Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

FBI: San Bernardino Terrorists Radicalized for "Some Time"; Interview with U.S. Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii; Global Reaction to Trump's Call to Ban Muslims. Aired 6:30-7a ET

Aired December 08, 2015 - 06:30   ET

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

[06:30:00] CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: Information here, but I would be remiss on not to hit on the day's big headline with you. Do you see any justification for a complete Muslim ban for any period into America?

PHIL MUDD, CNN COUNTERTERRORISM ANALYST: Look, my family came here part of them in the 19th century. Those are Catholics who are viewed in the 19th century as unacceptable in America. The history of America says the downtrodden come to America, regardless of where they are.

But on the practical level, think of this phone conversation. The first call if you're president of the United States overseas is the prime minister of Britain. Prime Minister Cameron, for your Christian citizens, they're allowed to come here. For your Muslims, they're not. And, by the way, we're going to ask him when they get to Dulles Airport to declare their religion.

That is not -- not only not acceptable in terms of American values. It's not practical. It's not possible.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: OK, let's talk about the San Bernardino case, which has scared so many people and brought all of this to the fore. It turns out that these two, husband and wife, were not radicalized overnight.

MUDD: Yes.

CAMEROTA: It was longer than we thought. So, that should give us comfort that maybe it didn't happen in the flick of a switch, that there might have been signs?

MUDD: In some ways it gives me more discomfort for the simple reason that -- you know, I've seen radicalization cases both here in Europe and also talking in some cases to terrorists in the Middle East that happen in a matter of weeks, because they're very emotional. They'll see a photo from Iraq or something and say, hey, I've got to do something about this.

The length of time to me suggests a depth of belief that's beyond what we see in a lot of cases, in the depth of belief says to me that they weren't just people who were emotional about something that happened in the workplace. That they really believed this was the right avenue to take to express their political beliefs. This is unusual -- this case has so many unusual pieces.

CAMEROTA: What stands out to you that's most unusual that you've seen here?

MUDD: Number one, the lack of additional people that were aware, the lack of connectivity. There is so little in this case to go on for people who have been radicalized for so long. You would expect a digital trail somewhere and it doesn't --

CUOMO: We don't know that they don't have it yet, right? They found the smashed cell phones. They know there was a hard drive missing. So, they'll still hunting and picking a little bit.

MUDD: That's true. But the lack of information, going into day six of the investigation on a case -- you're talking about hundreds of agents and analysts. Remarkable.

CUOMO: When you hear about this, they were more radicalized, practicing, it smacks of you missed them. Is there a case to be made you should have detected these two and you did not?

MUDD: I'd sure like to know what's on the cell phones and e- mails. When you look at -- there will be after-actions forever. If you're sitting in the FBI, one of the first things you say is, where is the after-action team because it's coming and there will be congressional hearings.

But you look at three threats, who did they talk to? So far people said we didn't know that much, although that's starting to change a bit.

Number two, who did they talk to on the phone? Phones are hard to access here. They broke them.

Number three, who did they e-mail? You're starting to see a little information there, for example, they went out looking for other groups earlier, a group called al Shabaab in Somalia, for example, which again suggests for some time they were trying to look for a great what would validate what they believe.

CAMEROTA: They were terror group shopping?

MUDD: That's right. It's interesting to me because if they're shopping, number one, the ideology is not that important. They were looking, for example, initially, at groups that oppose ISIS, looking at al Qaeda group. Al Qaeda and ISIS don't agree.

It also suggests to me in terms of this radicalization question that they radicalized themselves, they were looking for a group to validate what they believed as opposed to the typical cycle you see which is the group says come down this path, join us on a path of radicalization.

CUOMO: Or is the they here a little bit of a defined term, could it be that the wife was radicalized, part of a group, was put into that dating site to troll, found this guy, radicalized him? So, there was connectivity at least of purpose coming into it that she turned him?

MUDD: Despite 25 years in government, I'm not a big conspiracy theorist. You know, they placed her there so she could radicalize him over time. I suspect what happened here is simpler, and it's what you see in a lot of case. Emotional connection between two people increases the likelihood that they will join each other down a path. What I mean is, if you're a woman or a man in a relationship like that, and you have radical beliefs and you tell your husband, we should do something about what we think about Israel. The husband says, well, maybe -- over the course of months, years, you bounce off each other that what you're doing is appropriate.

We saw this with the Tsarnaev brothers. I don't think the little brother would have acted without the big brother. I've seen it with parents radicalizing children.

So, the emotional bond, living in the same house, to me is one of the steps to understanding how people can radicalize, they're persuading each other it's OK.

CAMEROTA: Phil Mudd, great to have you in the studio.

MUDD: Thanks. Nice to be here.

CAMEROTA: Thanks so much for the expertise as always.

MUDD: Thank you.

CAMEROTA: Michaela?

MICHAELA PEREIRA, CNN ANCHOR: All right. Meanwhile, President Obama is coming under some fire for his ISIS strategy. Is he doing enough to wipe out the terrorists? Is it time to ramp up the fight?

We're going to ask Iraq war veteran, Democrat Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii. We'll ask her about Donald Trump's latest comment, the one specifically about banning Muslims from entering America, before we ask Mr. Trump himself. He'll be joining us live on NEW DAY in our next hour.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

[06:38:52] DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on.

(CHEERS)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: People are asking that same question now about Donald Trump's suggestion. The united Republicans, party leaders, political opponents all in the notion of rejecting the idea of banning Muslims. They say not only is it a bad idea, it may make us less safe.

Why? Let's discuss.

Democratic Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii, a member of the House Armed Services and Foreign Affairs Committees, also an Iraq war vet who believes our efforts to unseat Syrian President Assad do more harm than good as well. We will get to that topic.

Always good to see you, congresswoman. So, what do you make of this, the idea of banning Muslims?

REP. TULSI GABBARD (D), HAWAII: Good to see you, Chris. Good morning. Aloha.

It's clear what Donald Trump is doing, he's trying to exploit people's fears for his own political purpose. I think it's important to look at where are these fears coming from, these unfunded generalized fears of all Muslims.

[06:40:01] It's really coming from failure of leaders in our country to make this distinction between the vast majority of Muslims and this small minority who are practicing or embracing this radical Islamic ideology also known as Islamism. This ideology that is really a totalitarian political ideology that says some form of Islam should be the governing doctrine over society or government. So, that's why this distinction is so important.

CUOMO: Right. But he says it's a distinction without a difference. He says one can be too many. And you can call it Islamism if you want, but it still got that word "Islam" in there, so that means you're dealing with a universe of Muslims. So, let's just keep them all out. That's his idea.

GABBARD: You know, that's a dangerous perspective to push forward, because without that distinction, that is really what is fueling this fear. It's the failure of recognizing and identifying who our enemy is and the ideology that's driving it that brings us to this point where we're seeing these attacks continue.

For example, if you look at the shooters in California, if you had recognized that this Islamist ideology is what is driving the San Bernardino killers, ISIS, al Qaeda, and these different attacks that are taking place, then you would have looked at Ms. Malik. You would have looked at the fact that in the past she's been taught at these madrassas that are known for radicalizing -- excuse me, young girls and women. You would have looked at that pass that really indoctrinates people and radicalizes them with this Islamist ideology, this political totalitarian ideology.

CUOMO: Right. Look, I understand your point that it trickles down to the practical and how you effectuate your security programs. But I think this is a bigger moment that we're having here right now. What you spoke to originally.

What is America about? America is scared right now. America is on many levels apparently acting out of fear. Who needs to step up and give the counter-notion to what Donald Trump just said? Because that's a form of leadership as well. Silence will not fill a vacuum.

GABBARD: I think it's leaders within the Muslim community, absolutely, need to step up and help to make this distinction between the vast majority of Muslims who preach and who embrace the ideals of freedom of religion and of tolerance and of separation of mosque and state. But it's also the political leaders here within our own country who need to make that distinction, that clearly differentiates the vast majority of Muslims from this minority of Islamists who are continuing to push forward this ideology that we find in ISIS, that we find in al Qaeda, and that is driving the threat to Americans, the United States and to the West.

CUOMO: All right. Now you are fighting this fight on this level but also a different one as well. That's a little subtle but deserves attention. You're saying the war against Bashar al Assad, the leader of Syria is illegal because no war was declared, which is something that's often ignored in political circles these days, but is also counterproductive to fighting ISIS. How so and what's going on with your bill to stop the Assad war funding?

GABBARD: Well, look, Chris, just recently Secretary Kerry said that we could defeat ISIS in three months if the civil war in Syria ended. I agree with him. This is why I've been so strongly advocating for us to end this illegal counter-productive war to overthrow the Syrian government of Assad.

First, if we allow this to continue and this objective is reached, if Assad is overthrown, this will open up the door for ISIS and al Qaeda and these other groups to walk in the front door and increase their capabilities, their military capabilities, you know, take ownership all of Syria and present an even greater threat to the world.

Secondly, we've got to look at the head-to-head conflict that is existing right now between the U.S. and Russia, because of this focus on the overthrow of Assad. The United States is advocating for the overthrow of the Syrian government of Assad and Russia is working to maintain that government. That is putting us at a direct head-to-head conflict with Russia that could potentially lead to something very devastating, even a nuclear war or something of a World War consequence.

CUOMO: Keep us informed on what's happening with the bill. It certainly deserves debate in this current climate. Tulsi Gabbard, thank you very much as always.

GABBARD: Thanks, Chris.

CUOMO: All right. Mick, over to you.

PEREIRA: Well, the outrage over Donald Trump's call to ban Muslims in America is not stopping at our borders. Worldwide reaction to Donald Trump's comments, we'll you get live from the Middle East, ahead.

And ahead as well, he joins us himself, Donald Trump here on NEW DAY defending his plan. Definitely don't want to miss this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:48:56] PEREIRA: Donald Trump's call to close U.S. borders to all Muslims is triggering strong reaction not just here at home but overseas as well.

Sara Sidner is live in Istanbul, Turkey, with that part of the story. And reaction from there, Sara.

SARA SIDNER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, the reaction is very strong, whether it's social media, whether it's people in the streets, whether it's business owners or governments, there has been fight a bit of reaction. Everything from calling Donald Trump a fascist for those kind of ideas saying these kind of ideas only lead to bad things in the end. Other people have called it ironic and that's because right here in Istanbul, looking over my shoulder, you notice those letters back there.

They do say Trump and this is a Trump Tower and this is a predominantly Muslim country. Some folks saying, wait a minute, he's OK with taking money from Muslims but not okay with having Muslims in the country? So, there is reaction here.

And, of course, his name was licensed. So, they paid to have his name on the tower. He does not own this building. But there is a deep irony that people see and they're talking about here in Turkey.

[06:50:01] Now, the reaction from the Muslim world, we're hearing from Egypt, this is a very influential group in Egypt. I want to read you what they have put out and a lot of Muslims follow this thinking and the thinking that comes out of this particular group.

The Egyptian Dar al-Ifta, the country's highest authority on Islamic jurisprudence has said this, "The hostile view of Islam and Muslims will increase the tension within the American society of which 8 million are Muslim. It is unfair for Muslims to be collectively punished for the actions of a group of extremists whose criminal activities are rejected by Islamic Sharia."

So, you're hearing these strong statements. We're not the only one, we heard from Indonesia. Foreign affairs saying things that this can't be part of the American way which is a country of immigrants -- Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: All right. Sara, thanks so much for all of that.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump as we know is stirring the pot again. He's calling for a ban on all Muslims entering the U.S. So could his comments and Sara was alluding to this, somehow end up helping extremism or even helping ISIS?

We will examine that, next. Do not leave for work yet. Our live interview with Donald Trump to explain his comments is 20 minutes away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:55:17] CAMEROTA: The big political news this morning is Donald Trump pushing for a ban on Muslims, all Muslims, traveling to the U.S. Some suggest these remarks, and other profiling tactics would increase terror recruitment.

Let's talk about this with the author of "Radical: My Journey Out of Islamist Extremism". He's the co-founder of the Quilliam Foundation. This is his book. His name is Maajid Nawaz.

Just so that I can tell you, the Quilliam Foundation is a think tank and it focuses on integration and religious freedom.

Maajid, great to have you with us this morning. Good morning.

MAAJID NAWAZ, CO-FOUNDER AND CHAIRMAN, QUILLIAM FOUNDATION: Pleasure. Good morning.

CAMEROTA: So, integration and religious freedom. I'm guessing Donald Trump is not going to be your spokesperson for Quilliam anytime soon. What do you think of the comments he made on banning all Muslims from entering the U.S.?

NAWAZ: You know, Alisyn, what I'm more worried about is not the practicality of Donald Trump's lunatic measures. I think what I'm more worried about are the effects, the implications on his followers, because he's promising them something that for all thoughts and purposes cannot possibly be implemented under the U.S. Constitution and violates all forms of international commitments to human rights that America is a signatory to.

So, in fact, what I'm more worried about is the anticlimax among Donald Trump's followers because he's promising them things he cannot deliver.

CAMEROTA: Right.

NAWAZ: So, what happens when you do that to people? You radicalize your followers and they end up joining extremist groups to seek solutions that you cannot deliver.

CAMEROTA: And it just followed that thread for me. So, if he's promising them a bill of goods that he never delivers on because we don't have a religious test to get into this country, then what do Trump supporters do? What do you mean extremist groups?

NAWAZ: Exactly. So, I work on following and pursuing for the last eight years, all I've been doing every day is pursuing the radicalization process on the Islamist extremist side, the theocrats, groups like ISIS. What we notice is when you -- it works with racism as well -- when you pump people up and promise them all forms of dreams and utopian visions and populist aims but you can't deliver on those, people become frustrated and they take action into their own hands.

So, it happens on the Islamist extremist side. I'm worried with Donald Trump's promises, you know, this started off as a joke perhaps, it started off funny, I even used to laugh at some of the things he said. It's gone beyond that.

First, he picked on Mexicans and he's picking on minority groups. He's come to the Muslims. What I worry is, his followers when he doesn't deliver what he's promised them end up joining fascist or far right groups and taking matters into their own hands against the 8 million Muslims in the United States. And we end up with an extremely polarized discourse.

It's very bad for social cohesion. This isn't a presidential candidate. This is a presidential troll.

CAMEROTA: Here's another thing Donald Trump is promising supporters, and that is that they will never be prosecuted or even in trouble for any sort of profiling because that's what it takes to shut down attacks like we saw in San Bernardino. Let me play you that moment from last night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We can't be people that knew what was going on two weeks ago in California probably for months, they knew what was going on and they didn't want to tell anybody. We can't be that. We have to be strong.

When we see violations, you have to report those violations and quickly. Don't worry about profiling. I promise, I will defend you from profiling. I promise.

(CHEERS)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: OK. Maajid, we have less than a minute. Does Donald Trump have a point in that case which is that people should have said things if they saw something suspicious?

NAWAZ: People should have said things not for the reasons he's mentioned. If you see something suspicious, regardless of what the person looks like, report it, ethnic and religious profiling. I've just written a "Daily Beast" column on this. I refer your viewers to it.

Ethnic and religious profiling does not work. It makes ISIS's job easier. And the reason is because Muslims do not look like anything.

You know, the lady in the Parisian attacks, the female jihadist was pictured in a bikini, yet we have Tashfeen Malik in a face veil. Terrorists don't have a profile and anyone who works in this field understands that, any expert in the terrorism field knows terrorists are diverse. They do not have a profile.

If you tell them what to look for at airports, terrorists will look exactly the opposite. So, it will make their job much easier if we profile.

CAMEROTA: That is an excellent article that you've written, "Why ISIS just loves profiling." People can find it in "The Daily Beast",

Maajid Nawaz, thanks so much for your expertise. Great to have you on NEW DAY.

NAWAZ: My pleasure.

CAMEROTA: We're following a lot of news this morning. So, let's get right to it.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TRUMP: Total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That's a very prudent idea.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It is reckless and simply un-American.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We are at war with radical Islam.

CAMEROTA: Right. So, why ban all Muslims from entering the U.S.?