Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live At Daybreak

Sound Off: Do Detainees Have Information That Could be Critical in Breaking Terrorist Network?

Aired October 26, 2001 - 08:52   ET

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

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: As we have been telling you, law enforcement agencies are holding some 800 people in the investigation of terrorism. Do they have information that could be critical in breaking the terrorist network? And what are those authorities doing to get that information? Are they using truth drugs, even torture?

Our "Sound Off" segment raises these questions, with syndicated columnist Julianne Malveaux, who doubts force...

JULIANNE MALVEAUX, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST: Good morning..

ZAHN: Good morning.

You doubt, of course, force is being used in the interrogation.

And constitutional lawyer Ann Coulter, fearful that it could be used.

Welcome back you two.

Now, Ann, there is no reporting that would suggest that any of this stuff has happened. Why are you afraid it is going to happen?

ANN COULTER, CONSTITUTIONAL LAWYER: No, I don't think it will. I mean, besides any constitutional problems, one problem with torture is you don't tend to get reliable confessions or information. No, I don't think it is being used. I think there are enough tools, and I hate to say anything nice about the United States Congress, but I think the bill they passed is actually a good balance of civil liberties and what needs to be done in terrorism investigations. You can only hold them for -- suspected terrorists for up to seven days, except there are various exceptions to that. A material witness can be held. If you have classified -- if the government has classified information, that can be presented in outline form to a judge, and that will extend the detainments or for deportation proceeding or criminal proceeding, you can hold, a suspected terrorist. So I actually think a fine balance that is being struck.

And...

MALVEAUX: Not at all, Ann, I think it's a horrible piece of legislation.

ZAHN: Why?

MALVEAUX: I praise Russ Feingold for being one of the holdouts, praise those 66 people who -- because we rushed into it, because there are not checks and balances, because all these things that are directed at terrorists can also be directed at ordinary Americans, and in addition, because these powers exist for four years, not two. Are we saying that we are going to be at war with Afghanistan four years? Can we not we go back and extend it as opposed to giving this much power to Mr. Ashcroft and others for four years?

I think that the terrorists have won, if we end up deciding our normal way of life is going to be changed because of our fears, that we are going to take away the civil liberties of ordinary people because of fears. I'm angry about this legislation.

ZAHN: So what you are telling me, you are more concerned about American citizens right now. Do you have a problem with some of these men who are considered potentially, have been potentially involved in the September 11 attacks being detained for seven-day period if they go through the process Ann told you about, could be detained up to six months? Do you have a problem with that?

MALVEAUX: I have some problems. I don't think 800 people are some involved in any terrorist plot. I think that it is some subset of that number. I'm curious about how these people have come to be detained. We don't know, because we are not giving that information. I also do think that torture may well be used. After all, police officers all over the United States have used torture against African- American detainees when they felt like it, and so I'm very concerned about that as well.

ZAHN: Ann Coulter?

COULTER: I mean, I agree with Julianne on one point, and that is, I don't trust the concept of emergency measures. New York City rent controls were a wartime emergency measure, you know, from World War II. They do tend to never go away. I don't have a problem with procedures never going away. We don't have a national ID card. I don't think this is the sort of thing that is going to affect all Americans. I mean, it really is just more -- I mean, it's very similar to the criminal law applied to terrorist situation, and that is, what do you do with classified information? The government doesn't want to present openly so that the "New York Times" can publish it, like the Pentagon papers? Does -- all of these things require a court hearing. A judge does have to sign off on all of these detentions.

ZAHN: All right, closing thoughts, parting thoughts from both of you.

Julianne, within the context of the fact that we know interrogators can lie to suspects, that is OK to do, but it against the law them to beat them. Do you...

MALVEAUX: No doubt.

(CROSSTALK)

ZAHN: But you no doubt know that there are a number of Americans out there who feel that if these interrogations are not revealing useful information, they think that that's an OK thing to do.

Julianne, a final thought on that, and then on to you, Ann.

MALVEAUX: Some think it's OK. I think that we have due process. We have a constitution. Again, terrorists win if we decide to alter the way that we respect people. If we decide that immigrant people are immediately suspect, the terrorists lose -- terrorists win, and we as Americans lose all things we fought for.

ZAHN: Ann, give me five seconds worth, and then I've got to take a commercial.

MALVEAUX: As I say, my main objection to torture is it doesn't work, but we do have, you know, sort of backup torture, and that is, you can be deported from this country and, you know, miss the whole World Series.

ZAHN: Ann and Julianne, thanks for your time this morning.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com