Interview with Deposed Egyptian President's Son; Talking with a Writer Who Got Information from PFC Bradley Manning
HALA GORANI, CNN HOST: Good evening, welcome to the program. I'm Hala Gorani, filling in for Christiane Amanpour. He's not guilty of aiding the enemy, but he did violate the Espionage Act. That's the verdict in the court martial of Bradley Manning. He was acquitted of the most serious charge against him, so there will be no life sentence on that charge, but he could still face more than 100 years in prison. He'll be sentenced tomorrow. Manning is the Army private behind the biggest leak of classified documents in American history. There he is. Almost three-quarters of a million secret documents downloaded by Manning from military servers and released to the anti-secrecy website WikiLeaks. Jeremy Scahill is an award-winning investigative reporter covering U.S. security operations, both overt and covert. Bradley Manning was once a source for Scahill in his investigative work. I'll talk to him in just a moment. But now to Egypt, where for the first time an official outside the Egyptian military met with the deposed president, Mohammed Morsy, Catherine Ashton, the European Union's top diplomat, visiting Cairo, has criticized the overthrow of the former Muslim Brotherhood leader. Listen.</s>CATHERINE ASHTON, EUROPEAN UNION FOREIGN POLICY CHIEF: We talked for two hours; we talked in depth. He has access to information in terms of TV, newspapers. So we were able to talk about the situation. And we were able to talk about the need to move forward.</s>GORANI: Well, Ashton was actually flown to the meeting with Morsy in a military helicopter and has no idea where the former president is being held. Even his own family hasn't seen or heard from him since July 3rd. Yesterday evening I had a highly emotional conversation with the president's son, Osama Morsy, who claims the military kidnapped his father on that day on July 3rd.</s>GORANI: Osama Morsy, thanks for being with us.</s>OSAMA MORSY, SON OF MOHAMMED MORSY, FORMER EGYPTIAN PRESIDENT: Thank you.</s>GORANI: All right, have you been in touch with your father at all since he was deposed July 3rd?</s>MORSY: No.</s>GORANI: Do you know where he's being held?</s>MORSY: No, no, I don't know. I saw him the last time in the middle of the day of the coup.</s>GORANI: And you haven't seen him or heard from him in any way since July 3rd?</s>MORSY: No, no.</s>GORANI: Have you been in touch with any government officials? Have you been trying to get information through other channels?</s>MORSY: No, I am -- I am Morsy's son. I'm Morsy's lawyer. But there is no legal way I can work. No one is saying anything legally about his situation, about his place, about where is he and what is his legal situation.</s>GORANI: I spoke with the interim prime minister of Egypt his -- Hazem el-Beblawi. I asked him about the detention of your father. And this is what he had to say. Listen.</s>HAZEM EL-BEBLAWI, INTERIM PRIME MINISTER, EGYPT: He is receiving generous treatment, a very kind one, very respectful. So there is no complaint on this regard.</s>MORSY: I think it's a joke. Why would I believe him? He is not legitimate head of ministers. He came after a military coup, a bloody military coup. He lies about violence. He lies about demonstrations, respectfully treating. He killed protesters. And why would I believe him?</s>GORANI: So what goes through your mind when you hear government ministers, or the prime minister, in this case, talk about your father and the fact that he should be held accountable for the time he spent in office and that he abused his power back then? What do you think? What is your response to them?</s>MORSY: Shame. They are trying to hide their crime. He was at the power. He was the president, the legitimate president, the elected president. They robbed it. They did this military -- a bloody military coup. And they kidnapped the president, the legitimate President Morsy in Egypt. And they have no legitimacy at all.</s>GORANI: I spoke with, as I said, with -- Osama, with the prime minister. And he said that the Muslim Brotherhood, as a group, would not be banned so long as religion and politics were kept separate and said that the process and said that the process would be all inclusive.</s>MORSY: Why do you believe him?</s>GORANI: Do you believe him?</s>MORSY: Why should we believe him? He lies about every action and everything he said. He killed -- he killed the protesters. He killed -- he killed Egyptian people. Do not ask us, please, when will you stop being killed, but ask those criminals, those international criminals, when will you stop killing the Egyptian people?</s>GORANI: You don't think that the government is now promising that there will be an all-inclusive political process that will include Islamist parties and the Freedom and Justice Party going forward? You think they're lying?</s>MORSY: This is not a legitimate government. There is no legitimate president. There is no legitimate government. We don't recognize them. They are lying. They're lying publicly about everything till now. They are the leaders of a military coup. Morsy is the legitimate leader and the democratic elected president. Everyone in the world knew this.</s>GORANI: I just want to ask you the question about whether or not you still think that he would return as legitimate leader? Because you said that a week after July 3rd. Do you still hold onto that hope?</s>MORSY: He has votes behind him. Now Egyptians in the squares asking, where is my vote? Where is my president? So the military coup's leader and his group are killing these, killing them because they are asking about their votes, they are asking about the democracy way. We did not let this way go. They won't be able to solve this without the legitimate president. He is the key, the only key to solving this mess.</s>GORANI: Do you think your family is in physical danger now?</s>MORSY: Yes, of course, every Egyptian, every Egyptian citizen is in danger. We are in a police state. They are criminals. There is no human rights in Egypt now. They are killing, torturing, arresting, very, very violent (inaudible) now. Everyone that is standing against the coup, they are killed. They arrest him or torturing them. Where is he now? Where is the constitution? This is a mess.</s>GORANI: Osama Morsy, thank you very much for taking the time to talk to us.</s>MORSY: Thank you. Thank you.</s>GORANI: Well, this is a mess. Certainly many people agree on that with regards to what's happening in Egypt, Osama Morsy, the son of the deposed Egyptian president, Mohammed Morsy, currently being detained. And we'll keep our eye, of course, on the latest happening in Egypt and that important story unfolding there. And now to the big story here in the United States, as I mentioned earlier a short time ago, we learned that a military court has found Private 1st Class Bradley Manning not guilty of aiding the enemy. That charge would have carried a maximum sentence of life in prison. However, Manning was found guilty of most of the remaining charges against him. The U.S. said Manning delivered hundreds of thousands of pages of classified documents and videos to WikiLeaks. The Justice Department has used the Espionage Act of 1917 six times to bring cases against government officials for leaks since President Obama came to office. That's a huge number, considering that it had only been used three times by all of his predecessors combined. Bradley Manning was a source for my next guest at one point, investigative journalist Jeremy Scahill, whose latest book is called "Dirty Wars;" also the name of the accompanying documentary film. Jeremy Scahill, thanks so much for being with us.</s>JEREMY SCAHILL, JOURNALIST AND AUTHOR: Thank you.</s>GORANI: What do you make of the fact that the most serious charge, aiding the enemy, did not stick?</s>SCAHILL: First of all, it was an insidious charge to begin with, not just against Bradley Manning, but also it had far-reaching implications for all of us, for journalists and for ordinary citizens who use the Internet. Basically what that charge said is if you provide information to anyone that's able to publish it and someone like Osama bin Laden is able to then read it, you have aided the enemy, meaning that "The New York Times" publishing information that the U.S. could determine is helpful to Al Qaeda or Al-Shabaab in Somalia, they could make an argument that you're actively aiding the enemy. They don't even need to prove that you had an intent to do so.</s>GORANI: And in the Internet age, anything that you publish anywhere can be seen pretty much by anyone with an Internet connection.</s>SCAHILL: Right. And during the course of the Bradley Manning trial, the judge asked at one point if Manning had given these documents to "The New York Times" or another respectable media outlet instead of WikiLeaks, would you still assert that it was aiding the enemy? And would you prosecute them? And the prosecutor said yes.</s>GORANI: Yes, right.</s>SCAHILL: Just to give you a sense that they view WikiLeaks in the same way as "The New York Times." So that's chilling.</s>GORANI: Right, so which means that investigative reporters who rely for their work on leaks -- and, by the way, you were, at one point, in touch with Bradley Manning; but at first you didn't know that it was him, right?</s>SCAHILL: Yes, it was strange. I mean, I was working on an investigation into the private security company Blackwater and I had gotten a note from someone that gave me a tip that Eric Prince (ph), the owner of that company, was intending to leave the United States to move to Abu Dhabi. And I pursued that story and it turned out it was true. And I broke that story. And I had no idea that the person that sent me that was Bradley Manning.</s>GORANI: And how did you find out?</s>SCAHILL: Years later someone who was working on a book about Bradley Manning called me and said, you know, I'm talking to people who've been in touch with Bradley Manning. And I said, well, I've never been in touch with Bradley Manning. And he goes, oh, my understanding is that you were. And I said, well, no; your understanding is wrong. And he then said to me, can you check this email address? And I put in the email address, and sure enough, I had been communicating with him. It just -- his name didn't register with me. He wasn't known at the time. This was before WikiLeaks. And he actually wrote in his initial email to me he basically said that he was horrified at the idea that Blackwater was getting away with the crimes it had committed in Iraq, and he wanted them to be investigated.</s>GORANI: Did he sound like an idealist, like a young man who just wanted the truth to come out, who just wanted to right a moral wrong in his view?</s>SCAHILL: That was my sense from it. And also, you know, the only time we've ever been able to hear Bradley Manning in his own words was some months ago when an audio recording leaked from the court martial proceedings against him. And you heard Bradley Manning, who had been characterized as sort of this timid, frightened guy in a corner, cowering, who was suicidal, you hear him in a very calm, collective voice, explain exactly why he did what he did. And I think it gave lie to a lot of the propaganda about him.</s>GORANI: So let's be clear; what he did was illegal. Should he have been prosecuted?</s>SCAHILL: Well, he himself pled guilty to around 10 counts against him and I think that what we all should be clear on here is that he has taken responsibility for his actions. What he's disputing is that he did it to aid any of America's enemies, that he did in the interest of being some kind of an espionage agent or that he did it for nefarious purposes, to harm the United States. What he's saying is, yes, I did these things and I will accept the consequences for it. But I did it because I love my country and I felt that crimes were being committed that the American people had a right to know about.</s>GORANI: Some people in the U.S. and elsewhere feel he shouldn't be prosecuted at all.</s>SCAHILL: Yes. Well, I mean, I understand that argument. And I think -- I mean, I think you could make a reasonable argument. Look, if you look at the collateral murder video as it was called, where you this Apache helicopter gunning down civilians including media workers from the Reuters --</s>GORANI: And there it is, by the way. I want to tell our viewers that's what they're seeing. This is what was essentially (inaudible) the crown jewel, if you will, of the leaks --</s>SCAHILL: This kicked it all off, yes.</s>GORANI: -- it did. And this is what Julian Assange presented to journalists with sort of like arrows pointing to the camera of one of the Reuters journalists there. And it is very chilling video.</s>SCAHILL: And they also shot people intentionally who were trying to help the wounded. They're just gunning them down. What happened to the people that did this action? Are they being court martialed? Are they being prosecuted? So I think people who look at what Manning did, the exposure of assassination squads in Afghanistan, the U.S. turning a blind eye to Iraqi surrogates torturing prisoners in Iraq, we know about this because of Bradley Manning.</s>GORANI: I think, Jeremy, the issue here is people will agree with you that this documentation and this type of material should be made available to the public, but it's the way in which it was made available, essentially breaking a law that you're leaking classified information, that it should have been taken up the chain of command internally.</s>SCAHILL: So here's my response to that. Look at the case of Thomas Drake, the famed NSA whistleblower, Thomas Drake was in the U.S. military and worked at the NSA for 30 years. He started to see wrongdoing after 9/11 within the NSA, and he took it up his chain of command. He never went public with it. He was then prosecuted under the Espionage Act for doing what those critics say that Manning should have done.</s>GORANI: So what choice --</s>SCAHILL: And he had his life ruined. He works at an Apple store right now, selling iPhones, after having spent 30 years in service for the U.S. government.</s>GORANI: What should happen then? I mean, what should the -- essentially the rules be governing the framework governing essentially leakers, whistleblowers, who feel that they've seen something wrong and they want to make it available, either to their superiors or to the public?</s>SCAHILL: I would say that the position that candidate Senator Obama laid out in 2008, when he was running for president, should be the standard, that whistleblowers should have protections under federal law, and that part of what's chilling about the Manning thing is I think it is meant to send a message to future whistleblowers, that you could serve life in prison or get the death penalty for speaking out. And that's pretty chilling.</s>GORANI: Very quickly, you mentioned what Obama's promise was when he was president-elect he had a website called change.gov, in which he wrote this, "Such acts of courage and patriotism should be encouraged rather than stifled. Barack Obama will strength whistleblower laws to protect federal workers who expose waste, fraud and abuse of authority and government."</s>SCAHILL: Right. He's on the exact opposite, as you point out, using the Espionage Act, also going after journalists, seizing phone records, this case of Jim Riis (ph) in "The New York Times," reporter now being ordered to testify against one of his sources. There's a real war on real journalism in this country, and I think all of us -- Hala, you and I and other journalists -- have an obligation to stand up to it.</s>GORANI: Jeremy Scahill, thanks very much, the author of "Dirty Wars" and the documentary of the same name is also out. Thanks so much for joining us.</s>SCAHILL: Thank you.</s>GORANI: And when it comes to approving the use of drones, take a look at this gigantic gender gap. A new poll suggests that men and women have sharply different opinions. According to the Pew Research Center in the U.S., one of the few countries where drones enjoy popular support, 70 percent of men approve the strikes; 53 percent of women are in favor, a significant gap of 17 percentage points. In Britain, where drones are supported by less than half the population, the gap between male and female is wider -- 24 points. And in Japan, take a look at this figure: only a quarter of the people favor drones overall, but the gap between men and women is a whopping 31 points, only 10 percent of women support the use of drones. And after a break, a different kind of poll, the upcoming election in Zimbabwe. Will it be Robert Mugabe's last stand or his last hurrah? That's when we come back.