Return to Transcripts main page
American Morning
Quran Retraction; ATM Scam; Bill Cosby Controversy
Aired May 17, 2005 - 07:30 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.
SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: Ah, the morning commute is under way New York City. Welcome back, everybody. It is exactly half past the hour on this AMERICAN MORNING. Bill Hemmer has got the day off. Miles O'Brien is helping us out for another day.
Thank you very much for that.
MILES O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: And the beauty of this shift? No traffic. It's great, 4:00 in the morning.
S. O'BRIEN: Isn't that?
M. O'BRIEN: Breeze right in.
S. O'BRIEN: Does it make up for getting up at 4:00 in the morning?
M. O'BRIEN: It feels great, doesn't it?
S. O'BRIEN: Oh, yes.
M. O'BRIEN: All right. Well, coming up, is there more that "Newsweek" magazine can do to repair damage from its story about U.S. desecration of the Quran?
S. O'BRIEN: This morning, we are talking with the magazine's Washington bureau chief. That's coming up in just a moment.
First, though, let's get a check of the headlines with Carol Costello.
Good morning.
CAROL COSTELLO, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning to both of you. Good morning to all of you.
"Now in the News."
An Army reservist could face up to five-and-a-half years in prison for her role in the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal. A military jury convicted Specialist Sabrina Harman on all but one of seven charges against her. A sentencing hearing is set to begin in about two-and-a-half hours at Fort Hood, Texas.
President Bush is set to host former South African President Nelson Mandela at the White House. The meeting, set to begin in two hours, is the first in years. Mandela has been a fierce critic of the war in Iraq. Today's discussion is expected to focus on development in Africa and efforts to combat HIV and AIDS.
In California, some workers at Michael Jackson's Neverland ranch are coming to his defense. A housekeeper said she saw the accuser carrying adult magazines in his backpack. And a former security guard said he once caught the accuser and his brother alone in Jackson's wine cellar with a half-empty bottle of wine. Testimony in the trial resumes later today.
And promoting diversity, Harvard University says it's planning to spend $50 million over the next decade to recruit and promote women and members of underrepresented minority groups to its faculty. Harvard's president, Lawrence Summers, made the announcement on Monday. The move comes after comments made by Summers back in January. I'm sure you remember. He had said intrinsic differences between the sexes may explain why few women work in academic sciences. Summers has apologized repeatedly for the remarks, but that $50 million makes is "I'm sorry" sound a whole lot better.
S. O'BRIEN: Doesn't it, though?
M. O'BRIEN: An expensive statement, wasn't it?
S. O'BRIEN: Yes. And it's a good thing for the university as an alum.
COSTELLO: It's definitely a good thing.
S. O'BRIEN: I applaud it. Thanks, Carol.
A good first step. That is what the White House is saying about "Newsweek's" retraction of a story alleging U.S. interrogators desecrated the Quran at Guantanamo Bay. The report sparked deadly protests in Afghanistan.
And "Newsweek" released this statement: "Based on what we know now, we are retracting our original story that an internal military investigation had uncovered Quran abuse at Guantanamo Bay."
Dan Klaidman is the "Newsweek" Washington bureau chief. He's at the Capitol this morning.
Dan, nice to see you. Thank you for talking with us. You have already apologized. Why go a step further with the retraction?
DAN KLAIDMAN, "NEWSWEEK" WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF: Well, I think there was some confusion, because we didn't use the word "retraction." But we retracted the story when we published it on Sunday. And as soon as we realized that we had made a mistake and that we had a problem with the story, we decided that we needed to figure out what happened, lay it out in the story, report it out and acknowledge that we had made these mistakes and be as transparent as possible. And that's what we did.
S. O'BRIEN: The White House has been very angry. We've heard that over the last couple days.
Here is what Scott McClellan had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE SPOKESMAN: The damage has been done. And what this report did was provide people who are opposed to the United States and who are on the other side of the war on terrorism with the ability to go out and exploit this report for their own purposes. They've used it to incite violence, violence that has led to the deaths of individuals. Some 15, 16, 17 individuals have lost their lives in the aftermath of this report.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
S. O'BRIEN: McClellan says that he applauds this first step, but he wants to see other steps that would mitigate the fallout. Is "Newsweek" planning any other steps?
KLAIDMAN: What we've done is to lay out in as much detail as we can, as we've learned the facts, what mistakes we made, how we believe we made them. And we will continue to look at our processes, our reporting methods, questions about sourcing. We're going to go back and learn from the mistakes we made so that we don't repeat them in the future. That's, I think, the most important thing we can do as we continue our mission to report the news as fairly, accurately and responsibly as we can.
S. O'BRIEN: A rule of thumb in journalism, as you well know, is generally you don't go with one source. Why this time did you?
KLAIDMAN: Well, these things are complicated. They're difficult judgment calls. First of all, you have to factor in who the source is, how reliable the source has been, what his position is. In this particular case, it was a source at a high level in the U.S. government, who we had relied on in the past, who had been -- whose information had been accurate in stories that we had published in the past.
And we went further than that. We ran the story by a Pentagon spokesman and by the southern command spokesman. And then we took the extraordinary length of actually showing the story, providing the story in advance to a senior responsible Department of Defense official who was in a position to know the facts here. And he didn't dispute any element of the story that we ultimately published, although he did quarrel with one element of the original story that we didn't publish.
And so, we felt that we had what we needed to go with the story. We will go back and look and see what we could have done better. And we'll discuss our sourcing policies and figure out how to proceed in the future.
S. O'BRIEN: When you're talking, though, about a particularly sensitive topic, are these things that you're going to consider in your discussions? I mean, I understand the need sometimes for one source. But at the same time, you're talking about something that, it's not a surprise, would spark riots and protests. KLAIDMAN: Well, precisely because it was a sensitive story, we ran it by and provided it to a Pentagon -- a Department of Defense official. You know, obviously, if we had known what kind of fallout there would have been in terms of the violence in Pakistan, you know, that's something that in some ways was unknowable. And we feel terrible about the role that we played in sparking the violence.
There were a lot of different forces, and it's hard to know exactly what caused the violence. There are underlying issues there, including a lot of pent-up and not so pent-up rage against the United States for its policies.
But clearly, as we continue to report the news, we are going to be as sensitive as we possibly can to the power of our words, which have consequences.
S. O'BRIEN: Michael Isikoff was a reporter on that, a well-known and very well-regarded reporter. What happens to him?
KLAIDMAN: Michael Isikoff is one of the very best investigative reporters that this city has ever had. He has reported many, many important politically-sensitive stories. Not only has he gotten them mostly right, he has gotten them completely right. He is an enormously professional and responsible reporter who does his due diligence when he reports. And I'm proud of Mike, the work he's been doing for our bureau for years.
Sometimes mistakes get made. This one was made in good faith. We all feel terrible about it. And we will try to make sure that these kinds of mistakes don't happen in the future.
S. O'BRIEN: Dan Klaidman is "Newsweek's" Washington bureau chief. Dan, thanks for talking with us.
KLAIDMAN: Thank you.
S. O'BRIEN: Miles.
M. O'BRIEN: Let's head out west where the weather is causing some problems in several states this morning. In California, parts of Yosemite National Park are closed. The warm weather there is melting an unusually large snow pack, and that's causing some serious flooding, as you see there. Vacationers are told to check road conditions before making plans to visit the park.
In Utah, a lot of cleaning up to do today. Winds of more than 80 miles an hour cut through northern parts of the state, blowing over trailers, power lines and trees. No injuries reported. At one point, power companies reported 18,000 customers without electricity, however.
And in Arizona, stiff winds making it hard for firefighters to get a wildfire under control there. The 9,500-acre blaze is burning up a sparsely-populated recreation area about 30 miles northeast of Phoenix. Fire crews hope to have the fire contained by Friday night.
Let's head to the CNN center.
(WEATHER REPORT)
S. O'BRIEN: Well, now to a new scam targeting automated teller machines. Americans conduct $10 billion to $15 billion in ATM business each year. And as CNN's Dan Lothian tells us, unsuspecting consumers are getting their electronic pockets picked.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DAN LOTHIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice over): Bank ATMs, a convenient way to get cash and, increasingly, a convenient way to steal it.
DET. STEVEN BLAIR, BOSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT: This is identity theft at its max. They get your personal information, and they steal all your money out of your bank accounts.
LOTHIAN: In Boston this woman says she lost $1,900 from her bank account.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I felt like my privacy was definitely threatened.
LOTHIAN: The suspect in her case was caught on surveillance tape and last week caught by police. Thirty-five-year-old Juan Gardicia (ph) is accused of using a high-tech scheme to target more than 400 ATM users in Massachusetts and New Hampshire, allegedly stealing at least $400,000 over the past two years, charges that he denies.
But in three easy steps, investigators say, Gardicia (ph) and others cashed in. Step number one: Police say they would mount this fake swiping box on the door of a bank's ATM machine area, which would be rigged to stay open.
BLAIR: It's a recording device that records credit card numbers.
LOTHIAN: Step number two: A small hidden camera was allegedly installed near the key pad and linked to a nearby laptop computer.
BLAIR: When a person was putting their password into the ATM machine, they were able to capture it.
LOTHIAN: And step number three: Police say blank credit cards were imprinted with the customer information that, when combined with PIN numbers, were ready to use.
While non-bank ATMs have long been targeted by criminals, this type of crime has only recent hit ATM customers nationwide in cities like Detroit, New York, Los Angeles, Phoenix and Miami.
LARRY JOHNSON, SECRET SERVICE: I think initially we saw big cities that were hit the hardest. But now, it can be anywhere USA.
LOTHIAN: The Secret Service is actively pursuing ATM criminals, who are getting smarter. JOHNSON: We try to stay a step ahead of technology.
LOTHIAN (on camera): Experts say a little common sense could help prevent some of these crimes. For example, always hide your PIN number as you enter it. Check for unusual signs or devices. If it doesn't feel right, leave. And finally, check your statements to make sure you're the only one using your account.
Dan Lothian, CNN, Boston.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
S. O'BRIEN: Now, while banks will always refund money that's been stolen, non-bank ATMs are not required to do so.
M. O'BRIEN: So, another reason not to use Fred's ATM, which costs five bucks anyway.
S. O'BRIEN: Well, those are all over the city here.
M. O'BRIEN: Yes, they're everywhere.
S. O'BRIEN: You know, in delis and, you know, whatever.
M. O'BRIEN: All right. You've got to be careful out there.
S. O'BRIEN: Yet another reason.
M. O'BRIEN: Be careful. They're watching you.
All right. So, why is a prominent author and professor calling Bill Cosby vicious?
S. O'BRIEN: We're going to talk about what he is taking exception to in what Bill Cosby has said.
Also, why it is not just wine lovers that are applauding yesterday's Supreme Court decision. Andy has got that as he minds your business up next on AMERICAN MORNING.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
S. O'BRIEN: Mexico's president, Vicente Fox, apologizing for a comment that he made about African-Americans. Fox called civil rights leaders Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson on Monday, told them he regretted any offense to the black community. Over the weekend, Fox said that Mexican immigrants in the United States take jobs that -- quote -- "Not even blacks want to do." Sharpton said the conversation was a step in the right direction, but he thinks that Fox should issue a formal apology.
One year ago today, comedian Bill Cosby sparked his own share of controversy over remarks that he made about African-Americans during an NAACP awards dinner. Cosby's comments provoked a response in the form of a book. It's called "Is Bill Cosby Right, or Has the Black Middle Class Lost its Mind?" It's written by Michael Eric Dyson. He's a professor at the University of Pennsylvania. And he's our guest this morning.
Nice to see you. Good morning.
MICHAEL ERIC DYSON, AUTHOR, "IS BILL COSBY RIGHT?": Good to see you.
S. O'BRIEN: You really take a lot of exception about some of the things that Bill Cosby said. And I want to play a little bit from a -- I'll read to you a speech that Cosby delivered before we start to give a little context for folks who may not remember.
DYSON: Absolutely.
S. O'BRIEN: He said this: "In a neighborhood that most of us grew up in, parenting is not going on. They're buying these things for the kids, $500 sneakers, for what? And they won't spend 250 bucks on Hooked on Phonics. These people are not Africans. They don't know a (EXPLETIVE DELETED) thing about Africa. With names like Shaniqua, Shaliqua, Mohammed and all that crap, and all of them are in jail."
That was about a year ago at this time.
DYSON: Yes.
S. O'BRIEN: It went on and on and has continued to go on and on.
DYSON: Yes.
S. O'BRIEN: What's your biggest problem with what Bill Cosby is saying?
DYSON: Well, first of all, it's interesting that you juxtaposed the two stories, Mr. Vicente calling Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson to apologize for saying that black people won't take job but Mexicans will, the context, of course, inflammatory. But our black leadership will not oppose Mr. Cosby for, as you just read, so much more vicious statements that are full of class bigotry.
First of all, (INAUDIBLE) Bill Cosby's name if your name is Soledad or Oprah or Shaquille. These are names that are unusual, and yet these people we have learned to love. And by loving and embracing them, we understand that we get over our class bigotry and accept them.
S. O'BRIEN: Well, you think he doesn't have a point, or you think that he should be going about it a different way?
DYSON: Well, I think both of them. I think that his point is that, I think, it's class bigotry from the have-gots to the have-nots. When he talks about education, saying, look, they're spending $500 on shoes, he means $250. If you're spending $500, you're being ripped off anyway. Hooked on Phonics has been proved not to deliver what it said it would. Four years ago they had to retract their statement that this can teach your kids.
S. O'BRIEN: But isn't he speaking metaphorically? DYSON: Of course.
S. O'BRIEN: He's saying, hey, you know, when poor people get a dollar in their pocket...
DYSON: Right.
S. O'BRIEN: ... instead of investing that dollar or putting it toward helping their kids...
DYSON: Sure.
S. O'BRIEN: ... they're buying some video games.
DYSON: That's a stereotype. They've done studies that say, first of all, black consumers who are poor, both for their children and their parents don't do what Mr. Cosby said. So, first of all, he's full of stereotypes.
Secondly, it's like a policeman with racial profiling, assuming that the person is a criminal because he or she is black. I'm saying Mr. Cosby has the same stereotypes.
Thirdly, Mr. Cosby was a spokesman for Jello and Coca-Cola and E.F. Hutton. He has created the culture of artificial desire in America where people spend beyond their means anyway to buy what they need.
But my broader point is this: Is that, of course, we want people to behave decently. That's why somebody should speak maybe to Paris Hilton. The point is it's not just simply class-based. She's a multimillionaire. Her parents are right there. She made two sex tapes, and now her ratings are running through the roof.
I'm saying that immorality is not the province necessarily of poor people alone. Should they be responsible? Of course, they should. But we should help them.
S. O'BRIEN: There are people who are cheering Bill Cosby.
DYSON: Let's not put our foot on their necks.
S. O'BRIEN: I mean, he's getting, when he does these events...
DYSON: Of course.
S. O'BRIEN: ... he gets standing ovations. He gets a lot of applause.
DYSON: Right. Bull Cutter (ph) had a lot of support.
S. O'BRIEN: He says poor people need to take responsibility.
DYSON: Of course.
S. O'BRIEN: What's wrong with the message of individual responsibility?
DYSON: There is nothing wrong with the message of individual responsibility if you put it in the context of American society. If you don't act as if -- if you act as if there has been no history of struggle in this country, where black people have had to make a way, where their responsibility could show forth, where their individual talent could be allowed to reign, then that would be a different thing.
Individual responsibility is critical. But in relationship to social responsibility, what about our responsibility as a society to provide sustenance for these people or at least provide them an opportunity that's equal? If you spend twice as much money in a suburban school for students and then less for those in the inner city, then you've got less -- you know, you don't have as good teachers. You don't have good curriculum material. And you don't have the ability to encourage people to do their best. We want them to do their best, but let's give them some support and not have obstacles and barriers to their...
S. O'BRIEN: Have you talked to Mr. Cosby about that?
DYSON: Well, he talked to me immediately after I criticized him in "The New York Times." But right now, he's not interested in a conversation. He wants to speak like the (INAUDIBLE) from the chair as opposed to engaging me in a conversation, or any others.
S. O'BRIEN: Then he took exception to your exception taking of his comments?
DYSON: Right. But I'm saying, if you want to have a conversation, let's have a conversation. Don't just try to play it hate, as the young people say.
S. O'BRIEN: Michael Eric Dyson. The new book is called "Is Bill Cosby Right, Or Has the Black Middle Class Lost Its Mind?" Nice talking to you. Thanks for joining us.
DYSON: Well, nice to talk to you as well.
S. O'BRIEN: Thank you -- Miles.
M. O'BRIEN: Still to come, the Supreme Court judges some wine. Why it could be a lot cheaper after the high court's latest decision. Andy Serwer is "Minding Your Business." Stay with us for more "AMERICAN MORNING."
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
S. O'BRIEN: Welcome back, everybody.
The wine industry is toasting the Supreme Court today. We've got that story and a preview of today's action on Wall Street with Andy Serwer, who is "Minding Your Business."
What do you want to start with? ANDY SERWER, "FORTUNE" MAGAZINE: I want to talk about wine, first of all. I mean, you know, we complain about the government not doing any good in our lives. And the Supreme Court did a really good thing yesterday, clearing the way for vineyards across the country to sell wine to any citizen in any state through the mail or over the Internet.
Previously, 24 states had restrictions. Of course, you can buy any bottle of wine you wanted in a liquor store or a wine store. But this way, you can buy -- you will be able to buy directly from vineyards. And that will make the prices a little bit better and your selection better, too.
S. O'BRIEN: Wasn't the concern that kids would be able to log on and have cases of wine delivered to their homes?
SERWER: I guess there still will be that concern. I mean, that's the same as any Internet business or mail order business. So, the vineyards will have to watch that a little bit.
Let's talk about the markets, Soledad. Everybody loves a rally. You know who was ringing the closing bell yesterday, and I think they're going to make me -- there, Raymond. He's there somewhere. Don't go in too close. Believe me, he is there. We had a big rally. He is there to the right. To the right. There he is. Yes, it's all because of you. Stocks up across the board yesterday. I don't think it had anything to do with Ray, sorry. Lower oil prices. This morning, Home Depot reported, as Miles suggested they would, and the numbers were looking pretty good, not enough to boost futures, though. Those are still down.
S. O'BRIEN: All right. Andy, thanks.
SERWER: Thank you.
M. O'BRIEN: Jack with the "Question of the Day."
JACK CAFFERTY, CNN ANCHOR: Thank you, Miles.
A showdown is looming in the so-called nuclear option for ending Senate filibusters on judicial nominees. Negotiations between Bill Frist and Harry Reid fell apart yesterday, and the confrontation could come as early as tomorrow when Frist is expected to put forward two additional judicial nominees. Democrats say they'll filibuster both of them.
Senator Frist could then seek a change in Senate rules that would bar the use of the filibuster for judicial nominees.
The question is: Should the Senate do that? AM@cnn.com.
Mel writes from New York: "The Senate is not a place of up or down votes. It's a place of deliberation. If the Republicans don't have the votes for cloture, then filibusters should continue as it represents significant disagreement on any issue, not just judicial nominees. The Senate is obliged to withhold its advise and consent as long as there's such disagreement on the floor."
Arthur in New Jersey: "Yes, the Senate should end the filibuster or we, the people, will end it for them. Word to the Democrats: If we wanted a liberal Supreme Court, we would have voted for Kerry."
Tony in Illinois writes: "The president should end the stalemate by realizing he cannot expect 100 percent confirmation and withdraw the handful of questionable nominations, replacing them with less controversial candidates."
Gene in New Hampshire: "Yes, yes, yes, end the filibuster and bring some common sense to the courts."
And Elaine in New York: "The American people will have no protection from this bunch of self-serving compassionate conservative corporate worshipers without the filibuster. Our country's bumper sticker would end up looking like this: If you like fascism, you'll love America's new world order."
M. O'BRIEN: I don't know if that would fit very well on a bumper sticker.
S. O'BRIEN: It's a long one.
SERWER: True.
M. O'BRIEN: You know, it's a thought.
S. O'BRIEN: Kind of a downer, too.
All right, Jack, thanks.
Coming up in just a moment, today's top stories, including Pakistan saying it has broken the back of al Qaeda. Just how credible is that claim? CNN terrorism analyst Peter Bergen is weighing in ahead on AMERICAN 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.
Aired May 17, 2005 - 07:30 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: Ah, the morning commute is under way New York City. Welcome back, everybody. It is exactly half past the hour on this AMERICAN MORNING. Bill Hemmer has got the day off. Miles O'Brien is helping us out for another day.
Thank you very much for that.
MILES O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: And the beauty of this shift? No traffic. It's great, 4:00 in the morning.
S. O'BRIEN: Isn't that?
M. O'BRIEN: Breeze right in.
S. O'BRIEN: Does it make up for getting up at 4:00 in the morning?
M. O'BRIEN: It feels great, doesn't it?
S. O'BRIEN: Oh, yes.
M. O'BRIEN: All right. Well, coming up, is there more that "Newsweek" magazine can do to repair damage from its story about U.S. desecration of the Quran?
S. O'BRIEN: This morning, we are talking with the magazine's Washington bureau chief. That's coming up in just a moment.
First, though, let's get a check of the headlines with Carol Costello.
Good morning.
CAROL COSTELLO, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning to both of you. Good morning to all of you.
"Now in the News."
An Army reservist could face up to five-and-a-half years in prison for her role in the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal. A military jury convicted Specialist Sabrina Harman on all but one of seven charges against her. A sentencing hearing is set to begin in about two-and-a-half hours at Fort Hood, Texas.
President Bush is set to host former South African President Nelson Mandela at the White House. The meeting, set to begin in two hours, is the first in years. Mandela has been a fierce critic of the war in Iraq. Today's discussion is expected to focus on development in Africa and efforts to combat HIV and AIDS.
In California, some workers at Michael Jackson's Neverland ranch are coming to his defense. A housekeeper said she saw the accuser carrying adult magazines in his backpack. And a former security guard said he once caught the accuser and his brother alone in Jackson's wine cellar with a half-empty bottle of wine. Testimony in the trial resumes later today.
And promoting diversity, Harvard University says it's planning to spend $50 million over the next decade to recruit and promote women and members of underrepresented minority groups to its faculty. Harvard's president, Lawrence Summers, made the announcement on Monday. The move comes after comments made by Summers back in January. I'm sure you remember. He had said intrinsic differences between the sexes may explain why few women work in academic sciences. Summers has apologized repeatedly for the remarks, but that $50 million makes is "I'm sorry" sound a whole lot better.
S. O'BRIEN: Doesn't it, though?
M. O'BRIEN: An expensive statement, wasn't it?
S. O'BRIEN: Yes. And it's a good thing for the university as an alum.
COSTELLO: It's definitely a good thing.
S. O'BRIEN: I applaud it. Thanks, Carol.
A good first step. That is what the White House is saying about "Newsweek's" retraction of a story alleging U.S. interrogators desecrated the Quran at Guantanamo Bay. The report sparked deadly protests in Afghanistan.
And "Newsweek" released this statement: "Based on what we know now, we are retracting our original story that an internal military investigation had uncovered Quran abuse at Guantanamo Bay."
Dan Klaidman is the "Newsweek" Washington bureau chief. He's at the Capitol this morning.
Dan, nice to see you. Thank you for talking with us. You have already apologized. Why go a step further with the retraction?
DAN KLAIDMAN, "NEWSWEEK" WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF: Well, I think there was some confusion, because we didn't use the word "retraction." But we retracted the story when we published it on Sunday. And as soon as we realized that we had made a mistake and that we had a problem with the story, we decided that we needed to figure out what happened, lay it out in the story, report it out and acknowledge that we had made these mistakes and be as transparent as possible. And that's what we did.
S. O'BRIEN: The White House has been very angry. We've heard that over the last couple days.
Here is what Scott McClellan had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE SPOKESMAN: The damage has been done. And what this report did was provide people who are opposed to the United States and who are on the other side of the war on terrorism with the ability to go out and exploit this report for their own purposes. They've used it to incite violence, violence that has led to the deaths of individuals. Some 15, 16, 17 individuals have lost their lives in the aftermath of this report.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
S. O'BRIEN: McClellan says that he applauds this first step, but he wants to see other steps that would mitigate the fallout. Is "Newsweek" planning any other steps?
KLAIDMAN: What we've done is to lay out in as much detail as we can, as we've learned the facts, what mistakes we made, how we believe we made them. And we will continue to look at our processes, our reporting methods, questions about sourcing. We're going to go back and learn from the mistakes we made so that we don't repeat them in the future. That's, I think, the most important thing we can do as we continue our mission to report the news as fairly, accurately and responsibly as we can.
S. O'BRIEN: A rule of thumb in journalism, as you well know, is generally you don't go with one source. Why this time did you?
KLAIDMAN: Well, these things are complicated. They're difficult judgment calls. First of all, you have to factor in who the source is, how reliable the source has been, what his position is. In this particular case, it was a source at a high level in the U.S. government, who we had relied on in the past, who had been -- whose information had been accurate in stories that we had published in the past.
And we went further than that. We ran the story by a Pentagon spokesman and by the southern command spokesman. And then we took the extraordinary length of actually showing the story, providing the story in advance to a senior responsible Department of Defense official who was in a position to know the facts here. And he didn't dispute any element of the story that we ultimately published, although he did quarrel with one element of the original story that we didn't publish.
And so, we felt that we had what we needed to go with the story. We will go back and look and see what we could have done better. And we'll discuss our sourcing policies and figure out how to proceed in the future.
S. O'BRIEN: When you're talking, though, about a particularly sensitive topic, are these things that you're going to consider in your discussions? I mean, I understand the need sometimes for one source. But at the same time, you're talking about something that, it's not a surprise, would spark riots and protests. KLAIDMAN: Well, precisely because it was a sensitive story, we ran it by and provided it to a Pentagon -- a Department of Defense official. You know, obviously, if we had known what kind of fallout there would have been in terms of the violence in Pakistan, you know, that's something that in some ways was unknowable. And we feel terrible about the role that we played in sparking the violence.
There were a lot of different forces, and it's hard to know exactly what caused the violence. There are underlying issues there, including a lot of pent-up and not so pent-up rage against the United States for its policies.
But clearly, as we continue to report the news, we are going to be as sensitive as we possibly can to the power of our words, which have consequences.
S. O'BRIEN: Michael Isikoff was a reporter on that, a well-known and very well-regarded reporter. What happens to him?
KLAIDMAN: Michael Isikoff is one of the very best investigative reporters that this city has ever had. He has reported many, many important politically-sensitive stories. Not only has he gotten them mostly right, he has gotten them completely right. He is an enormously professional and responsible reporter who does his due diligence when he reports. And I'm proud of Mike, the work he's been doing for our bureau for years.
Sometimes mistakes get made. This one was made in good faith. We all feel terrible about it. And we will try to make sure that these kinds of mistakes don't happen in the future.
S. O'BRIEN: Dan Klaidman is "Newsweek's" Washington bureau chief. Dan, thanks for talking with us.
KLAIDMAN: Thank you.
S. O'BRIEN: Miles.
M. O'BRIEN: Let's head out west where the weather is causing some problems in several states this morning. In California, parts of Yosemite National Park are closed. The warm weather there is melting an unusually large snow pack, and that's causing some serious flooding, as you see there. Vacationers are told to check road conditions before making plans to visit the park.
In Utah, a lot of cleaning up to do today. Winds of more than 80 miles an hour cut through northern parts of the state, blowing over trailers, power lines and trees. No injuries reported. At one point, power companies reported 18,000 customers without electricity, however.
And in Arizona, stiff winds making it hard for firefighters to get a wildfire under control there. The 9,500-acre blaze is burning up a sparsely-populated recreation area about 30 miles northeast of Phoenix. Fire crews hope to have the fire contained by Friday night.
Let's head to the CNN center.
(WEATHER REPORT)
S. O'BRIEN: Well, now to a new scam targeting automated teller machines. Americans conduct $10 billion to $15 billion in ATM business each year. And as CNN's Dan Lothian tells us, unsuspecting consumers are getting their electronic pockets picked.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DAN LOTHIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice over): Bank ATMs, a convenient way to get cash and, increasingly, a convenient way to steal it.
DET. STEVEN BLAIR, BOSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT: This is identity theft at its max. They get your personal information, and they steal all your money out of your bank accounts.
LOTHIAN: In Boston this woman says she lost $1,900 from her bank account.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I felt like my privacy was definitely threatened.
LOTHIAN: The suspect in her case was caught on surveillance tape and last week caught by police. Thirty-five-year-old Juan Gardicia (ph) is accused of using a high-tech scheme to target more than 400 ATM users in Massachusetts and New Hampshire, allegedly stealing at least $400,000 over the past two years, charges that he denies.
But in three easy steps, investigators say, Gardicia (ph) and others cashed in. Step number one: Police say they would mount this fake swiping box on the door of a bank's ATM machine area, which would be rigged to stay open.
BLAIR: It's a recording device that records credit card numbers.
LOTHIAN: Step number two: A small hidden camera was allegedly installed near the key pad and linked to a nearby laptop computer.
BLAIR: When a person was putting their password into the ATM machine, they were able to capture it.
LOTHIAN: And step number three: Police say blank credit cards were imprinted with the customer information that, when combined with PIN numbers, were ready to use.
While non-bank ATMs have long been targeted by criminals, this type of crime has only recent hit ATM customers nationwide in cities like Detroit, New York, Los Angeles, Phoenix and Miami.
LARRY JOHNSON, SECRET SERVICE: I think initially we saw big cities that were hit the hardest. But now, it can be anywhere USA.
LOTHIAN: The Secret Service is actively pursuing ATM criminals, who are getting smarter. JOHNSON: We try to stay a step ahead of technology.
LOTHIAN (on camera): Experts say a little common sense could help prevent some of these crimes. For example, always hide your PIN number as you enter it. Check for unusual signs or devices. If it doesn't feel right, leave. And finally, check your statements to make sure you're the only one using your account.
Dan Lothian, CNN, Boston.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
S. O'BRIEN: Now, while banks will always refund money that's been stolen, non-bank ATMs are not required to do so.
M. O'BRIEN: So, another reason not to use Fred's ATM, which costs five bucks anyway.
S. O'BRIEN: Well, those are all over the city here.
M. O'BRIEN: Yes, they're everywhere.
S. O'BRIEN: You know, in delis and, you know, whatever.
M. O'BRIEN: All right. You've got to be careful out there.
S. O'BRIEN: Yet another reason.
M. O'BRIEN: Be careful. They're watching you.
All right. So, why is a prominent author and professor calling Bill Cosby vicious?
S. O'BRIEN: We're going to talk about what he is taking exception to in what Bill Cosby has said.
Also, why it is not just wine lovers that are applauding yesterday's Supreme Court decision. Andy has got that as he minds your business up next on AMERICAN MORNING.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
S. O'BRIEN: Mexico's president, Vicente Fox, apologizing for a comment that he made about African-Americans. Fox called civil rights leaders Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson on Monday, told them he regretted any offense to the black community. Over the weekend, Fox said that Mexican immigrants in the United States take jobs that -- quote -- "Not even blacks want to do." Sharpton said the conversation was a step in the right direction, but he thinks that Fox should issue a formal apology.
One year ago today, comedian Bill Cosby sparked his own share of controversy over remarks that he made about African-Americans during an NAACP awards dinner. Cosby's comments provoked a response in the form of a book. It's called "Is Bill Cosby Right, or Has the Black Middle Class Lost its Mind?" It's written by Michael Eric Dyson. He's a professor at the University of Pennsylvania. And he's our guest this morning.
Nice to see you. Good morning.
MICHAEL ERIC DYSON, AUTHOR, "IS BILL COSBY RIGHT?": Good to see you.
S. O'BRIEN: You really take a lot of exception about some of the things that Bill Cosby said. And I want to play a little bit from a -- I'll read to you a speech that Cosby delivered before we start to give a little context for folks who may not remember.
DYSON: Absolutely.
S. O'BRIEN: He said this: "In a neighborhood that most of us grew up in, parenting is not going on. They're buying these things for the kids, $500 sneakers, for what? And they won't spend 250 bucks on Hooked on Phonics. These people are not Africans. They don't know a (EXPLETIVE DELETED) thing about Africa. With names like Shaniqua, Shaliqua, Mohammed and all that crap, and all of them are in jail."
That was about a year ago at this time.
DYSON: Yes.
S. O'BRIEN: It went on and on and has continued to go on and on.
DYSON: Yes.
S. O'BRIEN: What's your biggest problem with what Bill Cosby is saying?
DYSON: Well, first of all, it's interesting that you juxtaposed the two stories, Mr. Vicente calling Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson to apologize for saying that black people won't take job but Mexicans will, the context, of course, inflammatory. But our black leadership will not oppose Mr. Cosby for, as you just read, so much more vicious statements that are full of class bigotry.
First of all, (INAUDIBLE) Bill Cosby's name if your name is Soledad or Oprah or Shaquille. These are names that are unusual, and yet these people we have learned to love. And by loving and embracing them, we understand that we get over our class bigotry and accept them.
S. O'BRIEN: Well, you think he doesn't have a point, or you think that he should be going about it a different way?
DYSON: Well, I think both of them. I think that his point is that, I think, it's class bigotry from the have-gots to the have-nots. When he talks about education, saying, look, they're spending $500 on shoes, he means $250. If you're spending $500, you're being ripped off anyway. Hooked on Phonics has been proved not to deliver what it said it would. Four years ago they had to retract their statement that this can teach your kids.
S. O'BRIEN: But isn't he speaking metaphorically? DYSON: Of course.
S. O'BRIEN: He's saying, hey, you know, when poor people get a dollar in their pocket...
DYSON: Right.
S. O'BRIEN: ... instead of investing that dollar or putting it toward helping their kids...
DYSON: Sure.
S. O'BRIEN: ... they're buying some video games.
DYSON: That's a stereotype. They've done studies that say, first of all, black consumers who are poor, both for their children and their parents don't do what Mr. Cosby said. So, first of all, he's full of stereotypes.
Secondly, it's like a policeman with racial profiling, assuming that the person is a criminal because he or she is black. I'm saying Mr. Cosby has the same stereotypes.
Thirdly, Mr. Cosby was a spokesman for Jello and Coca-Cola and E.F. Hutton. He has created the culture of artificial desire in America where people spend beyond their means anyway to buy what they need.
But my broader point is this: Is that, of course, we want people to behave decently. That's why somebody should speak maybe to Paris Hilton. The point is it's not just simply class-based. She's a multimillionaire. Her parents are right there. She made two sex tapes, and now her ratings are running through the roof.
I'm saying that immorality is not the province necessarily of poor people alone. Should they be responsible? Of course, they should. But we should help them.
S. O'BRIEN: There are people who are cheering Bill Cosby.
DYSON: Let's not put our foot on their necks.
S. O'BRIEN: I mean, he's getting, when he does these events...
DYSON: Of course.
S. O'BRIEN: ... he gets standing ovations. He gets a lot of applause.
DYSON: Right. Bull Cutter (ph) had a lot of support.
S. O'BRIEN: He says poor people need to take responsibility.
DYSON: Of course.
S. O'BRIEN: What's wrong with the message of individual responsibility?
DYSON: There is nothing wrong with the message of individual responsibility if you put it in the context of American society. If you don't act as if -- if you act as if there has been no history of struggle in this country, where black people have had to make a way, where their responsibility could show forth, where their individual talent could be allowed to reign, then that would be a different thing.
Individual responsibility is critical. But in relationship to social responsibility, what about our responsibility as a society to provide sustenance for these people or at least provide them an opportunity that's equal? If you spend twice as much money in a suburban school for students and then less for those in the inner city, then you've got less -- you know, you don't have as good teachers. You don't have good curriculum material. And you don't have the ability to encourage people to do their best. We want them to do their best, but let's give them some support and not have obstacles and barriers to their...
S. O'BRIEN: Have you talked to Mr. Cosby about that?
DYSON: Well, he talked to me immediately after I criticized him in "The New York Times." But right now, he's not interested in a conversation. He wants to speak like the (INAUDIBLE) from the chair as opposed to engaging me in a conversation, or any others.
S. O'BRIEN: Then he took exception to your exception taking of his comments?
DYSON: Right. But I'm saying, if you want to have a conversation, let's have a conversation. Don't just try to play it hate, as the young people say.
S. O'BRIEN: Michael Eric Dyson. The new book is called "Is Bill Cosby Right, Or Has the Black Middle Class Lost Its Mind?" Nice talking to you. Thanks for joining us.
DYSON: Well, nice to talk to you as well.
S. O'BRIEN: Thank you -- Miles.
M. O'BRIEN: Still to come, the Supreme Court judges some wine. Why it could be a lot cheaper after the high court's latest decision. Andy Serwer is "Minding Your Business." Stay with us for more "AMERICAN MORNING."
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
S. O'BRIEN: Welcome back, everybody.
The wine industry is toasting the Supreme Court today. We've got that story and a preview of today's action on Wall Street with Andy Serwer, who is "Minding Your Business."
What do you want to start with? ANDY SERWER, "FORTUNE" MAGAZINE: I want to talk about wine, first of all. I mean, you know, we complain about the government not doing any good in our lives. And the Supreme Court did a really good thing yesterday, clearing the way for vineyards across the country to sell wine to any citizen in any state through the mail or over the Internet.
Previously, 24 states had restrictions. Of course, you can buy any bottle of wine you wanted in a liquor store or a wine store. But this way, you can buy -- you will be able to buy directly from vineyards. And that will make the prices a little bit better and your selection better, too.
S. O'BRIEN: Wasn't the concern that kids would be able to log on and have cases of wine delivered to their homes?
SERWER: I guess there still will be that concern. I mean, that's the same as any Internet business or mail order business. So, the vineyards will have to watch that a little bit.
Let's talk about the markets, Soledad. Everybody loves a rally. You know who was ringing the closing bell yesterday, and I think they're going to make me -- there, Raymond. He's there somewhere. Don't go in too close. Believe me, he is there. We had a big rally. He is there to the right. To the right. There he is. Yes, it's all because of you. Stocks up across the board yesterday. I don't think it had anything to do with Ray, sorry. Lower oil prices. This morning, Home Depot reported, as Miles suggested they would, and the numbers were looking pretty good, not enough to boost futures, though. Those are still down.
S. O'BRIEN: All right. Andy, thanks.
SERWER: Thank you.
M. O'BRIEN: Jack with the "Question of the Day."
JACK CAFFERTY, CNN ANCHOR: Thank you, Miles.
A showdown is looming in the so-called nuclear option for ending Senate filibusters on judicial nominees. Negotiations between Bill Frist and Harry Reid fell apart yesterday, and the confrontation could come as early as tomorrow when Frist is expected to put forward two additional judicial nominees. Democrats say they'll filibuster both of them.
Senator Frist could then seek a change in Senate rules that would bar the use of the filibuster for judicial nominees.
The question is: Should the Senate do that? AM@cnn.com.
Mel writes from New York: "The Senate is not a place of up or down votes. It's a place of deliberation. If the Republicans don't have the votes for cloture, then filibusters should continue as it represents significant disagreement on any issue, not just judicial nominees. The Senate is obliged to withhold its advise and consent as long as there's such disagreement on the floor."
Arthur in New Jersey: "Yes, the Senate should end the filibuster or we, the people, will end it for them. Word to the Democrats: If we wanted a liberal Supreme Court, we would have voted for Kerry."
Tony in Illinois writes: "The president should end the stalemate by realizing he cannot expect 100 percent confirmation and withdraw the handful of questionable nominations, replacing them with less controversial candidates."
Gene in New Hampshire: "Yes, yes, yes, end the filibuster and bring some common sense to the courts."
And Elaine in New York: "The American people will have no protection from this bunch of self-serving compassionate conservative corporate worshipers without the filibuster. Our country's bumper sticker would end up looking like this: If you like fascism, you'll love America's new world order."
M. O'BRIEN: I don't know if that would fit very well on a bumper sticker.
S. O'BRIEN: It's a long one.
SERWER: True.
M. O'BRIEN: You know, it's a thought.
S. O'BRIEN: Kind of a downer, too.
All right, Jack, thanks.
Coming up in just a moment, today's top stories, including Pakistan saying it has broken the back of al Qaeda. Just how credible is that claim? CNN terrorism analyst Peter Bergen is weighing in ahead on AMERICAN 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.
