novel have the sole objective of toning down/improving the situation and helping mothers to accept their son's homosexuality.

But once again, no joke, because -- I mean, kids whose parents reject them for coming out for being gay, this is very serious stuff.

JOHNSON: Yes, it's very serious. And as I said before, we've seen the statistics. LGBT youth who are rejected by their parents are eight times more likely to commit suicide, more likely to end up on the streets, more likely to suffer from mental illness and what Android and Google should be doing is promoting applications to parents to teach them how to accept their children, not promoting an application that has these outdated stereotypes.

It's just -- it's not funny, it's outrageous, and it's very offensive actually.

KAYE: All right. Corey Johnson, appreciate that. I certainly think there's work to be done on that app, as well. Thank you.

JOHNSON: Thanks for having me.

KAYE: Well, he is the subject of a new Gerard Butler movie. He is a biker, an ex-con, a former drug addict and how he's saving thousands of children from rape and slaughter in Sudan. Don't miss this interview, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAYE: Meet the machine gun preacher -- a true to life criminal who turned in to what some call angel. He is subject of a new movie titled appropriately, "Machine Gun Preacher," starring Gerard Butler.

The native Pennsylvanian grew up to become simply a bad guy. Addicted to drugs, fighting, shooting and stabbing for money, he spent time in jail and had no direction until he says he found God. And in the process of preaching the gospel in East Africa 13 years ago, he started rescuing orphans in gun battles with the Lord Resistance Army. And I'm talking real battles were lives were lost on every side.

The LRA is a brutal militant rebel group known for hacking off the lips of ears of victims. They kill and rape without remorse, leaving behind a scattered trail of missing children, looted villages and burned huts. They replenish their ranks through abducting young men and boys.

According to the nonprofit Angels of East Africa, they have kidnapped 30,000 children and murdered hundreds of thousands of villagers.

Joining me now, the "machine gun preacher" himself, Sam Childers.

Sam, thank you so much. I really appreciate your honesty in this new film. You don't cover up the fact that you're, well, I'll just say it, unlikable at the beginning. Was all that true about the gunfights and time in jail and a stabbing that almost killed a man?

SAM CHILDERS, THE MACHINE GUN PREACHER: Yes, it was. I was in jail before. I was never in prison. I was in jail.

And they really held back on who I really was 30 years ago. I don't believe they everyone hit a fraction of the person I was over 30 years ago.

KAYE: What brought you -- what took you from Pennsylvania to the Sudan all those years ago?

CHILDERS: I went on a normal mission trip that was a five-week mission trip, and when I went into Sudan, I've seen the body of a small child that stepped on a land mine. It was a few days old. But everything in the movie is based on the truth except the time line is really confused because you got 30-plus years in the two-hour movie.

But I stood over that body and I said, God, I'll do anything I can to help these people. And I'm still there working.

KAYE: And is that how you went really? I mean, film takes us through you going from a construction worker to a volunteer to the machine gun preacher. I mean, you would do anything, even kill, to protect these children?

CHILDERS: It did go that fast -- or, excuse me, it didn't go that fast, but it was in that order. Again, it was 30-some plus years.

But one of the big things that I try to let people know, I got a platform now to stand up and tell the world what's truly going on in Sudan. I mean, everyone knows that there has been a genocide in Darfur, genocide in south Sudan.

South Sudan got their independence now, they're building an infrastructure for a new country. But they're still fighting in Abyei. There's fighting in Nuba mountains. There's fighting in the Blue Nile.

But they need to realize that even these small rebel groups, they're all financed by the president of northern Sudan, Bashir. Bashir is one of the only presidents in office that has had war crime charges placed on him, also.

KAYE: There is no question that you're doing some incredible work and some very good work. You clearly have a big heart.

But there are those who question your methods, who question your tactics. So today I want to ask you, do you consider yourself a missionary or a mercenary?

CHILDERS: You know, I wished I was a mercenary. They make good money. So I'm not a mercenary. I am a missionary.

And I believe that in the country that we live in, we live in a free country, and I'm what they call a freedom fighter. So I fight that every man and every woman has freedom to serve who they want to serve and how they want to believe. And if somebody has in their mind that they don't believe that what I do is right, I fight for that freedom. And so, I believe everyone has the right to believe what they like.

But what I ask you is if somebody took your child or if somebody took your family member or your mother or your father, and if I said I can bring them home, what would you say?

KAYE: Well, of course, I think we all know the answer to that.

From what I understand, though, I mean, you were so committed to this. You slept with a Bible in one hand and an AK-47 in the other hand, to make sure this orphanage of yours got done. Tell me how successful it is today, how many children you've helped, and where do they go from here?

CHILDERS: We have three bases in Uganda. We have work going on in Ethiopia. We're getting ready to do work this Somalia, as well. Plus, the orphanage in South Sudan. We have 179 children, but those children some of them are also in Uganda, also. I believe there's like 130, 125 children on the orphanage in South Sudan. Some of our children have been there for many, many years now. So, they're actually old enough that they're in universities in southern Uganda now. So I have many children being schooled also in Uganda, as well.

KAYE: And how do you feel seeing your life story in a Hollywood script?

CHILDERS: You know, I'm getting used to it now, but for a long time, it was like a dream. I mean, most every morning I'd wake up thinking, wow, is this a dream or what, you know? But all of in begun back in 2005, I was featured on "Dateline" NBC and that's kind of like when everything went on is when they featured me in Sudan rescuing children.

You know, back in '04 -- '03, '04, '05, was very serious problems going on in South Sudan from the Lord Resistant Army. And a lot of people say it's finished now. The Lord Resistance Army is not a threat.

Since the first of the year, Joseph Kony, the Lord Resistance Army, abducted over 1,000 people, and killed over 200. So, it's not over. This man is still a threat.

KAYE: Sam Childers, appreciate you coming on the show and I certainly appreciate the work you're doing to help the children there. Thank you so much.

CHILDERS: Thank you.

KAYE: And if you're interested in helping out Sam and his cause, you can just go to machinegunpreacher.com.

CNN NEWSROOM continues with Brooke Baldwin, right after this short break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)