Free-For-All Friday for November 29, 2002
JOHN VAUSE, HOST: Hello and welcome to TALKBACK LIVE.</s>VAUSE: Wow. So many people here today. I'm John Vause, in for Arthel Neville, who is still at home on the couch with a very big stomach after too much turkey. Well, it's "Free-For-All Friday." There's lots to cover. And we're going to start in Mombasa in Kenya, where several people are being questioned in the bombing of the Israeli-run Paradise Hotel. And then stay tuned, because the United Nations says it doesn't do background check on all of its weapons inspectors. And does it matter that one of its picks is in fact a specialist in S&M;, sadomasochism? And then later, we'll find out what's behind the counter at a pricey mall store that usually targets teens. First, let's get the latest on yesterday's suicide bombing that left 13 innocent people dead. The bombing happened just as two missiles nearly shout down an Israeli passenger jet taking off from Mombasa Airport. CNN correspondent Ben Wedeman is there. He brings us up to date with the latest. Ben, the 12 people in custody, what can you tell us about them?</s>BEN WEDEMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, basically, those 12 people seem to have fallen within a very wide net thrown by the Kenyan authorities. We've heard them described, many of them, as belonging to suspicious nationalities, in the words of Kenyan authorities, which basically means that they're Pakistanis and Somalis who entered the country illegally and therefore were probably picked up when they were making a fairly broad sweep of the streets of Mombasa looking for potentially suspicious individuals. Also among those two are an American woman and her Spanish husband. They apparently decided, shortly after the explosion at the Paradise Hotel, that it was time to check out of Mombasa, leave their hotel, and get out of here. But, apparently, the Kenyan police had put out word to all the hotels in Mombasa that anybody who is reported to be trying to leave their hotel should be reported to the police. And that seems to be one of the reasons why these two people, the American woman and her Spanish husband, have been brought into custody. And we are told by U.S. diplomats that they may be released shortly. Now, today, Israeli investigators were combing through the scene at the Paradise Hotel, no real hard-and-fast clues yet being reported. But what has come to light is a very interesting video shot by one of the Israeli tourists who was in the hotel yesterday morning when that explosion went off. Now, the explosion came as a result of when a green four-wheeled vehicle smashed through the front gate of that hotel, which is behind me, and went all the way into the lobby, where it exploded. The explosion left 10 Kenyans dead and three Israelis dead as well, a devastating explosion that cause the thatched roofs of this hotel to burst into flame. So, really, it is, indeed, a scene of destruction there. Meanwhile, there's continued questions into the nature of those two missiles that were fired in the direction of an Israeli charter, 757. One of our producers was in the area. Maria Flete (ph) spoke to some scrap metal workers who said that they saw the missiles -- or, rather, heard the missiles being fired, saw the smoke as they went up into the air. But, nonetheless, despite their very interesting account of events, they have not been questioned yet by Kenyan investigators -- John.</s>VAUSE: Ben, there is word from Australia that Australian officials had warning that there could in fact be some kind of terrorist attack in that region. Is there any evidence to suggest that this warning was passed on to U.S. or Israeli authorities where you are?</s>WEDEMAN: No, a matter of fact. Their warning was specific to Mombasa, which is quite interesting. However, it must be taken into account that, these days, there are lots of warnings going out in all directions. And, for one reason or another, it appears that this was not a warning that was widely heeded. And here we have the results -- John.</s>VAUSE: OK, Ben Wedeman reporting for us live there from Mombasa -- thanks, Ben, for bringing us up to date. Now, we want to go over to a terrorism expert, Mike Brooks. Now, Mike, tell us, you've had a lot of experience in this part of the world. You were in Kenya shortly after the terrorist attacks four years ago. Do you think this was al Qaeda?</s>MIKE BROOKS, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: From all the indications right now, it looks like it could be -- again, could be. That's speculation. They're saying it could be al Qaeda. It could be al Qaeda, along with maybe a local faction. There has been one group, a Palestinian group, that has claimed responsibility. But they don't think that that is actually the group that did it. Now, if you look at the similarities John, between what happened at the hotel and what happened back in 1998, there was a car with three men, drove up to the hotel. There's usually a fence around the hotels in other resort compounds there. They drove up. A guard turned them away. They drove around in front of the hotel for about 10 minutes. Then they burst through the gate, drove right up to the front of the lobby and set the bomb off. If you go back to 1998, a truck ladened with explosives tried to get into the U.N. Embassy, drove up to the gate in front. They were told to go around to the back. They went around to the back. There was another guard, who turned them away because they were acting suspiciously, put a large metal bar down across the hood of the car. They decided to go ahead and try to drive through the bar. They drove through, because what they wanted to do was to drive down into the parking garage of the U.S. Embassy and have the embassy implode on itself. What happened was, the guard wouldn't allow that. They drove in, set the bomb off right there. And it still killed 224 people. But many more would have been killed.</s>VAUSE: OK, so the authorities there are investigating right now. You've been through a very similar thing. What are these guys looking for right now on that scene in Mombasa?</s>BROOKS: Well, No. 1, one of the things they want to try to find out is, what kind of explosive was used in the blast?</s>VAUSE: Why is that important?</s>BROOKS: Well, for instance, in 1998, there was TNT used. There have been other different kinds of explosives used around the world in other terrorist attacks. So, if they can determine what kind of explosive it was -- and from looking at that amateur video we just saw, definitely some kind of a high explosive, whether it's a TNT, a plastic explosive, like C- 4, C-3, Semtex, which is widely used in that part of the world for terrorist operations. They can go back and look at a database. The U.S., the Israelis, and the British have probably one of the most extensive databases in the world from different terrorist attacks over the years around the world. Then, as evidence people move in, they can come in and kind of draw a perimeter around and start looking for clues and pieces of the possible bomb, all the way down from a little tiny piece of wire to just a small piece of metal, which you and I would probably look and think was insignificant. But investigators are looking for that to see if they can take that and match that to other pieces of bomb that have been recovered at other terror incidents around the world.</s>VAUSE: OK, bigger picture, are there al Qaeda cells operating in East Africa?</s>BROOKS: They believe there probably were. You go back to 1998. The Kenyan CID, the Criminal Investigation Division, within Kenya and the FBI and CIA had been working closely together on trying to identify any other terrorist cells within Kenya. Whether there were or not, or they just recently came in to the area, that remains to be seen. Hopefully, we'll find out through an investigation. If you go back 1998, it was believed that, three to five years prior to the bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Nairobi, that people were on the ground doing target assessments, looking for vulnerabilities in and around the U.S. Embassy on how they could get into the embassy: taking, drawing diagrams, taking pictures, just watching the goings-on in and around the embassy to try to find out where the soft target was.</s>VAUSE: What's the chances that this was, in fact, if not planned by al Qaeda, it was inspired by al Qaeda, by some local independent group, which didn't have the expertise or the help from head office, if you like?</s>BROOKS: If you go back to look at the bombing recently in Bali, those folks there, the terrorists in Bali probably lived there in Indonesia, but were inspired and maybe funded by al Qaeda. And we know, in fact, that that was probably al Qaeda-involved. So you might be looking at the same kind of scenario. In fact, looking at that amateur video, it looked a lot like the Bali bombing. And what they're doing now: instead of hitting hardened targets, they're looking for soft targets, such as tourist resorts, things like that.</s>VAUSE: Time for a quick question. David over there.</s>DAVID: Yes, Mike. This is the second attempt in recent years on an attack in Kenya. Is this a hot spot for terrorism in the world?</s>BROOKS: Well, Kenya is a unique country. It's such a diverse culture, with a lot of different religions. And it's a large, large country. And in the whole continent of Africa, it's easy to get lost in the continent. Now, most of the problems in Africa usually happen on the west coast. You know, right now, we've got problems going on in the Ivory Coast, in Nigeria. They've had problems in the Congo before. But, for the most part, there has not been too much activity, terrorist- wise, in Kenya since the 1998 bombings.</s>VAUSE: OK, Mike Brooks, thank you very much for joining us today, giving us some insight into what's happening over there in Africa. Well, up next, we're going to meet our panel for "Free-For All Friday." And we'll start with a look at why the U.N. thinks an S&M; instructor would make a good weapons inspector. You can get in on all the action. Give us a call now at 1-800- 310-4CNN or e-mail TALKBACK@CNN.com. Stay with us. You're watching TALKBACK LIVE.</s>VAUSE (voice-over): Today on TALKBACK LIVE's "Free-For-All Friday": Who do Democrats really favor in 2004? A new poll reveals the real heart of the party. And Democratic leaders take on what they claim is a right-wing media bias. Sour grapes or is there really a right-wing media conspiracy? All this and more as TALKBACK LIVE's "Free-For-All Friday" continues.</s>VAUSE: And welcome back. While the U.S. military has its don't-ask/don't-tell rule, the United Nations has no problems with a munitions expert who is also a leader in sadomasochistic sex clubs around Washington, D.C. Harvey John McGeorge, a member of the U.N. inspections team, is a missile warheads, bombs and explosives deliveries expert. That's not what he normally wears on his day off either, by the way. CNN's Deborah Feyerick is following this story. Deborah, what is going on with the inspections team?</s>DEBORAH FEYERICK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, this particular issue has sort of underscored the fact that the United Nations does not do background checks on its weapons inspectors. And the reason this one is a bit salacious is because Jack McGeorge shows up on several Web sites, sex Web sites, specifically devoted to sadomasochism. Well, that kind of raised eyebrows and led to the revelation that, although there are interviews that are done with everybody who applies for the position of U.S. weapons inspectors, the actual resumes are not checked. And the U.N. just says it's impossible to do background checks on some 300 inspectors. Part of the problem, of course, is because they come from countries all across the world. These people are nominated by their governments and then put forward. So, for the U.N. to do actual checks would be very, very complicated. They really do rely on the governments who are sending these people. In the case of the United States, what happens is that the information goes to the State Department. The State Department then passes on qualified applicants to the United Nations. And that's how they're selected. But critics of the new inspection team simply say that they don't have the expertise, they don't have the experience that weapons inspectors should have. And part of the problem is, is that, in 1999, the U.N. changed it so that governments could not send its own experts to be part of these teams. They had to be people who were either in private industry or retired from government. And then those people now who are hired effectively become employees of the United Nations, at least for a short time.</s>VAUSE: Well, Deborah, from what we've read today, we found out that Mr. McGeorge is a founding member of the Leather Leadership Conference and Black Rose -- there's some giggles in the audience. I don't know why. Does it really matter what this guy does in his off time? Does that affect how he does his job?</s>FEYERICK: No. And the United Nations is very careful to point that out. They say, as long as he's not breaking any laws, as long as it's not affecting his ability to do his job, then, no, they don't care what he does in his personal life. And they say that they don't care what anybody, any of the inspectors do in their personal lives. But, again, these Web sites, are very salacious.</s>VAUSE: To say the least.</s>FEYERICK: People go on to them and they list him as a member. So, it's complicated.</s>VAUSE: OK, Deborah Feyerick, thank you very much for that. We want to go to our panel now. We're going to meet our panel for today. Howard Kurtz is a CNN media analyst and media reporter for "The Washington Post." He is co-host of CNN's "RELIABLE SOURCES" and author of "Spin Cycle." Blanquita Cullum is a radio talk show host for Radio America. Greg Knapp is host of "The Greg Knapp Show" on KLIF in Dallas, Texas. And Sandy Nieves is a radio talk show host on WBAI in New York. He is also founder of LatinoJournal.com. Welcome to all of you today. Well, let's just start -- go to Howard. What do you think of Mr. McGeorge?</s>HOWARD KURTZ, CNN MEDIA ANALYST: Well, when I read about this in "The Washington Post," I must confess that, although I realize this is the provocative part of the story, I don't care all that much about what his sexual proclivities are. He's made no attempt to hide it. What I was more concerned about was that he has no specialized training, no specific degree in any specific science, like a biochemistry, that would help him figure out whether or not there are weapons of mass destruction weapons in Iraq. But the whole system of -- anybody, apparently, can become an inspector. There's no background check. You can't become a deputy assistant secretary of commerce in this country without a background check. So that just seems to me to be crazy.</s>VAUSE: What about Greg Knapp? Over to you. Do you think this shows up the flaws which are in the weapons inspection team, an inexperienced team being sent to Iraq?</s>GREG KNAPP, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Absolutely. If you listen to the former inspectors, what they're upset with is the way that these teams are being chosen. First of all, you have to give up your government job to be on this panel. And that, right away, gets rid of a lot of the most experienced people we have. The fact that this guy is the leader of some sadomasochistic sex clubs, it may be a little titillating. And the Muslims will probably go, "There's the decadent West." I don't know if it was a Clinton appointee or what. But the bigger issue is, if you're not doing background checks and you missed that, when we're talking about hundreds of inspectors from all these different countries, could some of them be associated with terrorists and we miss it because we don't have the background check? Could some of them be blackmailable? Could some of them be sympathetic to "So Damn Insane" and then they help him during the inspections? I think those are concerns.</s>VAUSE: Blanquita, is that a fair point or should we just let these guys go as they are?</s>BLANQUITA CULLUM, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: I'm wondering if he's thinking of weapons of mass destruction as a dog collar and handcuffs.</s>CULLUM: Hello? Everybody in this town has a background inspection. I'm not buying it. But, you know, if the U.N. thinks it's too difficult to have a background inspection on the guys that they're sending over on a life- and-death mission, can you imagine? I mean, who else do we have in there who might be flawed? OK, maybe this guy is into whips and chain. But what I'm concerned about is if -- like Howard said -- that he didn't have any qualifications. And Hans Blix didn't do such a great job last time. We cannot afford to be sitting here worried about this guy's proclivity. We need to know that he's got some mental ability and these guys are going to be able to pick up the subtleties of what's going on, because, frankly, if they don't do a good job, we're in big-time trouble.</s>VAUSE: Sandy, should we worry about the whips and the chains and the dog collars?</s>SANTIAGO NIEVES, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: The Leather Leadership Conference, it has such a ring, doesn't it?</s>NIEVES: You know, the thing is, can you imagine the U.N. admits they didn't do a background check on this guy? What does that tell you about American security, much less a homeland defense office</s>CULLUM: It's about the</s>U.N. KNAPP: This is the U.N., not America.</s>CULLUM: Not America.</s>NIEVES: I know, but -- well, I think that part of this is expressive in terms of what we're talking about with the homeland defense. I think there are a lot of parallels here. But that's the kind of security that we have here. It's a dog and pony show and it's outrageous. I agree with most of you, by the way.</s>CULLUM: Santiago, can I just say something?</s>NIEVES: Yes.</s>CULLUM: Santiago, the difference is, you have the -- look, the president was encouraged by the world community to go to the U.N. So, if the U.N. can't respect the fact that the United States is there trying to accommodate them and they can't -- I mean, look, the U.N. has not proved much. They've been pretty flawed. And it's not the Americans and homeland security</s>VAUSE: Blanquita, I'm just going to drop you there. We've got an e-mail which I think we should put up on the screen.</s>NIEVES: I couldn't agree with you more, Blanquita.</s>VAUSE: Sorry. We've just got to go with this e-mail. "I'm offended when the news media reports on something that is none of the public's business and interferes with the life of a man performing an important function for the world" -- Lauraine in New York. Howard Kurtz, is the media making too much of the whips and the chains and the dog collars?</s>KURTZ: Well, this fellow, McGeorge, is certainly not hiding it. He's out there all over the Internet with this sort of thing. And, while ordinarily, I think that the media do intrude into people's private lives way too much, in this case, if you agree to be a United Nations weapons inspector, you have to expect that you're going to get some media attention.</s>KNAPP: And, Howard, if "The Washington Post" hadn't...</s>VAUSE: OK, that's the bell. Time to move on. Up next: Al Gore speaks out about talk that there's a right-wing media conspiracy. What do you think? Was it the media or the message that did in the Democrats? "Free-For-All" continues after this break.</s>VAUSE: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE's "Free-For-All Friday." Al Gore is helping Democrats in an all-out attack on what they call a right-wing media. Gore talked about the media to "The New York Observer," saying: "Fox News Network, 'The Washington Times,' Rush Limbaugh, there's a bunch of them. And some of them are financed by wealthy, ultra-conservative billionaires who make political deals with Republican administrations and the rest of the media." Howard Kurtz interviewed Rush Limbaugh for this coming Sunday's "RELIABLE SOURCES." Mr. Limbaugh and his ilk have been blasted by some Democrats for costing them the midterm elections. Here's what Mr. Limbaugh had to say. (</s>BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "RELIABLE SOURCES") RUSH LIMBAUGH, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Look at the way Bush was covered the first two years. Whatever the Democratic leadership said was parroted by many in the media: dunce, idiot, frat boy.</s>KURTZ: That's certainly not how he's been covered lately.</s>LIMBAUGH: No, but the first two years -- first two. Now, of course, it's changed. He skunked them, so now they've got to go, "OK, he's not who we thought he was or he's not who we tried to make him," whatever the case was. I don't know what the agenda was. But...</s>KURTZ: Do you believe that Howell Raines, for example, is pursuing a left-wing agenda at "The New York Times"?</s>LIMBAUGH: I personally do, yes.</s>KURTZ: And he--that the reporters have their marching orders, they're not independent professionals. They...</s>LIMBAUGH: I think...</s>KURTZ: ... don't think for themselves?</s>LIMBAUGH: Well, depends on how you define marching orders. But there's an assignment editor, and there are -- you wrote a column the other day on Paul Krugman, I noticed in the editorial page. But so much of the Times news reporting these days seems to be editorializing, even on the front page, to me anyway. "The Times," to me, it's one of the last newspapers I look at now. I just don't believe much of what's in it when it comes to domestic, political news.</s>KURTZ: And you think it's conscious distorting of the news or subconscious because of the opinions and values that journalists hold?</s>LIMBAUGH: Well, I think the editorial page leads it. And when I read editorial...</s>KURTZ: Oh, the editorial page is for opinion.</s>LIMBAUGH: Well, but wait now. When I see editorial pages advising Democrat leaders, like Nancy Pelosi or whatever, on how to behave, I think that that does get transferred to reporters in what's assigned, and it can show up.</s>VAUSE: Howie, how much power are you going to give Rush Limbaugh? How much credit are you going to give him for the midterm elections?</s>KURTZ: I'll give him a little bit of credit. He's the most popular radio talk show host in America. He has a way of rallying his troops. I don't give him as much credit as the president. But I tell you, it was an entertaining half-hour with Rush. He loves to be attacked by the likes of Tom Daschle and now Al Gore. It brings him more media attention. It gives him a chance to get behind the microphone and beat up on the liberal media. And I was sort of surprised that Gore would elevate Limbaugh by naming him in "The Washington Times" and Fox News. Yes, so what? We learned that these folks are conservative. That's not exactly a news flash. And it makes Gore look whiny, I think, because, if he's going to put himself forth as a potential president who is going to deal with Saddam and Osama, he has got to be able to deal with Rush Limbaugh.</s>KNAPP: Well, Howard, the thing is, Gore is trying desperately to be relevant again. He's not. His books, if you look at the Amazon.com's worst-sellers list, they're ranking like 1,423 in worst in sales. He's got to be relevant, so he's going to attack something that's popular: Rush Limbaugh, talk radio. The Democrats are grasping at straws. Look, they lost because they looked weak on the war on terror. They lost because they turned a memorial for Wellstone into a political pep rally. They lost because they looked so desperate going to the New Jersey Sopranos court to get Torricelli replaced. And they don't really have their message, so they're doing whatever they can to be relevant. And I guess throwing a tantrum is something they hope will work.</s>NIEVES: But, you know, but to get back to the issue...</s>CULLUM: And it's even more fundamental than that. Can I just tell you, if you look at latest issue of "Talkers" magazine, the new media seminar, which is our big event for all of the talkers, and when it was candidate Gore and candidate Bush, and we asked the president, now president, whom was a candidate, to come speak to our group -- and we asked Al Gore. Al Gore said, "Oh, no." He couldn't be bothered. "Write a letter." And President Bush basically said, "Send directions." We have asked the Democrats over and over, as an industry, to come to our association, to be on our shows, and they are afraid of talk radio. And the reason is that they know that over 80 percent of the people who listen to talk radio vote. And they are afraid of us. And so, frankly, if</s>VAUSE: Well, I'm not afraid of you, Blanquita, so I'm going to drop you for a moment. We're going to take a phone call from Robbi-Lee (ph) from Texas. Robbi, what do you got to say?</s>CALLER: Hi.</s>VAUSE: Hi. Go ahead. You're on</s>TALKBACK LIVE. CALLER: Hi. This is Robbi-Lee.</s>VAUSE: Yes, we know.</s>CALLER: It's a sad world when right-wing -- hi. Hi. Is it ready for me?</s>VAUSE: It's your turn, Robbi. Go for it.</s>CALLER: Hello?</s>CULLUM: There you have it.</s>VAUSE: Robbi-Lee, what have you got to say? Go.</s>CALLER: It is a sad world when right-wing hate mongers like Rush Limbaugh and Neal Boortz are viewed as entertainment. It teaches adults and kids it's cool and funny to tear others down.</s>NIEVES: I couldn't agree more. And that's what we're talking about.</s>CULLUM: Oh, please.</s>VAUSE: OK, that's the bell. OK, coming up next: Does the military's don't-ask/don't-tell rule compromise the war on terrorism? And don't forget to weigh in on today's "Question of the Day": What is the worst holiday gift you've ever received? I'll take your answers later this hour.</s>VAUSE: And welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. Does the military don't ask, don't tell rule hinder the war on terrorism? Earlier this year several linguist was dismissed from the military after it became clear they are in fact gay. This was in spite of the fact that the military is in desperate need of people who can speak Arabic. Alastair Gamble, one of the men discharged, wrote in today's op- ed page of the "New York Times": There was something about me that, despite my skills and aptitude for the work, mad me incompatible with military culture: I'm gay. The military's `don't ask, don't tell' policy makes no exceptions, even for personnel it needs desperately." OK. What about Greg? What do you think? Are we putting the war on terrorism at risk because of this policy? And this really is about that wider policy, about gays in the military?</s>KNAPP: I think it's tough. I mean, I understand the don't ask, don't tell policy, because the best way to let gays serve in the military is don't ask, don't tell because there are going to be people who are awkward. And if it affects how a military unit works at all in the field and compromises even one person's life, than you don't want that. On the other side, obviously, you don't want to have great people leave the military, be kicked out because of their sexual orientation. I understand that. You know, there were 561 people in this school. Those six were kicked out. If six were kicked out because they were overweight, there's body fat standards, or they couldn't do the physical fitness standards, would we be having this discussion? We say, We lost six people because they were fat? I was wondering about that.</s>NIEVES: I don't think this is the same analogy. I think it's hypocrisy from top to bottom. And I think that part of the problem is that we don't acknowledge the gay and lesbian community in the armed services. Imagine how many there are. And this is the kind of retribution they get when they admit they are. By the way, he's not only being discriminated by being gay, he's also discriminated against for learning Arabic, very well and fluently. That's somehow...</s>KNAPP: How's he being discriminated for that?</s>NIEVES: Well, if you read the piece, you'll notice that there are many feelings that people have against -- he felt, against his speaking the language. And that was the certain kind of...</s>VAUSE: ... from the audience. Over here. Peter, what's your question?</s>PETER: The current policy came out in the first year of the Clinton administration between what the administration wanted and what the services wanted and the compromise as such. I think the important question is do you want a military that does not enforce a policy given to it? That's what the policy is right now. And I think the American country wants a military that will enforce the policies, no matter what they are, they are given to it.</s>VAUSE: You're talking about the hypocrisy?</s>CULLUM: If you have a situation -- I think people really don't care about people's personal disposition. But if you have a policy and it's don't ask, don't tell, it's one thing. But if you walk in to the barracks and you've got a guy and his boyfriend in bed, it would be same as he were in bed with his girlfriend, there are rules there. Frankly, this is not a time to be practicing somebody's agenda. We're talking about a war here and we're trying to help the country have some sort of national defense and national security. There have got to be a lot of people out there that can speak Arabic. And I think there are a lot of people that believe in don't ask, don't tell. Some people have got to understand that the rules will bend so far, but you don't just want to flaunt them and break them and say in your face and I'm going to do what I want to.</s>KURTZ: But this guy was not is your face. Don't ask, don't tell is always something of a crude and somewhat unworkable political compromise. It's OK to be in the military, you can be gay, just don't tell anybody. This guy was going along...</s>NIEVES: ... the government a hypocrite and it makes the gay and lesbian person a hypocrite for having to live with a lie.</s>CULLUM: Let me just ask you a question, then. So it's OK, then, if everyone says don't ask, don't tell then if a guy can be in bed with his boy friend the barracks can a guy be in bed with his girlfriend in the barracks?</s>NIEVES: No, Blanquita, I agree you. Anybody in bed, if that's against the rules, that's aside. I believe that the essence should be...</s>VAUSE: Thanks, guys. There's the bell. Alastair Gamble will be our guest on "WOLF BLITZER REPORTS" today at 5 Eastern. Up next, we'll explore the naked truth about Abercrombie & Fitch's new catalog. Meanwhile, I want to know what was the worst gift you ever received? Call or e-mail us right now.</s>VAUSE: And welcome back. It's the busiest shopping day of the year, and Abercrombie & Fitch is welcoming the day with what some people may say is, in fact, quite a shocking way. Stores nationwide, young models in their underwear are greeting customers. And if that's not risque enough, once you get inside, you can get your very own copy of the new catalog, which might actually make you wonder exactly what Abercrombie & Fitch is saying. We've had to blur some of these pictures out, because this is not daytime viewing.</s>KURTZ: OK. Well, let's go to our panel and ask Howard Kurtz. Selling sex, selling clothes? I didn't see any clothes there. I love these television shows that say, isn't it terrible? People are selling sex and then they show the picture.</s>VAUSE: Sorry.</s>KURTZ: That's all right. You've got to illustrate it somehow. I think the media have kind of pushed us toward a kind of a soft porn culture. I see it everywhere. I see it in lingerie ads, in newspapers, I see Christina Aguilera on the cover of "Rolling Stone" wearing basically nothing, and I think some of it goes too far, and it kind of desensitizes people. And you know, obviously sex has always been used to sell products, but now it just seems to be really out of control.</s>VAUSE: Sandy is it going too far? Sandy?</s>NIEVES: You know, we've been there, we've seen that literally with Calvin Klein. Here we go with the same argument over again. By the way, if you know about advertising, sex and advertising have been a marriage since day one.</s>KNAPP: When you have to show your ID...</s>NIEVES: Let me say this, in the Victorian age, used it a lot. I agree, however, when it comes -- I don't know whether to talk about using children is where I draw the line, but we're way beyond calling this risque, you know, in this society...</s>KNAPP: When you have to show your driver's license to prove you're 18 to get their catalog, that's a little strange.</s>KURTZ: Good point.</s>KNAPP: And they're aiming for teens and preteens. I mean, this is the thing. If this was a cigarette company, there'd people protesting it like crazy. They're aiming at children, and man, it's tough being a parent nowadays.</s>UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Absolutely. I think it's the publicity that we give them here on the talk show that they're looking for. And it's obviously going to promote their brand and their clothing store. So we're just giving them more publicity.</s>VAUSE: OK, Josh on the phone from Tennessee, Josh.</s>JOSH: Hello.</s>VAUSE: Yes, go ahead, Josh.</s>JOSH: Yes. I believe that it's 2002, and as for the censors who believe in censoring this, it's not a conservative era like it was in the 1950s or '60s, and they need to understand it and accept it now.</s>VAUSE: OK, Blanquita, what do you think? We're a bit more accepting of this?</s>CULLUM: Well, there were some pretty sexy things back then. If you look at old movies, and you see Marilyn Monroe, that was pretty sexy. She didn't have to show everything. In fact, that's why strippers were so sexy, because they didn't reveal all. They made you kind of -- they were titillating your attention. But, I mean, you know, this is like Hooters goes to the holidays. I mean, who cares? If you don't want to see it, don't look at it.</s>NIEVES: I don't know what happened to that uptight, pristine magazine "Upper Crust" that -- I don't think anybody really bought it, but everybody talked about Abercrombie & Fitch, what made them make that...</s>NIEVES: It's about sales.</s>CULLUM: ... are they selling sex?</s>VAUSE: Well, it certainly doesn't look like they're selling clothes, because I didn't see a lot of clothes in that catalog, and I looked at it quite extensively.</s>KNAPP: They're aiming for the teens, and the only thing for teens is the image. And if they can make this be a sexy image, they'll buy the clothes.</s>UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: As I expressed during the break, I think it's just typical of our culture that's unfortunately gone too far promoting -- using sex to promote selling of all types of goods. And that's what I think.</s>CULLUM: Well, I mean, it's hard to find something for your mother-in-law in that catalog.</s>KURTZ: ... that is where I think we ought to have some concerns.</s>CULLUM: You're exactly right, Howard, because if they can't look at a picture of Joe Camel, why is it that they can have an Abercrombie & Fitch catalog?</s>NIEVES: Good point.</s>KNAPP: And I'm sure someone would say, hey, sex doesn't kill you, but in 2002, it can.</s>CULLUM: Absolutely.</s>VAUSE: OK. Betty has a comment. I'll come to Betty.</s>BETTY: In my neighborhood, there are a lot of young, junior high and high school girls, and I was looking at them the other day -- many of these kids are going to school looking like soft porn models. This is the damage that Abercrombie & Fitch are doing, to me. This is the influence.</s>CULLUM: You have the power to be able to speak up about it. You have the power as the consumer to call up Abercrombie & Fitch and just tell them that...</s>KNAPP: Well, beyond that, parents. Parents.</s>VAUSE: OK. Sorry, Greg. It's OK. We've got to move on. Our "Flash Round" is coming up next. Meanwhile, call me, let me know what was the worst holiday gift you've ever received. We'll be right back.</s>VAUSE: Welcome back. It's time for our fast-paced "Flash Round." The National Turkey Federation is crying foul over a television campaign by the animal rights group PETA. It features a turkey puppet terrorists who takes shoppers and workers hostage at a supermarket, threatening to scold (ph) and dismembers anyone who resists. So does this PETA ad ruffle your feathers, Howie?</s>KURTZ: It does seem like it's in bad taste, but obviously they're -- free expression, they can say what they want.</s>VAUSE: Blanquita?</s>CULLUM: PETA, PETA, PETA. Get over it.</s>VAUSE: Greg?</s>KNAPP: The worst thing since tofurkey. Oh.</s>VAUSE: Sandy?</s>NIEVES: The mark of a good ad is, that it works. We'll see where it goes.</s>VAUSE: OK. Up next, some oddly decorated trees. Two colleges are decking their evergreen trees with skunk musk and coyote urine so people won't chop them down. We hear the odor isn't so bad outside, but be warned, once they're inside, it's not very pleasant. Good idea or playing the Scrooge -- Howie.</s>KURTZ: We don't seem to have this problem with Hanukkah menorahs.</s>VAUSE: Blanquita?</s>CULLUM: It stinks.</s>VAUSE: Oh God. OK. Greg.</s>KNAPP: I'm worried about all the skunks all of a sudden running around these trees and what they're up to.</s>VAUSE: OK. And Sandy.</s>NIEVES: Oh, PU. Absolutely out. No.</s>VAUSE: OK. Up next, Michael Jordan is calling it quits again. He'll says he'll stop playing ball when his contract expires at the end of this season, though he will stay on as part owner of the Washington Wizards. Can Mike really give up or will he be back yet again? Michael Jordan fan, Howie?</s>KURTZ: As somebody who started going to Wizards games again, this is terrible news, but I think he may try to come back when he gets to be as old as Henry Kissinger. This guy loves the game, can't give it up.</s>VAUSE: OK. Blanquita.</s>CULLUM: He's so rich he can hire out.</s>VAUSE: OK. And Greg?</s>KNAPP: Michael's still better than two-thirds of the league. And I would absolutely pay to see him.</s>VAUSE: Sandy.</s>NIEVES: Then you're going to pay a lot, because the man makes so much, I don't know what to say about a man that makes a gazillion dollars.</s>VAUSE: Fair point. OK, 37 days in jail, celebrity publicist</s>KURTZ: She may be out of legal trouble now, but in the court of public opinion, people are still going to look at this as somebody who backed up over a bunch of people, called them white trash. In other words, I think she's going to have a hard time coming back.</s>VAUSE: OK. Blanquita.</s>CULLUM: We need a Lizzy list, let everybody know that she's on the streets and driving again.</s>KNAPP: The worst celebrity justice since</s>OJ. VAUSE: OK. And Sandy.</s>NIEVES: Free Lizzie. I am so glad she's out.</s>VAUSE: OK. OK. The bell once again. The flash round is over. I have to say good-bye to Howard Kurtz, Blanquita Cullum, Sandy Nieves and Greg Knapp. Thank you all for joining us. Up next, I want to know, what is the worst holiday present you ever received? Call or e-mail right now.</s>VAUSE: And welcome back. It's time for our "Question of the Day." What is the worst holiday gift you have ever received? We want to go to our audience. We want to ask Lewis Ellison (ph). It's over to Dan (ph). Dan (ph), what did you get?</s>DAN: My sister got me a backpack for the holiday season. I didn't like it, and so I asked for the receipt and she said she lost it. I took it back to the store and they said it was a free gift you get when you make another purchase. So...</s>VAUSE: Nice.</s>DAN: So that was my worst gift.</s>VAUSE: OK. Let's go to an e-mail now. We got an e-mail about the worst gift: "My worst present was a bed. A full sized mattress and box spring set. I was traumatized. What 8-year-old wants a bed?"</s>VAUSE: Very good -- very good point. OK. Diane (ph) from Oregon. You're on the phone. Diane, what is your worst gift story? Uh-oh. Diane, are you there? OK. Another e-mail. Let's put the e-mail up. Diane -- OK, you missed out. We're going to go the e-mail: "The worst Christmas gift I ever got was when my wife got me new floormats for our VW Bug." Ouch. That's kind of nasty. We got one more e-mail. OK. One more. Yes: "Fruitcake. Need I say more?" Good point, Roger. OK.</s>ELEANOR: My husband gave me jigsaw for christmas.</s>VAUSE: Nice guy. OK, a jigsaw. OK. Well, we're out of time. That's it for another "Free for all Friday." Thanks very much for joining us. I'm John Vause. I'm in for Arthel Neville. She'll be back on Monday at 3:00 Eastern. Have a great weekend. "INSIDE POLITICS" with Judy Woodruff, that's coming up next. Thanks very much. TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com