MSNBC show
Alan Keyes is Making Sense
Alan KeyesFebruary 27, 2002
ALAN KEYES, HOST: Welcome to MAKING SENSE. I'm Alan Keyes.
I'm actually coming to you live tonight from Atlanta, Georgia, where I just enjoyed a wonderful exchange of views with Julian Bond, the chairman of the NAACP. I found myself wishing the whole evening that there were some way we could have brought at least part of that discussion to all of you. But can't do it quite yet.
However, we do have a wonderful and exciting show for you. Some of you I am sure, most of you I hope, have seen the reports that were banner headlined in “USA Today” about the poll that was taken among folks in the Islamic world. Well, we're going to have an exclusive interview with the Kuwaiti ambassador on this show tonight to talk a little bit about the surprising and I think disturbing figures particularly that came out about Kuwait in that poll.
But first, we are going to be dealing with an outrage that I think is occurring right here in the United States where the attorney general in New York, Attorney General Spitzer, has decided to take on the job of going after crisis pregnancy centers in New York, what I think is a clear abuse of his prosecutorial power for political reasons. He happens to be a very strongly pro-abortion politician who was supported by pro-abortion groups for his election effort and seems to be engaging right now in some payback in going after the crisis pregnancy centers.
Now, I have talked to you about them before. And I have to say, stating my own biases, that I have spent a lot of time and will continue to spend a lot of time and effort to support the crisis pregnancy center movement around the country because I think it's one of the most important and constructive things that's being done to help young women who are in a crisis pregnancy situation make the kind of decision that they and their child can live with once it's made.
The idea that these crisis pregnancy centers are engaged in some kind of criminal abuse strikes me as almost criminal in and of itself. And we are going to take a good hard look at what Attorney General Spitzer is up to in New York tonight on the program.
The key questions that we are going to address on MAKING SENSE tonight about Mr. Spitzer's vendetta in New York against the crisis pregnancy centers, is it right to take these organizations and treat them as if they are lawbreakers? Is the New York attorney general, in fact, engaged in a politically motivated witch-hunt? Is he serving the law, or is he serving his pro-abortion political patrons?
Those are serious questions. And I think it's a serious problem if we do, in fact, have in front of us politically motivated prosecutorial abuses.
Up front tonight, we're joined by Charlie Condon. Charlie is the attorney general for South Carolina. And he has written to Attorney General Spitzer as one of his colleagues in the country, questioning whether or not this investigation, so-called, is in fact based on any real suspicions that could warrant such an investigation.
He's also a candidate for governor in South Carolina. He sees no problems with the crisis pregnancy center, has worked closely with those in his state. And he's called on the New York attorney general to end his investigation.
Attorney General Condon, welcome to the program. And thanks for sharing your time with us tonight.
CHARLIE CONDON, SOUTH CAROLINA ATTORNEY GENERAL: It's good to be with you, Ambassador Keyes.
KEYES: First question I would like to put to you, you have experience with the crisis pregnancy centers. You are yourself in a position of responsibility for law enforcement in South Carolina. Looking at the crisis pregnancy centers and what you know of them, do you see any justification for the kind of investigation that the attorney general in New York has been conducting?
CONDON: I've got grave concerns about what the attorney general of the state of New York is doing. As you know, the Office of Attorney General has broad investigative powers. He's using a civil subpoena power to require these crisis pregnancy centers to produce just thousands and thousands of documents.
In my state, I've had the occasion to work with them very closely. I had the honor of actually distributing to crisis pregnancy centers in South Carolina some $250,000 because they do such good work in South Carolina.
We've had a tremendous decline in our abortion rate. And I'm thoroughly convinced it's because these — they are essentially volunteers. They're out there with a loving heart and helping hand, helping women in crisis. They are there to provide support.
They've been very, very, just wonderful citizens here in South Carolina. So, I have a hard time imagining targeting them with the kind of investigation that the attorney general of New York is now conducting.
KEYES: Well, as I understand it, he has been raising questions suggesting that they have somehow fraudulently misrepresented themselves, that they are engaged in some sort of coercive efforts with respect to the women who come to the crisis pregnancy center.
Two questions. Is that your understanding? Do you think something like that actually provides a basis that is justifiable for this investigation? And, in your experience with the crisis pregnancy centers, do you see any warrantable basis for these kinds of suspicions?
CONDON: Well, obviously, I'm not familiar with the facts in New York because I've not visited the centers there. But I do know this. The kind of investigation he's launched raises serious questions with its methodology because these people have made it very clear they want to abide by the laws of the state of New York.
He's accusing them of, in effect, practicing medicine without a license and offering improper medical advice. And everything that I've heard and read about the crisis pregnancy centers in New York, as well as obviously in the state of South Carolina, they want to comply with the law. So, why not simply sit down with them, ask them what the problems are, work out if there are indeed problems?
The concern I have in looking at this from afar, I've had such a positive experience with these folks. They are good, decent, hardworking Americans. They want to simply help out with women in need. They are there to provide support, to provide counseling relative to adoption, to offer clothing, diapers, you name it.
So, why issue these broad-based subpoenas accusing them of, in effect, flaunting the laws of the state of New York in requiring them, and they are basically in a volunteer position, of spending hundreds of thousands of dollars potentially in legal fees when the situation can be worked out quite easily.
And you're right. The question that I have is he's received campaign contributions from groups that support strongly having abortions. And I do think there is possibly a political motivation here.
KEYES: Well, I think that that may be one of the problems. You cited earlier the fact that where crisis pregnancy centers are operating, we often see a decline in the abortion rate. But for someone who is advocating the work of the abortion industry and those who promote it, wouldn't this in fact be the offense, that they are effectively helping young women to make a decision that does not include abortion?
CONDON: That's precisely the concern. General Spitzer may have strong feelings relative to the abortion question, I readily admit, as do I. But our feelings should not get in the way of how we investigate matters. We need to do that without political motivations here.
And there appears to be a clear case of bias. And I really do challenge the way he's conducting these investigations. I have questions about them.
I simply wrote to him asking him to consider the good experiences I've had with these crisis pregnancy centers. He actually called me up personally, was really irate that I even bothered to write him. And I was really stunned with the comments he made. In fact, he implied that they were involved with actually being involved with the murder of abortion providers in the state of New York, which I thought was an outrageous accusation or implication to make.
KEYES: Well, that suggests a couple of things. First of all, I do have to note that we asked Attorney General Spitzer to come on the program this evening to present his side of the case. And he refused to do so on the grounds that it was an ongoing investigation. He didn't want to talk about it.
But from the sound of it, the reaction you got from him seems to include a kind of personal venom that I am not sure is appropriate for somebody who is using public authority. Shouldn't that be used for the sake of public ends and public goals, not to pursue what may be a very strong and passionate private political vendetta?
CONDON: Precisely. He made it very clear to me that he has never lost a fight with one of his ideological opponents. So, when you hear these sorts of comments from the state's chief law enforcement officer — and I merely wrote him as a colleague telling him that these people do good work in South Carolina, I hope that he would consider that, and that he would sit down and meet with him because the issuing of a subpoena, a broad-based subpoena, with essentially a volunteer group causes tremendous disruption. It's very expensive to comply with it.
And if there are problems with what they are doing, I would simply ask that he meet with them and to work out the problems because I do know that the crisis pregnancy centers do excellent work in South Carolina.
KEYES: We do have to suspect, don't we, that the burdensome costs that result from complying with this kind of a campaign of harassment which could lead to the destruction of some of the crisis pregnancy centers? They are not hugely budgeted operations. Maybe that's one of the objectives of the harassment itself.
Mr. Attorney General, thank you so much for joining us this evening...
CONDON: Thank you.
KEYES: ... I appreciate your willingness to come share your views. And I appreciate your conscientious willingness to step forward and share your thoughts with your counterpart in the hope you might get a more constructive approach to this out of him. We'll have to see.
Thanks for being on the show tonight. I really appreciate it.
Next, we're going to get to the heart of the matter. We're going to hear from folks on both sides, as we always do. We'll have some representatives from the National Organization of Women and NARAL and others.
And I, as somebody who has firsthand experience running a crisis pregnancy center in New York, will be sharing thoughts with you. Later, an outrageous poll I'm sure you've already heard of, 10 years after the U.S. helped drive Iraq out of Kuwait, this poll indicates that 36 percent of Kuwaitis actually believe the 9-11 attacks were morally justifiable. We are going to get reaction to this in an exclusive interview with the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States.
But first of all, does this make sense? A lot of folks are coming forward now and saying that we should be, in fact, applying racial profiling to our anti-terror efforts at airports and elsewhere. It is causing inconvenience and difficulty to people of all backgrounds and persuasions.
Now, I don't have any problem with applying common sense experience in law enforcement matters. I've made that very clear. It's not the racial part of racial profiling that bothers me here. It's the profiling part.
If we narrow the profile, then maybe the terrorists would just make up their next group with folks who look like this, John Walker Lindh. Remember him?
He doesn't look like an Arab fellow. But if they were to make up a team that looked like him, we would find ourselves seriously dead. I think the problem with racial profiling isn't that it's racial. It's that it opens up vulnerabilities, which would later be exploited by the terrorists. Does that make sense?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KEYES: Welcome back to MAKING SENSE. Tonight we are talking about the investigative campaign of Attorney General Spitzer in New York state against the crisis pregnancy centers in his state. We are raising all kinds of specious issues.
He is moving against them in a way that may constitute the abuse of his prosecutorial authority in order to harass them and undermine them financially, drive them out of business. Why? Well, I think, quite frankly, because they are, in fact, an alternative to the abortion mills in his state, offering counseling and support and help to young women in crisis pregnancies so that they can make a decision that respects the life of their child as well as their own future life prospects.
Joining us now to get to the heart of this matter, we have Joan Malin, CEO of Planned Parenthood in New York. Also with us it's Betsy Cavendish, the general council for NARAL, the National Abortion Rights Action League.
And Chris Slattery, the founder and president of Expectant Mother Care, one of the crisis pregnancy centers under subpoena in New York. First, let me go to Joan Malin.
Joan, I've obviously raised what are for me some very clear and pointed questions about the nature of this investigation in New York state. I've worked with crisis pregnancy centers. I've seen what they do. And I frankly don't see any ground whatsoever for suggesting that there is some abuse here that an attorney general ought to be investigating. Why do you support the idea of these investigations?
JOAN MALIN, CEO, PLANNED PARENTHOOD, NEW YORK: We here at Planned Parenthood believe very strongly that women need to get full access to complete information so that they can make the best informed decisions for themselves and for their families.
Our experience in crisis pregnancy centers is that they use scare tactics. They provide false information. They are misleading. And they really seek to prey on women at a very vulnerable time.
We've had examples. And I don't think it's an accident that many of the pregnancy centers are located across the street from Planned Parenthood facilities. And one of them is across the street from us in the South Bronx. We've had clients who have gone there by mistake and have talked about receiving false pregnancy tests, have talked about being locked in a room and made to watch a video that is graphically inaccurate, highly inappropriate, and really scared. And they are really told that there is only one option available for them, which is to take their pregnancy to term.
We believe that women need to have the full range of information given to them so they can make the best decision for themselves. And the pregnancy centers clearly are not doing that.
They are using deceptive advertising. They are talking about abortion alternatives. They are talking about providing medical services. They do not provide medical services. And it really sort of ensnares women into the false services at a time when they are most vulnerable.
KEYES: I've got to confess, and I will say this quite bluntly, which sometimes I do, sometimes I don't on this program. I believe that just about every charge you have just made is simply a falsehood. I've got to be quite frank with you. I have worked closely with crisis pregnancy centers and the people who run them.
But first, I want to make sure we get to everybody. Let's go to Betsy Cavendish at NARAL.
Betsy, do you share this understanding that this is the basis for the fact that, well, they do offer some competition to the abortion centers hat are in New York state. Is that now a crime in New York state, to offer abortion centers some competition?
ELIZABETH CAVENDISH, GENERAL COUNSEL, NARAL: I don't believe that's the basis of Attorney General Spitzer's investigation at all. And NARAL completely shares Planned Parenthood's view, based on many comments to our Web site and our own investigations into crisis pregnancy centers, that many women are indeed deceived by the nature of crisis pregnancy centers.
They believe they are going to get options counseling or some medical services when they go in. And instead, they are shut in rooms, shown horrific pictures that are highly sensationalized. They are shamed, humiliated for even thinking about having an abortion. And they are not given medically accurate information about abortion at all.
We like Planned Parenthood believe that women deserve full options counseling. And women should decide for themselves what's best for themselves and their family when they face a crisis pregnancy.
KEYES: So, based on that I presume that in these abortion mills they are informing women about the stage of their pregnancy, sharing sonograms with them so that they can understand the development of the being in their womb, and things of that kind. Do they share that information with people going to the abortion centers, or not?
CAVENDISH: Common law in all 50 states and statutory law on top of it requires that women, as all patients, be told about all the risks, benefits, alternatives to any medical treatment. That's medically ethically required.
KEYES: Well, if I can interrupt you just a second. That's not the question I asked you. I asked you whether or not they are shown sonograms and other things are done so that it will be clear about the stage of development of the child in the womb and what we are actually talking about because I have to confess I've heard many reports and read many reports that very often they are told, “Well, that's just a mass of tissue. You don't have to worry about that.”
That doesn't sound like accurate information to me. But you said you are interested in accurate information.
CAVENDISH: Absolutely, we are interested in accurate information. The exact stage of fetal development and everything that's going on with the fetus may or may not be relevant to that woman. And the counselors and doctors engage in a dialogic process with the woman and give her all the information she needs without humiliation, without degradation, in order to allow her to make the choice about whether to continue or terminate a pregnancy.
KEYES: Well, the charge of humiliation and degradation, your language mind you, is one that I think is entirely unsubstantiated. But that's why I brought Chris Slattery here.
Chris, you are somebody, you have worked in this area for many years. You are in charge of a crisis pregnancy center, the Expectant Mother Care Center. As you sit here and listen to what is being said by Joan Malin and Betsy Cavendish about so-called abuses at the crisis pregnancy center, does this correspond to your experience?
CHRIS SLATTERY, EXPECTANT MOTHER CARE: I think it's outrageous. These charges come — remember, we are dealing in an industry where Planned Parenthood, first of all, 91 percent of their pregnant clients in the United States get abortions at their facilities. They've killed 3,000 babies in the last 25 years, and in the last 15 years have taken $3 billion of taxpayer money to carry out their grisly deeds.
In addition, we have in New York state one of the most unregulated, undisciplined abortion industries. We have the only abortionist serving a life term in prison right now. We have abortionists with hundreds of lawsuits against them for malpractice across the state, including Planned Parenthood's facilities.
The caring, compassionate counselors at the crisis centers throughout the state of New York are doing heroic work in loving and mending hearts, helping hurts of young ladies who are caught in unplanned pregnancies or had abortions. It's just baseless to say that people are locked in rooms and shamed.
First of all, most of these crisis pregnancy centers have no locks on their doors. They are all given options to turn off videotapes or to leave at any time if they don't like the services that are offered.
About 10 percent of crisis pregnancy centers now in the U.S. are offering on-site medical services. It's baseless for Planned Parenthood's president to say we don't have medical services when right across the street from their facility in the South Bronx we have a full-service medical clinic with licensed, board-certified physicians.
KEYES: Now, when you say medical clinic, these are licensed, board-certified physicians. These are people who have satisfied all the requirements of the law. Is that right?
SLATTERY: Absolutely. We have our own medical clinic with our own three-dimensional ultrasound, sonography. We have prenatal care.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh, thank you (INAUDIBLE)...
SLATTERY: We have this also in Brooklyn. We are expanding it across the city. And we are looking at a trend across the United States of crisis centers offering on-site medical services.
They have been discrediting us for years. Last year, NARAL came out with a 60-page attack manual called “Unmasking Fake Clinics.” And I believe the attorney general of New York has played right into this manual.
First of all, he paid an abortion group to make 86,000 phone calls to get him elected in New York. He has pledged and made a commitment and opened the first reproductive rights unit in the United States, a special abortion rights team that all they do is file cases against pro-lifers across the U.S.
Now they've come to the crisis pregnancy centers in an election year. It's payback time.
MALIN: I need to comment on several of the concerns that were raised about our services. We provide to over 30,000 women in the city of New York over 60,000 services. Less than 10,000 of that are abortions.
We are primarily a family planning provider. We provide a full range of health care services to women. And the critical issue that we provide is that we inform women so they can make the best decisions for themselves.
Those services do include abortion. I'm proud of the care that we provide. It is quality health care.
But we do provide a range of services. We also as an agency have direct referral links to adoption agencies, to prenatal care.
The critical issue is the woman is given the information to make the best decision for herself. Crisis pregnancy centers do not do that. There is one decision as far as you are concerned. Women are not given a choice. The whole issue is to give them a choice.
SLATTERY: I'm sorry. I'm sorry...
MALIN: And we are also — I might add we are a health care service. We are fully regulated. We are fully licensed. Your providers may be licensing and providing those services under those license, but you are not a health care service. And that's a very distinct operation from what we do.
If you were, then the attorney general would be asking questions about your regulations and your license. He's not doing that.
SLATTERY: No...
MALIN: He's really talking about deceptive advertising, misinformation, and inappropriate medical care.
SLATTERY: No, he's saying...
KEYES: Wait a second. Chris, Chris, answer that charge because I think this is one of the things I hear all the time. I go to the phone books. I look at the advertisements. And I see clearly on all of these advertisements that notation that this is not a clinic and so forth and so on.
SLATTERY: That's right.
KEYES: Isn't that in fact one of the things that's routine with crisis pregnancy centers?
(CROSSTALK)
MALIN: If you are not a clinic, then you are not health care services. If you are a clinic, you should be regulated and licensed.
KEYES: Wait a minute, excuse me, let him answer.
SLATTERY: Not all the crisis centers have medical services on site. Especially in New York state now, it's very difficult to become a licensed clinic. In fact, most abortion facilities are not clinics. They are doctors' offices masquerading as clinics.
In reality, we partner now in our centers in New York with licensed physicians who can legally advertise under clinics. But the pregnancy centers themselves are all advertising exclusively under abortion alternatives. And each of those headings in the phone books have clear disclaimers that say: “Facilities under these headings do not provide abortions or referrals for abortion services.”
Our counselors and our centers never tell women that they can get abortions in our facilities. We always say, “Come in for some counseling. Let's talk about this pregnancy. Let's get a pregnancy test. Let's get a sonogram. Let's see what solutions we can work out.” This is what we do.
KEYES: Can I ask a question of Joan and Betsy? Can I ask a question of you? You saying there are these advertisements and so forth and so on. Now, you all are intelligent folks, and you know how a case has to be made before the public. Show me one. You must have brought one with you because if you are out there, and you've seen them, you must surely have one to show me.
MALIN: I don't have anything.
KEYES: Where is the evidence? No, you don't. No, you don't.
I'll be glad. Anytime you can come up with one, you send it to me.
MALIN: I would be happy to...
KEYES: Let me finish, please. You send it to me, and I'll show it to folks on this program.
MALIN: ... Alan, I will be happy to.
CAVENDISH: Glad to.
KEYES: OK, go ahead. The manuals from the Pearson Foundation, which established procedures for how to open up a crisis pregnancy center, and also Focus on the Family, they urge crisis pregnancy center providers to try to advertise under medical services, women's organizations, and other headers as well.
And I believe they are under abortion alternatives in New York pursuant to existing injunctions that the current attorney general is enforcing. Prior Attorneys General Vacco and Elliott, Abrams had successfully brought injunctions against crisis pregnancy centers. The current investigation is not some sort of pay back to NARAL or other pro-choice groups. It's an enforcement of existing injunctions.
KEYES: What I find amazing about this, though, is we look at something like, I don't know, Enron, which the media has been promoting and claiming that these contributions out there. And when the campaign finance reform is being promoted everybody said, “This must lead to influence.”
And yet we see a pattern with thousands of dollars, with cooperation in terms of phone calling and other sorts of things going on in the case of this attorney general. And you want us to believe it's entirely an innocent consequence that he is pursuing now the agenda of those who have supported him, bought and paid for him in the past. Go ahead, Chris.
SLATTERY: I have here actual proof that the NARAL actually took credit for the establishment of the reproductive rights unit of the attorney general. The political action committee published a document, which said: “NARAL New York was central to the narrow yet critical triumph by Elliott Spitzer in the race for attorney general. NARAL New York's work to elect pro-choice Attorney General Spitzer resulted in the creation of its first-of-its-kind reproductive rights unit.”
And the attorney general in this brochure says: “NARAL New York was instrumental in my victory.” Unbelievable. I mean, they actually take credit for setting up his unit, which is now going after the crisis pregnancy centers. He made a commitment to them at a luncheon January 22, 1999, to go after crisis pregnancy centers. And he's doing it.
MALIN: I can't speak to the legal or political issues. What I can speak to is, again, Planned Parenthood stands for ensuring that women have the full access of information to be able to make the best decision for themselves. I trust that if women are given full information, they will make responsible decisions for themselves. The crisis pregnancy centers don't do that.
SLATTERY: And, you know, that's amazing because then you are insulting the intelligence of the two-thirds of the women that come in...
KEYES: Chris...
SLATTERY: ... choose life in our centers.
KEYES: Chris, I have to thank all of you. Now we've come to the end of our time. Really appreciate your coming, sharing your views with us.
I do have to end on the note, though, that I am not saying, by the way, that one should interfere with NOW or NARAL spreading what information they want. What I'm finding objectionable here is that the attorney general appears to want to withdraw those rights from the folks who are in compassionate love and care promoting a different viewpoint at the crisis pregnancy centers.
That sounds to me like a legal abuse for the sake of a political vendetta. And I think this country needs to take a careful look at that abuse in New York to make sure it doesn't spread.
Next, we're going to have an exclusive interview with the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States about the outrageous new poll, which showed that some Kuwaitis, 36 percent of them, in fact, think that, according to this poll, the attack on 9-11 was morally justifiable. We're going to ask him just what that means.
Next, we're also going to be getting to what's on your mind, as we do every night. But first, does this make sense? I hear that Gary Condit, the fellow who is famous for the involvement, is now saying that the lady he's accused of murdering, he wants to have an investigation of this crime, and that if he gets elected to Congress, that's what he'll do.
Seems to me it would make a lot more sense if he didn't run for Congress and devoted full-time to this exercise. Maybe he and O.J. Simpson could establish a private detective agency aimed at finding out what really happened in both these illustrious cases.
It sounds like it's making a lot more sense for him to do that than to hoist himself off on the people in his district of Congress one more time. But I guess he disagrees. Does that make sense?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KEYES: Welcome back to MAKING SENSE. Millions of Americans woke up to this headline in “USA Today,” saying that many in the Islamic world believe that Arabs were not involved in the 9-11 attacks, the September 11 attacks that took out the World Trade Center and a chunk of the Pentagon.
And we know that since those attacks, sometime back the Saudi Arabian government itself has acknowledged 15 of the 19 perpetrators were in fact Saudis. Yet it seems that these basic facts are not acknowledged in many parts of the Arab and Islamic world. But I've got to tell you, that isn't what got me most. When you look at these figures, unfavorable opinion of the U.S., 41 percent, dislike president George W. Bush, 63 percent, morally justified, 36 percent. Now that wasn't the overall figures. You know where those figures come from? And this was particularly shocking to me. Those are the figures supposedly from this survey that came out of Kuwait.
Now, all of you remember Kuwait. Kuwait was the country that the Iraqis invaded, and that invasion then triggered our response to come to the aid of Kuwait and drive the invader out of their country. And just so that there could be no misunderstanding and I know some folks have criticized this, we didn't then move in to conquer Iraq or take advantage of the situation. We accomplished the purpose of liberating Kuwait and we stopped, giving clear evidence that our aim was in fact to stand with the Kuwaiti people and aid them against this invasion that had destroyed their freedom. Much as George Bush said, some years back at the time, in March, I believe, of 2001. This is what he had to say about where we ended up at the end of the Persian Gulf War.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE HEBERT WALKER BUSH, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The Gulf War put this new world to its first test, and my fellow Americans, we passed that test for the sake of our principles, for the sake of the Kuwaiti people. We stood our ground because the world would not look the other way. Ambassador Al Sabba (ph), tonight Kuwait is free. We are very happy about that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KEYES: Tonight Kuwait is free. Well, and today, in our time the U.S. has been under attack. And I have to say I particularly and I think a lot of Americans would have looked at this overall survey, we are kind of dismayed by it. We don't understand the sentiment in many parts of the Islamic world. But in Kuwait especially, I saw that figure, 36 percent say the attack against us was morally justified and I did not know what to make of it. I think I was not only surprised, but hurt by the thought that after the effort that we had made, standing shoulder to shoulder with folks to help them win back their freedom, that when push comes to shove and this time of our peril, this would be the kind of response we got.
Well, the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States has graciously agreed to come on the program and chat with us a little bit about that this evening. And I'm very glad to introduce Sheikh Abdullah Jubeir (ph) Al-Sabah, Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States, who has joined us tonight. And Mr. Ambassador, I have to put it to you bluntly and I hope that you will not take offense. But I look at the result of this poll and in my mind, and in my heart like a lot of Americans I said, look, we stood with you. Do you think the people of Kuwait, judging by this poll, are not willing to stand with us now in our time of peril? Because 36 percent, that's an awful large proportion of the population.
SALEM AL-SABAH, KUWAITI AMB. TO THE U.S.: Well, first let me say that I was as shocked as you were reading the figures this morning. I thought I was reading figures about a country I know nothing of, because really I was very surprised by these figures. Now, Allan, I have to be very clear from the beginning, taking polls in Kuwait has always been a risky business for a very simple reason. Demographically in Kuwait we have a special situation. Kuwaitis are only 40 percent of the general population. We are a minority in our own country. Now, I read in the polls this morning that 790 Kuwaitis were interviewed. But we don't know. Are they all Kuwaitis? Is half of them Kuwaitis. Are they all non-Kuwaitis? 1.4 million people in Kuwait are not Kuwaitis. Only 800,000 are Kuwaitis. I have a lot of reservations about this poll and I'm very happy to talk about them further if you like.
KEYES: Well, does that mean that in your experience — because I have to tell you. I am one of those folks, as many people in the audience know, who has been and is very skeptical of a lot of these surveys and polls. I think the methodologies can be questionable, the results can be skewed, and so forth and so on. This one, of course, has been blasted all over the headlines in America.
But I would like to ask you, do you think that this corresponds to the Kuwait that you know...
AL-SABAH: No.
KEYES: ... and to the people that you know there in terms of their attitude toward America in this time of crisis?
AL-SABAH: Not in the least, Alan. Not in the least. First of all, I have to say I have a lot of respect for the Gallup Poll Organization. I read their polls regularly. But I don't think this corresponds in the least to Kuwaiti sentiments.
When the attacks happened on September 11, there was an outcry in Kuwait. People held vigil at the American embassy. Hundreds of people rushed to our blood bank to donate blood. So it does not in the least correspond to the genuine Kuwaiti feelings towards what's happening.
Let me give you a small example. The poll says 69 percent of Kuwaitis are against the war in Afghanistan. Now, our government made it public by saying the bin Laden tapes are self-incriminating. We've made it public by saying we stand firmly with the United States in its war against terrorism in Afghanistan. Now, if 70 percent of the Kuwaiti population were against that, wouldn't we have heard something about it?
Now, keep in mind, Alan, that Kuwait is a free society. We have a free press. We have a parliament, and 30 percent of Kuwaiti homes are wired to the Internet. Now, when the poll says 70 percent of Kuwaitis are against a stand my government has taken and we have not heard a peep until this poll was published, there is something wrong. And that's what makes me a bit skeptical about this poll.
And I'd like to take this a little bit further. Earlier this evening on one of the talk shows, I heard Frank Newport speak from the Gallup Poll. And he was talking about how they conducted this poll. And this poll was conducted by means of a questionnaire that had 120 questions. He mentioned that, in certain instances, it took an hour to get people to answer all the questions. Now, I don't know about you, Mr. Keyes, but if I had the questionnaire of 120 questions, after question number 60, I might, you know, be a bit fuzzy doing it.
Another thing, if I may add, another thing that makes me a bit skeptical about this poll, the nine countries surveyed have a population of over half a billion people. Now, the poll only covers 9,000-plus. Now, that is a very, very small number. You cannot judge what half a billion people think by talking to 9,000-something people.
KEYES: Well, that seems to raise a question then, in your mind, about the entire poll itself. I mean, are we looking here at a snapshot of opinion? Because a lot of folks are talking about this as if, well, here we have it. People in the Islamic world hate America. People — even the fact that Arabs were involved in the attacks at the World Trade Center, they say that 61 percent of the folks are denying that this is the case. Do you think that that in fact corresponds to the state of knowledge or ignorance in the Islamic world in general?
AL-SABAH: I think certain people in the Islamic world are still in a state of unbelief because our religion preaches peace. So they find it hard to believe that a Muslim, who also preaches himself to be going by the way of Islam, could do a thing like that. I think they are still in denial. And it's very hard for some Muslims to believe that a Muslim would do such a crime because it goes contrary to all of our beliefs.
But as I mentioned, I have a lot of reservations about this poll. And I hear that there are other polls that are going to be done in the region and they are going to be more widespread. They are going to cover all Islamic countries. So let's wait and see if the results are identical.
KEYES: If, however, this poll does reflect a state of knowledge or ignorance, don't you think that governments in the Islamic world have an obligation to take positive steps that would help to correct these misimpressions? Because I think that's one of the things that I immediately thought of, in terms of the fact that if you just leave them out there it could lead to tremendous difficulties, even in relationships where we have mutual and common interests. Don't you think the governments have an obligation to try to get the truth out there?
AL-SABAH: Well, I can only speak for Kuwait in this instance. And I'm sure that the government of Kuwait will take some steps in this regard. But again, I truly believe that this poll we saw is highly — does not reflect the sentiments in my country at least. I know that for a fact.
KEYES: Mr. Ambassador, I want to thank you for joining us tonight and for sharing your thoughts with us. I want to express my personal hope that what you say is in fact true, because I think that the work that we were able to accomplish together on behalf of the liberation of Kuwait was a demonstration of what people around the world can do in response to an act of aggression that tramples on the rights of a small and innocent people who have provoked nobody.
And I think that we need to keep that example untarnished and lay it as a basis for continued cooperation between our peoples and amongst other folks. And I hope that this poll is in fact a misimpression. Thank you for joining me tonight. I really appreciate it.
AL-SABAH: Thank you, Alan.
KEYES: Later, we'll get to my outrage of the day. But first, I want to hear what's on your mind. You are watching MSNBC, the best news on cable.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KEYES: Welcome back to MAKING SENSE. Now we get a chance to hear what's on your mind. Let me go first to Samantha in Texas. Welcome to MAKING SENSE.
SAMANTHA: Hi, Allan. I think you are off base about the New York crisis pregnancy issue. I actually was a client at a place that advertised as a woman's pregnancy resource center. They advertised free pregnancy tests and abortion and risk and injury education. What I found was no medical personnel at all, one volunteer who gave me a pregnancy test that I could have bought at the supermarket, and a video that showed me the most horrific images that I have ever seen in my life.
KEYES: Were you forced to watch the video?
SAMANTHA: Yes, actually, I was. She closed the door...
KEYES: Can you tell me something? She closed the door and locked it? Or just closed the door?
SAMANTHA: She did close the door. I got up and knocked after a while. It was in the same room as the adjoining bathroom, and I said I've got to leave. She never gave me the results of my test, but my point is there was no medical personnel.
KEYES: What was the name — what was the name of the crisis pregnancy center? And where was it located?
SAMANTHA: I've got it right here, they still advertise in my phone book.
KEYES: Because I'm going to follow up. Quickly now.
SAMANTHA: OK. They've got a Web site, actually. WWW.EPJUSTLIFE.ORG.
KEYES: OK. I will further investigate this, Samantha. I thank you for your call. Really appreciate it.
Let's go to Terry in Texas. Terry, welcome to MAKING SENSE.
TERRY: Hi, Allan. I have been with the CPC's here for a little over six years now, and all the women and girls who come through our doors are greeted with Christian, loving concern. I wish that there had been a center like this one when I was pregnant with my son. At no time they are ever forced to watch horrific videos. We do offer fetal development videos, but they can stop them at any time. There are no locks on our doors. And if they are considering an abortion, we give them accurate information about the procedures and risks, physical and emotional, which sometimes doesn't happen. And we can also offer them a sonogram so they can see for themselves what they are carrying in their womb.
We are not a medical facility. We don't advertise as that.
KEYES: And that is the story that I have not only heard but seen as I've traveled around the country, visited these centers and so forth. So I must say that based on my own experience the description you have given is accurate.
But I'll look into what our first caller from Texas said and see if there is anything to it. I want to thank you for your feedback. We are going to get next to my “Outrage of the Day.” We are going to be taking a look at it right after these words here on MSNBC.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KEYES: A study by Columbia University's National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse that was bandied about yesterday came to the conclusion that 25 percent of the alcohol in America is consumed by underage drinkers. Shocking, that was the cause of a big uproar.
Well, guess what. Turns out that due to faulty methodology, they had used the wrong number. It's actually only 11 percent. Now, as if that's not bad enough, the other problem, of course, is that this was picked up, it was bandied about by all kinds of big news media and so forth and so on. And yet nobody stopped to ask or investigate whether it was accurate or inaccurate. People just went on overboard talking about it.
Could it have had anything to do with the fact that Joseph Califano, one of America's best known liberals is at the head of this think tank? I know lots of conservative surveys don't get bandied about with nearly that vigor. They don't make nearly the same kinds of mistakes, either.
Well, that's my sense of it. Next, we have “AMERICA AT WAR” with Gregg Jarrett. I'll see you tomorrow.
I'm actually coming to you live tonight from Atlanta, Georgia, where I just enjoyed a wonderful exchange of views with Julian Bond, the chairman of the NAACP. I found myself wishing the whole evening that there were some way we could have brought at least part of that discussion to all of you. But can't do it quite yet.
However, we do have a wonderful and exciting show for you. Some of you I am sure, most of you I hope, have seen the reports that were banner headlined in “USA Today” about the poll that was taken among folks in the Islamic world. Well, we're going to have an exclusive interview with the Kuwaiti ambassador on this show tonight to talk a little bit about the surprising and I think disturbing figures particularly that came out about Kuwait in that poll.
But first, we are going to be dealing with an outrage that I think is occurring right here in the United States where the attorney general in New York, Attorney General Spitzer, has decided to take on the job of going after crisis pregnancy centers in New York, what I think is a clear abuse of his prosecutorial power for political reasons. He happens to be a very strongly pro-abortion politician who was supported by pro-abortion groups for his election effort and seems to be engaging right now in some payback in going after the crisis pregnancy centers.
Now, I have talked to you about them before. And I have to say, stating my own biases, that I have spent a lot of time and will continue to spend a lot of time and effort to support the crisis pregnancy center movement around the country because I think it's one of the most important and constructive things that's being done to help young women who are in a crisis pregnancy situation make the kind of decision that they and their child can live with once it's made.
The idea that these crisis pregnancy centers are engaged in some kind of criminal abuse strikes me as almost criminal in and of itself. And we are going to take a good hard look at what Attorney General Spitzer is up to in New York tonight on the program.
The key questions that we are going to address on MAKING SENSE tonight about Mr. Spitzer's vendetta in New York against the crisis pregnancy centers, is it right to take these organizations and treat them as if they are lawbreakers? Is the New York attorney general, in fact, engaged in a politically motivated witch-hunt? Is he serving the law, or is he serving his pro-abortion political patrons?
Those are serious questions. And I think it's a serious problem if we do, in fact, have in front of us politically motivated prosecutorial abuses.
Up front tonight, we're joined by Charlie Condon. Charlie is the attorney general for South Carolina. And he has written to Attorney General Spitzer as one of his colleagues in the country, questioning whether or not this investigation, so-called, is in fact based on any real suspicions that could warrant such an investigation.
He's also a candidate for governor in South Carolina. He sees no problems with the crisis pregnancy center, has worked closely with those in his state. And he's called on the New York attorney general to end his investigation.
Attorney General Condon, welcome to the program. And thanks for sharing your time with us tonight.
CHARLIE CONDON, SOUTH CAROLINA ATTORNEY GENERAL: It's good to be with you, Ambassador Keyes.
KEYES: First question I would like to put to you, you have experience with the crisis pregnancy centers. You are yourself in a position of responsibility for law enforcement in South Carolina. Looking at the crisis pregnancy centers and what you know of them, do you see any justification for the kind of investigation that the attorney general in New York has been conducting?
CONDON: I've got grave concerns about what the attorney general of the state of New York is doing. As you know, the Office of Attorney General has broad investigative powers. He's using a civil subpoena power to require these crisis pregnancy centers to produce just thousands and thousands of documents.
In my state, I've had the occasion to work with them very closely. I had the honor of actually distributing to crisis pregnancy centers in South Carolina some $250,000 because they do such good work in South Carolina.
We've had a tremendous decline in our abortion rate. And I'm thoroughly convinced it's because these — they are essentially volunteers. They're out there with a loving heart and helping hand, helping women in crisis. They are there to provide support.
They've been very, very, just wonderful citizens here in South Carolina. So, I have a hard time imagining targeting them with the kind of investigation that the attorney general of New York is now conducting.
KEYES: Well, as I understand it, he has been raising questions suggesting that they have somehow fraudulently misrepresented themselves, that they are engaged in some sort of coercive efforts with respect to the women who come to the crisis pregnancy center.
Two questions. Is that your understanding? Do you think something like that actually provides a basis that is justifiable for this investigation? And, in your experience with the crisis pregnancy centers, do you see any warrantable basis for these kinds of suspicions?
CONDON: Well, obviously, I'm not familiar with the facts in New York because I've not visited the centers there. But I do know this. The kind of investigation he's launched raises serious questions with its methodology because these people have made it very clear they want to abide by the laws of the state of New York.
He's accusing them of, in effect, practicing medicine without a license and offering improper medical advice. And everything that I've heard and read about the crisis pregnancy centers in New York, as well as obviously in the state of South Carolina, they want to comply with the law. So, why not simply sit down with them, ask them what the problems are, work out if there are indeed problems?
The concern I have in looking at this from afar, I've had such a positive experience with these folks. They are good, decent, hardworking Americans. They want to simply help out with women in need. They are there to provide support, to provide counseling relative to adoption, to offer clothing, diapers, you name it.
So, why issue these broad-based subpoenas accusing them of, in effect, flaunting the laws of the state of New York in requiring them, and they are basically in a volunteer position, of spending hundreds of thousands of dollars potentially in legal fees when the situation can be worked out quite easily.
And you're right. The question that I have is he's received campaign contributions from groups that support strongly having abortions. And I do think there is possibly a political motivation here.
KEYES: Well, I think that that may be one of the problems. You cited earlier the fact that where crisis pregnancy centers are operating, we often see a decline in the abortion rate. But for someone who is advocating the work of the abortion industry and those who promote it, wouldn't this in fact be the offense, that they are effectively helping young women to make a decision that does not include abortion?
CONDON: That's precisely the concern. General Spitzer may have strong feelings relative to the abortion question, I readily admit, as do I. But our feelings should not get in the way of how we investigate matters. We need to do that without political motivations here.
And there appears to be a clear case of bias. And I really do challenge the way he's conducting these investigations. I have questions about them.
I simply wrote to him asking him to consider the good experiences I've had with these crisis pregnancy centers. He actually called me up personally, was really irate that I even bothered to write him. And I was really stunned with the comments he made. In fact, he implied that they were involved with actually being involved with the murder of abortion providers in the state of New York, which I thought was an outrageous accusation or implication to make.
KEYES: Well, that suggests a couple of things. First of all, I do have to note that we asked Attorney General Spitzer to come on the program this evening to present his side of the case. And he refused to do so on the grounds that it was an ongoing investigation. He didn't want to talk about it.
But from the sound of it, the reaction you got from him seems to include a kind of personal venom that I am not sure is appropriate for somebody who is using public authority. Shouldn't that be used for the sake of public ends and public goals, not to pursue what may be a very strong and passionate private political vendetta?
CONDON: Precisely. He made it very clear to me that he has never lost a fight with one of his ideological opponents. So, when you hear these sorts of comments from the state's chief law enforcement officer — and I merely wrote him as a colleague telling him that these people do good work in South Carolina, I hope that he would consider that, and that he would sit down and meet with him because the issuing of a subpoena, a broad-based subpoena, with essentially a volunteer group causes tremendous disruption. It's very expensive to comply with it.
And if there are problems with what they are doing, I would simply ask that he meet with them and to work out the problems because I do know that the crisis pregnancy centers do excellent work in South Carolina.
KEYES: We do have to suspect, don't we, that the burdensome costs that result from complying with this kind of a campaign of harassment which could lead to the destruction of some of the crisis pregnancy centers? They are not hugely budgeted operations. Maybe that's one of the objectives of the harassment itself.
Mr. Attorney General, thank you so much for joining us this evening...
CONDON: Thank you.
KEYES: ... I appreciate your willingness to come share your views. And I appreciate your conscientious willingness to step forward and share your thoughts with your counterpart in the hope you might get a more constructive approach to this out of him. We'll have to see.
Thanks for being on the show tonight. I really appreciate it.
Next, we're going to get to the heart of the matter. We're going to hear from folks on both sides, as we always do. We'll have some representatives from the National Organization of Women and NARAL and others.
And I, as somebody who has firsthand experience running a crisis pregnancy center in New York, will be sharing thoughts with you. Later, an outrageous poll I'm sure you've already heard of, 10 years after the U.S. helped drive Iraq out of Kuwait, this poll indicates that 36 percent of Kuwaitis actually believe the 9-11 attacks were morally justifiable. We are going to get reaction to this in an exclusive interview with the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States.
But first of all, does this make sense? A lot of folks are coming forward now and saying that we should be, in fact, applying racial profiling to our anti-terror efforts at airports and elsewhere. It is causing inconvenience and difficulty to people of all backgrounds and persuasions.
Now, I don't have any problem with applying common sense experience in law enforcement matters. I've made that very clear. It's not the racial part of racial profiling that bothers me here. It's the profiling part.
If we narrow the profile, then maybe the terrorists would just make up their next group with folks who look like this, John Walker Lindh. Remember him?
He doesn't look like an Arab fellow. But if they were to make up a team that looked like him, we would find ourselves seriously dead. I think the problem with racial profiling isn't that it's racial. It's that it opens up vulnerabilities, which would later be exploited by the terrorists. Does that make sense?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KEYES: Welcome back to MAKING SENSE. Tonight we are talking about the investigative campaign of Attorney General Spitzer in New York state against the crisis pregnancy centers in his state. We are raising all kinds of specious issues.
He is moving against them in a way that may constitute the abuse of his prosecutorial authority in order to harass them and undermine them financially, drive them out of business. Why? Well, I think, quite frankly, because they are, in fact, an alternative to the abortion mills in his state, offering counseling and support and help to young women in crisis pregnancies so that they can make a decision that respects the life of their child as well as their own future life prospects.
Joining us now to get to the heart of this matter, we have Joan Malin, CEO of Planned Parenthood in New York. Also with us it's Betsy Cavendish, the general council for NARAL, the National Abortion Rights Action League.
And Chris Slattery, the founder and president of Expectant Mother Care, one of the crisis pregnancy centers under subpoena in New York. First, let me go to Joan Malin.
Joan, I've obviously raised what are for me some very clear and pointed questions about the nature of this investigation in New York state. I've worked with crisis pregnancy centers. I've seen what they do. And I frankly don't see any ground whatsoever for suggesting that there is some abuse here that an attorney general ought to be investigating. Why do you support the idea of these investigations?
JOAN MALIN, CEO, PLANNED PARENTHOOD, NEW YORK: We here at Planned Parenthood believe very strongly that women need to get full access to complete information so that they can make the best informed decisions for themselves and for their families.
Our experience in crisis pregnancy centers is that they use scare tactics. They provide false information. They are misleading. And they really seek to prey on women at a very vulnerable time.
We've had examples. And I don't think it's an accident that many of the pregnancy centers are located across the street from Planned Parenthood facilities. And one of them is across the street from us in the South Bronx. We've had clients who have gone there by mistake and have talked about receiving false pregnancy tests, have talked about being locked in a room and made to watch a video that is graphically inaccurate, highly inappropriate, and really scared. And they are really told that there is only one option available for them, which is to take their pregnancy to term.
We believe that women need to have the full range of information given to them so they can make the best decision for themselves. And the pregnancy centers clearly are not doing that.
They are using deceptive advertising. They are talking about abortion alternatives. They are talking about providing medical services. They do not provide medical services. And it really sort of ensnares women into the false services at a time when they are most vulnerable.
KEYES: I've got to confess, and I will say this quite bluntly, which sometimes I do, sometimes I don't on this program. I believe that just about every charge you have just made is simply a falsehood. I've got to be quite frank with you. I have worked closely with crisis pregnancy centers and the people who run them.
But first, I want to make sure we get to everybody. Let's go to Betsy Cavendish at NARAL.
Betsy, do you share this understanding that this is the basis for the fact that, well, they do offer some competition to the abortion centers hat are in New York state. Is that now a crime in New York state, to offer abortion centers some competition?
ELIZABETH CAVENDISH, GENERAL COUNSEL, NARAL: I don't believe that's the basis of Attorney General Spitzer's investigation at all. And NARAL completely shares Planned Parenthood's view, based on many comments to our Web site and our own investigations into crisis pregnancy centers, that many women are indeed deceived by the nature of crisis pregnancy centers.
They believe they are going to get options counseling or some medical services when they go in. And instead, they are shut in rooms, shown horrific pictures that are highly sensationalized. They are shamed, humiliated for even thinking about having an abortion. And they are not given medically accurate information about abortion at all.
We like Planned Parenthood believe that women deserve full options counseling. And women should decide for themselves what's best for themselves and their family when they face a crisis pregnancy.
KEYES: So, based on that I presume that in these abortion mills they are informing women about the stage of their pregnancy, sharing sonograms with them so that they can understand the development of the being in their womb, and things of that kind. Do they share that information with people going to the abortion centers, or not?
CAVENDISH: Common law in all 50 states and statutory law on top of it requires that women, as all patients, be told about all the risks, benefits, alternatives to any medical treatment. That's medically ethically required.
KEYES: Well, if I can interrupt you just a second. That's not the question I asked you. I asked you whether or not they are shown sonograms and other things are done so that it will be clear about the stage of development of the child in the womb and what we are actually talking about because I have to confess I've heard many reports and read many reports that very often they are told, “Well, that's just a mass of tissue. You don't have to worry about that.”
That doesn't sound like accurate information to me. But you said you are interested in accurate information.
CAVENDISH: Absolutely, we are interested in accurate information. The exact stage of fetal development and everything that's going on with the fetus may or may not be relevant to that woman. And the counselors and doctors engage in a dialogic process with the woman and give her all the information she needs without humiliation, without degradation, in order to allow her to make the choice about whether to continue or terminate a pregnancy.
KEYES: Well, the charge of humiliation and degradation, your language mind you, is one that I think is entirely unsubstantiated. But that's why I brought Chris Slattery here.
Chris, you are somebody, you have worked in this area for many years. You are in charge of a crisis pregnancy center, the Expectant Mother Care Center. As you sit here and listen to what is being said by Joan Malin and Betsy Cavendish about so-called abuses at the crisis pregnancy center, does this correspond to your experience?
CHRIS SLATTERY, EXPECTANT MOTHER CARE: I think it's outrageous. These charges come — remember, we are dealing in an industry where Planned Parenthood, first of all, 91 percent of their pregnant clients in the United States get abortions at their facilities. They've killed 3,000 babies in the last 25 years, and in the last 15 years have taken $3 billion of taxpayer money to carry out their grisly deeds.
In addition, we have in New York state one of the most unregulated, undisciplined abortion industries. We have the only abortionist serving a life term in prison right now. We have abortionists with hundreds of lawsuits against them for malpractice across the state, including Planned Parenthood's facilities.
The caring, compassionate counselors at the crisis centers throughout the state of New York are doing heroic work in loving and mending hearts, helping hurts of young ladies who are caught in unplanned pregnancies or had abortions. It's just baseless to say that people are locked in rooms and shamed.
First of all, most of these crisis pregnancy centers have no locks on their doors. They are all given options to turn off videotapes or to leave at any time if they don't like the services that are offered.
About 10 percent of crisis pregnancy centers now in the U.S. are offering on-site medical services. It's baseless for Planned Parenthood's president to say we don't have medical services when right across the street from their facility in the South Bronx we have a full-service medical clinic with licensed, board-certified physicians.
KEYES: Now, when you say medical clinic, these are licensed, board-certified physicians. These are people who have satisfied all the requirements of the law. Is that right?
SLATTERY: Absolutely. We have our own medical clinic with our own three-dimensional ultrasound, sonography. We have prenatal care.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh, thank you (INAUDIBLE)...
SLATTERY: We have this also in Brooklyn. We are expanding it across the city. And we are looking at a trend across the United States of crisis centers offering on-site medical services.
They have been discrediting us for years. Last year, NARAL came out with a 60-page attack manual called “Unmasking Fake Clinics.” And I believe the attorney general of New York has played right into this manual.
First of all, he paid an abortion group to make 86,000 phone calls to get him elected in New York. He has pledged and made a commitment and opened the first reproductive rights unit in the United States, a special abortion rights team that all they do is file cases against pro-lifers across the U.S.
Now they've come to the crisis pregnancy centers in an election year. It's payback time.
MALIN: I need to comment on several of the concerns that were raised about our services. We provide to over 30,000 women in the city of New York over 60,000 services. Less than 10,000 of that are abortions.
We are primarily a family planning provider. We provide a full range of health care services to women. And the critical issue that we provide is that we inform women so they can make the best decisions for themselves.
Those services do include abortion. I'm proud of the care that we provide. It is quality health care.
But we do provide a range of services. We also as an agency have direct referral links to adoption agencies, to prenatal care.
The critical issue is the woman is given the information to make the best decision for herself. Crisis pregnancy centers do not do that. There is one decision as far as you are concerned. Women are not given a choice. The whole issue is to give them a choice.
SLATTERY: I'm sorry. I'm sorry...
MALIN: And we are also — I might add we are a health care service. We are fully regulated. We are fully licensed. Your providers may be licensing and providing those services under those license, but you are not a health care service. And that's a very distinct operation from what we do.
If you were, then the attorney general would be asking questions about your regulations and your license. He's not doing that.
SLATTERY: No...
MALIN: He's really talking about deceptive advertising, misinformation, and inappropriate medical care.
SLATTERY: No, he's saying...
KEYES: Wait a second. Chris, Chris, answer that charge because I think this is one of the things I hear all the time. I go to the phone books. I look at the advertisements. And I see clearly on all of these advertisements that notation that this is not a clinic and so forth and so on.
SLATTERY: That's right.
KEYES: Isn't that in fact one of the things that's routine with crisis pregnancy centers?
(CROSSTALK)
MALIN: If you are not a clinic, then you are not health care services. If you are a clinic, you should be regulated and licensed.
KEYES: Wait a minute, excuse me, let him answer.
SLATTERY: Not all the crisis centers have medical services on site. Especially in New York state now, it's very difficult to become a licensed clinic. In fact, most abortion facilities are not clinics. They are doctors' offices masquerading as clinics.
In reality, we partner now in our centers in New York with licensed physicians who can legally advertise under clinics. But the pregnancy centers themselves are all advertising exclusively under abortion alternatives. And each of those headings in the phone books have clear disclaimers that say: “Facilities under these headings do not provide abortions or referrals for abortion services.”
Our counselors and our centers never tell women that they can get abortions in our facilities. We always say, “Come in for some counseling. Let's talk about this pregnancy. Let's get a pregnancy test. Let's get a sonogram. Let's see what solutions we can work out.” This is what we do.
KEYES: Can I ask a question of Joan and Betsy? Can I ask a question of you? You saying there are these advertisements and so forth and so on. Now, you all are intelligent folks, and you know how a case has to be made before the public. Show me one. You must have brought one with you because if you are out there, and you've seen them, you must surely have one to show me.
MALIN: I don't have anything.
KEYES: Where is the evidence? No, you don't. No, you don't.
I'll be glad. Anytime you can come up with one, you send it to me.
MALIN: I would be happy to...
KEYES: Let me finish, please. You send it to me, and I'll show it to folks on this program.
MALIN: ... Alan, I will be happy to.
CAVENDISH: Glad to.
KEYES: OK, go ahead. The manuals from the Pearson Foundation, which established procedures for how to open up a crisis pregnancy center, and also Focus on the Family, they urge crisis pregnancy center providers to try to advertise under medical services, women's organizations, and other headers as well.
And I believe they are under abortion alternatives in New York pursuant to existing injunctions that the current attorney general is enforcing. Prior Attorneys General Vacco and Elliott, Abrams had successfully brought injunctions against crisis pregnancy centers. The current investigation is not some sort of pay back to NARAL or other pro-choice groups. It's an enforcement of existing injunctions.
KEYES: What I find amazing about this, though, is we look at something like, I don't know, Enron, which the media has been promoting and claiming that these contributions out there. And when the campaign finance reform is being promoted everybody said, “This must lead to influence.”
And yet we see a pattern with thousands of dollars, with cooperation in terms of phone calling and other sorts of things going on in the case of this attorney general. And you want us to believe it's entirely an innocent consequence that he is pursuing now the agenda of those who have supported him, bought and paid for him in the past. Go ahead, Chris.
SLATTERY: I have here actual proof that the NARAL actually took credit for the establishment of the reproductive rights unit of the attorney general. The political action committee published a document, which said: “NARAL New York was central to the narrow yet critical triumph by Elliott Spitzer in the race for attorney general. NARAL New York's work to elect pro-choice Attorney General Spitzer resulted in the creation of its first-of-its-kind reproductive rights unit.”
And the attorney general in this brochure says: “NARAL New York was instrumental in my victory.” Unbelievable. I mean, they actually take credit for setting up his unit, which is now going after the crisis pregnancy centers. He made a commitment to them at a luncheon January 22, 1999, to go after crisis pregnancy centers. And he's doing it.
MALIN: I can't speak to the legal or political issues. What I can speak to is, again, Planned Parenthood stands for ensuring that women have the full access of information to be able to make the best decision for themselves. I trust that if women are given full information, they will make responsible decisions for themselves. The crisis pregnancy centers don't do that.
SLATTERY: And, you know, that's amazing because then you are insulting the intelligence of the two-thirds of the women that come in...
KEYES: Chris...
SLATTERY: ... choose life in our centers.
KEYES: Chris, I have to thank all of you. Now we've come to the end of our time. Really appreciate your coming, sharing your views with us.
I do have to end on the note, though, that I am not saying, by the way, that one should interfere with NOW or NARAL spreading what information they want. What I'm finding objectionable here is that the attorney general appears to want to withdraw those rights from the folks who are in compassionate love and care promoting a different viewpoint at the crisis pregnancy centers.
That sounds to me like a legal abuse for the sake of a political vendetta. And I think this country needs to take a careful look at that abuse in New York to make sure it doesn't spread.
Next, we're going to have an exclusive interview with the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States about the outrageous new poll, which showed that some Kuwaitis, 36 percent of them, in fact, think that, according to this poll, the attack on 9-11 was morally justifiable. We're going to ask him just what that means.
Next, we're also going to be getting to what's on your mind, as we do every night. But first, does this make sense? I hear that Gary Condit, the fellow who is famous for the involvement, is now saying that the lady he's accused of murdering, he wants to have an investigation of this crime, and that if he gets elected to Congress, that's what he'll do.
Seems to me it would make a lot more sense if he didn't run for Congress and devoted full-time to this exercise. Maybe he and O.J. Simpson could establish a private detective agency aimed at finding out what really happened in both these illustrious cases.
It sounds like it's making a lot more sense for him to do that than to hoist himself off on the people in his district of Congress one more time. But I guess he disagrees. Does that make sense?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KEYES: Welcome back to MAKING SENSE. Millions of Americans woke up to this headline in “USA Today,” saying that many in the Islamic world believe that Arabs were not involved in the 9-11 attacks, the September 11 attacks that took out the World Trade Center and a chunk of the Pentagon.
And we know that since those attacks, sometime back the Saudi Arabian government itself has acknowledged 15 of the 19 perpetrators were in fact Saudis. Yet it seems that these basic facts are not acknowledged in many parts of the Arab and Islamic world. But I've got to tell you, that isn't what got me most. When you look at these figures, unfavorable opinion of the U.S., 41 percent, dislike president George W. Bush, 63 percent, morally justified, 36 percent. Now that wasn't the overall figures. You know where those figures come from? And this was particularly shocking to me. Those are the figures supposedly from this survey that came out of Kuwait.
Now, all of you remember Kuwait. Kuwait was the country that the Iraqis invaded, and that invasion then triggered our response to come to the aid of Kuwait and drive the invader out of their country. And just so that there could be no misunderstanding and I know some folks have criticized this, we didn't then move in to conquer Iraq or take advantage of the situation. We accomplished the purpose of liberating Kuwait and we stopped, giving clear evidence that our aim was in fact to stand with the Kuwaiti people and aid them against this invasion that had destroyed their freedom. Much as George Bush said, some years back at the time, in March, I believe, of 2001. This is what he had to say about where we ended up at the end of the Persian Gulf War.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE HEBERT WALKER BUSH, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The Gulf War put this new world to its first test, and my fellow Americans, we passed that test for the sake of our principles, for the sake of the Kuwaiti people. We stood our ground because the world would not look the other way. Ambassador Al Sabba (ph), tonight Kuwait is free. We are very happy about that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KEYES: Tonight Kuwait is free. Well, and today, in our time the U.S. has been under attack. And I have to say I particularly and I think a lot of Americans would have looked at this overall survey, we are kind of dismayed by it. We don't understand the sentiment in many parts of the Islamic world. But in Kuwait especially, I saw that figure, 36 percent say the attack against us was morally justified and I did not know what to make of it. I think I was not only surprised, but hurt by the thought that after the effort that we had made, standing shoulder to shoulder with folks to help them win back their freedom, that when push comes to shove and this time of our peril, this would be the kind of response we got.
Well, the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States has graciously agreed to come on the program and chat with us a little bit about that this evening. And I'm very glad to introduce Sheikh Abdullah Jubeir (ph) Al-Sabah, Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States, who has joined us tonight. And Mr. Ambassador, I have to put it to you bluntly and I hope that you will not take offense. But I look at the result of this poll and in my mind, and in my heart like a lot of Americans I said, look, we stood with you. Do you think the people of Kuwait, judging by this poll, are not willing to stand with us now in our time of peril? Because 36 percent, that's an awful large proportion of the population.
SALEM AL-SABAH, KUWAITI AMB. TO THE U.S.: Well, first let me say that I was as shocked as you were reading the figures this morning. I thought I was reading figures about a country I know nothing of, because really I was very surprised by these figures. Now, Allan, I have to be very clear from the beginning, taking polls in Kuwait has always been a risky business for a very simple reason. Demographically in Kuwait we have a special situation. Kuwaitis are only 40 percent of the general population. We are a minority in our own country. Now, I read in the polls this morning that 790 Kuwaitis were interviewed. But we don't know. Are they all Kuwaitis? Is half of them Kuwaitis. Are they all non-Kuwaitis? 1.4 million people in Kuwait are not Kuwaitis. Only 800,000 are Kuwaitis. I have a lot of reservations about this poll and I'm very happy to talk about them further if you like.
KEYES: Well, does that mean that in your experience — because I have to tell you. I am one of those folks, as many people in the audience know, who has been and is very skeptical of a lot of these surveys and polls. I think the methodologies can be questionable, the results can be skewed, and so forth and so on. This one, of course, has been blasted all over the headlines in America.
But I would like to ask you, do you think that this corresponds to the Kuwait that you know...
AL-SABAH: No.
KEYES: ... and to the people that you know there in terms of their attitude toward America in this time of crisis?
AL-SABAH: Not in the least, Alan. Not in the least. First of all, I have to say I have a lot of respect for the Gallup Poll Organization. I read their polls regularly. But I don't think this corresponds in the least to Kuwaiti sentiments.
When the attacks happened on September 11, there was an outcry in Kuwait. People held vigil at the American embassy. Hundreds of people rushed to our blood bank to donate blood. So it does not in the least correspond to the genuine Kuwaiti feelings towards what's happening.
Let me give you a small example. The poll says 69 percent of Kuwaitis are against the war in Afghanistan. Now, our government made it public by saying the bin Laden tapes are self-incriminating. We've made it public by saying we stand firmly with the United States in its war against terrorism in Afghanistan. Now, if 70 percent of the Kuwaiti population were against that, wouldn't we have heard something about it?
Now, keep in mind, Alan, that Kuwait is a free society. We have a free press. We have a parliament, and 30 percent of Kuwaiti homes are wired to the Internet. Now, when the poll says 70 percent of Kuwaitis are against a stand my government has taken and we have not heard a peep until this poll was published, there is something wrong. And that's what makes me a bit skeptical about this poll.
And I'd like to take this a little bit further. Earlier this evening on one of the talk shows, I heard Frank Newport speak from the Gallup Poll. And he was talking about how they conducted this poll. And this poll was conducted by means of a questionnaire that had 120 questions. He mentioned that, in certain instances, it took an hour to get people to answer all the questions. Now, I don't know about you, Mr. Keyes, but if I had the questionnaire of 120 questions, after question number 60, I might, you know, be a bit fuzzy doing it.
Another thing, if I may add, another thing that makes me a bit skeptical about this poll, the nine countries surveyed have a population of over half a billion people. Now, the poll only covers 9,000-plus. Now, that is a very, very small number. You cannot judge what half a billion people think by talking to 9,000-something people.
KEYES: Well, that seems to raise a question then, in your mind, about the entire poll itself. I mean, are we looking here at a snapshot of opinion? Because a lot of folks are talking about this as if, well, here we have it. People in the Islamic world hate America. People — even the fact that Arabs were involved in the attacks at the World Trade Center, they say that 61 percent of the folks are denying that this is the case. Do you think that that in fact corresponds to the state of knowledge or ignorance in the Islamic world in general?
AL-SABAH: I think certain people in the Islamic world are still in a state of unbelief because our religion preaches peace. So they find it hard to believe that a Muslim, who also preaches himself to be going by the way of Islam, could do a thing like that. I think they are still in denial. And it's very hard for some Muslims to believe that a Muslim would do such a crime because it goes contrary to all of our beliefs.
But as I mentioned, I have a lot of reservations about this poll. And I hear that there are other polls that are going to be done in the region and they are going to be more widespread. They are going to cover all Islamic countries. So let's wait and see if the results are identical.
KEYES: If, however, this poll does reflect a state of knowledge or ignorance, don't you think that governments in the Islamic world have an obligation to take positive steps that would help to correct these misimpressions? Because I think that's one of the things that I immediately thought of, in terms of the fact that if you just leave them out there it could lead to tremendous difficulties, even in relationships where we have mutual and common interests. Don't you think the governments have an obligation to try to get the truth out there?
AL-SABAH: Well, I can only speak for Kuwait in this instance. And I'm sure that the government of Kuwait will take some steps in this regard. But again, I truly believe that this poll we saw is highly — does not reflect the sentiments in my country at least. I know that for a fact.
KEYES: Mr. Ambassador, I want to thank you for joining us tonight and for sharing your thoughts with us. I want to express my personal hope that what you say is in fact true, because I think that the work that we were able to accomplish together on behalf of the liberation of Kuwait was a demonstration of what people around the world can do in response to an act of aggression that tramples on the rights of a small and innocent people who have provoked nobody.
And I think that we need to keep that example untarnished and lay it as a basis for continued cooperation between our peoples and amongst other folks. And I hope that this poll is in fact a misimpression. Thank you for joining me tonight. I really appreciate it.
AL-SABAH: Thank you, Alan.
KEYES: Later, we'll get to my outrage of the day. But first, I want to hear what's on your mind. You are watching MSNBC, the best news on cable.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KEYES: Welcome back to MAKING SENSE. Now we get a chance to hear what's on your mind. Let me go first to Samantha in Texas. Welcome to MAKING SENSE.
SAMANTHA: Hi, Allan. I think you are off base about the New York crisis pregnancy issue. I actually was a client at a place that advertised as a woman's pregnancy resource center. They advertised free pregnancy tests and abortion and risk and injury education. What I found was no medical personnel at all, one volunteer who gave me a pregnancy test that I could have bought at the supermarket, and a video that showed me the most horrific images that I have ever seen in my life.
KEYES: Were you forced to watch the video?
SAMANTHA: Yes, actually, I was. She closed the door...
KEYES: Can you tell me something? She closed the door and locked it? Or just closed the door?
SAMANTHA: She did close the door. I got up and knocked after a while. It was in the same room as the adjoining bathroom, and I said I've got to leave. She never gave me the results of my test, but my point is there was no medical personnel.
KEYES: What was the name — what was the name of the crisis pregnancy center? And where was it located?
SAMANTHA: I've got it right here, they still advertise in my phone book.
KEYES: Because I'm going to follow up. Quickly now.
SAMANTHA: OK. They've got a Web site, actually. WWW.EPJUSTLIFE.ORG.
KEYES: OK. I will further investigate this, Samantha. I thank you for your call. Really appreciate it.
Let's go to Terry in Texas. Terry, welcome to MAKING SENSE.
TERRY: Hi, Allan. I have been with the CPC's here for a little over six years now, and all the women and girls who come through our doors are greeted with Christian, loving concern. I wish that there had been a center like this one when I was pregnant with my son. At no time they are ever forced to watch horrific videos. We do offer fetal development videos, but they can stop them at any time. There are no locks on our doors. And if they are considering an abortion, we give them accurate information about the procedures and risks, physical and emotional, which sometimes doesn't happen. And we can also offer them a sonogram so they can see for themselves what they are carrying in their womb.
We are not a medical facility. We don't advertise as that.
KEYES: And that is the story that I have not only heard but seen as I've traveled around the country, visited these centers and so forth. So I must say that based on my own experience the description you have given is accurate.
But I'll look into what our first caller from Texas said and see if there is anything to it. I want to thank you for your feedback. We are going to get next to my “Outrage of the Day.” We are going to be taking a look at it right after these words here on MSNBC.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KEYES: A study by Columbia University's National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse that was bandied about yesterday came to the conclusion that 25 percent of the alcohol in America is consumed by underage drinkers. Shocking, that was the cause of a big uproar.
Well, guess what. Turns out that due to faulty methodology, they had used the wrong number. It's actually only 11 percent. Now, as if that's not bad enough, the other problem, of course, is that this was picked up, it was bandied about by all kinds of big news media and so forth and so on. And yet nobody stopped to ask or investigate whether it was accurate or inaccurate. People just went on overboard talking about it.
Could it have had anything to do with the fact that Joseph Califano, one of America's best known liberals is at the head of this think tank? I know lots of conservative surveys don't get bandied about with nearly that vigor. They don't make nearly the same kinds of mistakes, either.
Well, that's my sense of it. Next, we have “AMERICA AT WAR” with Gregg Jarrett. I'll see you tomorrow.