The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer

JIM LEHRER: Good evening. I'm Jim Lehrer. On the NewsHour tonight: A summary of the news; a look at Pres. Bush's connecting an Iraq war with democracy in the Middle East; an update from the leadership meeting of the Iraqi opposition to Saddam Hussein; the latest on the search for what caused the space shuttle "Columbia" disaster; conversation number four on Iraq and foreign policy with the democratic presidential candidates-- tonight, Congressman Dennis Kucinich; and a farewell to Fred Rogers, public television's Mr. Rogers, who died today.

NEWS SUMMARY

JIM LEHRER: The national terror alert status was lowered today. After 20 days at orange, or "high risk," it returned to yellow for "elevated" risk. The attorney general and the secretary of homeland security announced the decision in a joint statement. They said it was based partly on the end of the Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca. U.S. Intelligence had warned of possible attacks during that period. The U.N. Security Council met behind closed doors today on Iraq, but the talks ended in sharp division. The Associated Press quoted some diplomats as saying the atmosphere was "bitter and unpleasant." The German ambassador said it was intense. The council is split over a resolution by the U.S., Britain and Spain, paving the way for military action. But France, Russia, and China, want continued inspections, and the French ambassador said the Council still backs that position.

JEAN-MARC DE LA SABLIERE: The majority of the Council today it is what I understood that, we should really look very carefully and work very... work very hard to enhance inspection regime and do the job, which is to disarm Iraq through peaceful means.

JIM LEHRER: In Washington, Pres. Bush spoke by phone with Russian President Putin. A spokesman at the Kremlin said they pledged to resolve the Iraq issue. And Secretary of State Colin Powell voiced optimism. He spoke after meeting with leaders of the European Union.

COLIN POWELL: We don't need a new list of questions or bench marks, everybody knows what Saddam Hussein should be doing and if he isn't doing it and shows no indication he is doing it I think we can present a strong enough argument for the second resolution we can put down to be able to get the support needed to pass it.

JIM LEHRER: The U.S. continued to lobby the swing votes on the Security Council to support the resolution. They are: Mexico; Chile; Angola; Guinea; Pakistan; and Cameroon. The chief U.N. Inspector, Hans Blix, submits his next report to the Security Council this weekend. Today, the BBC reported that a draft copy says the inspections in Iraq have produced very limited results so far. Iraq today promised a response late today Iraq reportedly agreed in principle. The associated president said they had sent a lesser to Blix but Pres. Bush said any such announcement would be part of a campaign of deception. Iraqi troops may be moving in to new positions to prepare for war. It was widely reported today that U.S. Intelligence has spotted an elite republican guard division moving south, possibly to protect Baghdad and Saddam Hussein's hometown. The U.S. military announced today that some 225,000 American troops are now in the Persian Gulf region. But in Turkey, the parliament delayed a crucial vote again today, on allowing more than 60,000 U.S. Combat troops to deploy there. The vote may not happen before Saturday. Kurdish opposition leaders called for talks with the U.S. and Turkey. They've been meeting this week in northern Iraq, with the focus on keeping Turkish troops from entering the country. One Kurdish leader warned today of serious consequences if the Turks try to occupy Kurdish territory. Another tried to reassure the Turks, by promising the Kurds would not declare an independent state. We'll have more on the opposition meeting later in the program. Israel said today it sees eye-to-eye with Pres. Bush on restarting the peace process, after an end to violence. The Palestinians said U.S. priorities are on war, and not their future. In a speech last night, Mr. Bush said removing Saddam Hussein from Iraq would foster democracy and peace in the entire region. We'll have more on this in a moment. A U.N. War Crimes Tribunal sentenced a former Bosnian Serb leader to 11 years in prison today. Biljana Plavsic was the highest-ranking Serb to be sentenced so far for atrocities against Muslims and Croats in the Bosnian war. The court gave her a lighter sentence, in part because she pleaded guilty and expressed sorrow for the killings. The U.S. House today approved a ban on all human cloning. Opponents tried and failed to include an exception for research on diseases like Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and diabetes. Other lawmakers urged a total ban, saying a cloned embryo is a human being. They made their arguments on the House floor.

REP. SHEILA JACKSON LEE: Would we take this legislation that we have today and to be able to void all of the wonderful research that a generated an extended light so people might enjoy their families and enjoy the wonderment of the world, the outstanding new discoveries every day, now we want to criminalize our doctors, criminalize our hospitals, criminalize the sick.

REP. DAVE WELDON: If there were evidence to support the position being held by some people in this body and some people in the scientific community that there was great potential from therapeutic cloning, I would be the first to admit it. I would be the first person to acknowledge it. I could not deny it, because it would be evident in the medical literature. But the fact of the matter is, the evidence is not there.

JIM LEHRER: The Bush administration supports the cloning ban, the same measure passed the House last year but stalled in the Senate. The head of NASA today denied his agency ignored concerns of senior engineers, before the space shuttle "Columbia" was destroyed. At a congressional hearing, Sean O'Keefe said the alarms raised in e-mails were properly considered, even though they never reached NASA's top brass. The e-mails involved fears of possible damage to the shuttle's left wing. We'll have more on this story later in the program. New York City announced the winning design today, for rebuilding the site of the world trade center. Architect Daniel Libeskind submitted the proposal. He estimated it would cost $330 million. The design calls for a series of angular towers around a spire standing 1,776 feet. It would be the tallest building in the world. Part of the pit where the original towers stood would serve as a 9/11 memorial. There's no date yet for construction. On Wall Street today, the Dow Jones Industrial Average gained 78 points to close at 7885. The NASDAQ rose 20 points to close at 1324. Florida senator bob graham became the ninth candidate in the democratic presidential field today. He filed papers to begin raising money. Graham is 66, and is recuperating from heart surgery last month. He was first elected to the Senate in 1986, and has chaired the Intelligence Committee. He co-chaired the 9/11 investigation, and strongly criticized national readiness for another attack. Fred Rogers, the "Mr. Rogers" of children's television, died early today in Pittsburgh. He had stomach cancer. He produced his "Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood" program on public television for more than 30 years. It focused on teaching children about sharing, dealing with anger, and loving themselves. Fred Rogers was 74 years old. And we'll have more about him at the end of the program tonight. Between now and then, the president's democracy argument, the Iraqi anti-Saddam opposition, a space shuttle "Columbia" update, and candidate Kucinich.

FOCUS - WAR AND DIPLOMACY

JIM LEHRER: War in Iraq, democracy for the Middle East. Margaret Warner has the story. ( Applause )

MARGARET WARNER: Last night, Pres. Bush laid out his argument that a post-Saddam Iraq could become a flourishing democracy.

PRES. GEORGE W. BUSH: There was a time when many said that the cultures of Japan and Germany were incapable of sustaining democratic values. Well, they were wrong. Some say the same of Iraq today. They are mistaken. (Applause) The nation of Iraq, with its proud heritage, abundant resources, and skilled and educated people, is fully capable of moving toward democracy and living in freedom. (Applause

MARGARET WARNER: The president further asserted that a democratic Iraq could transform the entire region in a similar way.

PRES. GEORGE W. BUSH: There are hopeful signs of the desire for freedom in the Middle East. Arab intellectuals have called on Arab governments to address the freedom gap, so their peoples can fully share in the progress of our times. From Morocco to Bahrain and beyond, nations are taking genuine steps toward political reform. A new regime in Iraq would serve as a dramatic and inspiring example of freedom for other nations in the region. (Applause) It is presumptuous and insulting to suggest that a whole region of the world, or the one-fifth of humanity that is Muslim, is somehow untouched by the most basic aspirations of life.

MARGARET WARNER: Mr. Bush also said change in Iraq could be a catalyst for Israeli-Palestinian peace, and he said the U.S. would seize every opportunity to make that happen.

MARGARET WARNER: Could Saddam's ouster lead to a democratic Iraq and broad democratic change in the region? We turn to two experts on the region. Patrick Clawson is deputy director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. And Murhaf Jouejati is a resident scholar at the Middle East Institute in Washington. Born in Syria, he's now an American citizen. Welcome to you both.

Do you, Patrick Clawson share the president's optimism that just as Germany and Japan were transformed after an American-led war into democracies, the same could happen in America?

PATRICK CLAWSON: Why not? Indeed we see several million Iraqis living in the northern part of country outside of Saddam s control have done a pretty good job at creating a society where there is a vigorous free press and I think that the people in the rest of Iraq are tired after 20 years of war and know that they need a complete change, a completely new approach. So I think that they're going to be open towards a democratic Iraq.

MARGARET WARNER: Do you share that optimism, Mr. Jouejati?

MURHAF JOUEJATI: I wish I could; I wish I could be as optimistic as this. I agree totally that people of Iraq are tired of this tyrannical and militarist regime. Where there is a marked difference with Germany, for example, is that before the fascist days of Mr. Hitler there was a democratic tradition in Germany. There is no such thing in Iraq. Iraq, which is a nation of thousands of years of history, has never had a democratic tradition. So although I wish very much for democracy to occur in Iraq it's going to take a very, very long time, if only to build the very human and physical infrastructure that a democracy requires.

MARGARET WARNER: What about that, that's really a very different situation given the history of Iraq?

PATRICK CLAWSON: Consider Japan which had a militaristic society, emperor worship, had a religion based in fact upon sacrificing for the empire, and yet they were able to create democratic institutions. Iraq had a vigorous parliament in the 1930s and the 1940s, so there are some foundations to build upon. It's one of the most literate, educated societies in the Arab world. So, yes, there are going to be problems; it's going to be a slow process. Look, it took 140 years after our own Declaration of Independence before women got the vote here. So the process in Iraq may not be complete the first year, even the first decade but I'm confident that there is going to be a lot of progress made.

MARGARET WARNER: Mr. Murhaf Jouejati, do you think at the very least really thinking of a military initially style occupation, U.S. occupation and then kind of civilian administrator, that that could at least, what the president says, he thought he could create an environment in which local people could then create democratic institutions of the kind you're talking about. Do you think that's possible or do you think the fact it starts with a war makes that not possible?

MURHAF JOUEJATI: Well, you said the words here, in the region, I think the perception is that it's going to be an American occupation; it's not going to be a liberation. And this is especially true if the United States acts without a United Nations resolution, or if it acts alone even if there is a U.N. resolution that is let's say vetoed by France or somebody else. It's going to be perceived as an occupation and I cannot imagine that the first year or two Iraq is going to be administered by Americans. That is going to drive even more the point that this is a foreign occupation of an Arab land, and this is rejected on a regional basis and I think it could be rejected also locally, though many Iraqis will be dancing in the streets after the going away of Saddam -- nobody will celebrate him. They will celebrate his departure, but we have to remember, that loyalty in Iraq is to clan and to tribe. We have to remember this is a heterogeneous society unlike Japan, which is homogenous, we have here a society that is divided along ethnic and sectarian lines. We have here a potential fragmentation of Iraq and so I cannot be as optimistic as I would like to be.

MARGARET WARNER: Broaden this out now, Patrick Clawson, to the president's broader point, which is that if you could get a represented government going in Iraq, that it could be the catalyst for broader democratic change in the region. How realistic is that?

PATRICK CLAWSON: Well, indeed, we already see the winds of democracy beginning to stir in the region. The president referred, for instance, to one of the most interesting cases, that of Saudi Arabia where a group of 103 Saudi intellectuals recently petitioned for an elected parliament and for more rights for women and the response the Saudi government was to meet with these people, not to condemn them. And afterwards, the crown prince, Abdullah of Saudi Arabia issued his own more modest call for a charter for Arab reform. So even in place like Saudi Arabia we're beginning to see stirrings of interest in how can we have more democracy in our societies?

MURHAF JOUEJATI: That's all very nice. These stirrings started before the actual crisis in Iraq. And if we have anarchy in Iraq as a result of its fragmentation, what is going to spill over to the rest of the Middle East is not democratization but anarchy.

MARGARET WARNER: What if you accepted the president's premise - just for the purpose of argument - and represented government did begin in Iraq. Then do you think it would have a catalytic effect on other countries, other Arab countries where the regimes are still pretty autocratic?

MURHAF JOUEJATI: The regimes are autocratic and they are very entrenched in their power. There will be certain moved to liberalize and democratize but if this is going to be top down, it is going to be more cosmetic than anything else, that Iraq suddenly becomes a democracy I do not believe in and that there will be a sudden spillover into to the rest of the region. I think that is, also, overly optimistic.

MARGARET WARNER: Mr. Clawson two of the leading countries - I mean, culturally, economically, politically, whatever, Egypt and Saudi Arabia - both autocratic governments, authoritarian governments of different kinds, both major U.S. allies, to have change in those countries what would the U.S. role have to be? Would it have to start pushing harder for reform than it ever has before?

PATRICK CLAWSON: Probably and also encouraging those governments to reflect what will happen if there isn't reform - that they could face greater social instability if they don't face up now to their social problems.

MARGARET WARNER: But I mean how likely is that, that the U.S. would stop... how likely is that?

PATRICK CLAWSON: What we see in Saudi Arabia is a de facto ruler the crown prince who from the first day he stepped into that office was interested in making some reforms, such as allowing local governors to decide if women could drive. And yet he faced opposition within the royal family. If we come along and say, we think this is really important and we want to help you, and if the international mood is different and if a lot of people in Saudi Arabia are talking about the importance of reform, it's more likely we'll see change. Everything in Saudi Arabia comes very slowly. So I don't want to give the impression there is going to be anything dramatic happening but I do think we would see a real speedup in the change.

MARGARET WARNER: What do you think the U.S. role would have to be, how likely do you think it is?

MURHAF JOUEJATI: We are talking here at one level Jeffersonian democracy, at another level the right of women to drive. Between the two there is a huge gap. So there is going to be a huge U.S. effort and I don't know that the United States has the attention span to focus for so long on such a resistant region. Again, that is overly optimistic.

PATRICK CLAWSON: If I may say that Jefferson's democracy involved slave ownership and the right to vote only for males who owned property. I think that Iraq will do better than that.

MARGARET WARNER: Mr. Jouejati, these regimes often say to the U.S., if we open up the Islamists, they're going to win the elections, what about that factor?

MURHAF JOUEJATI: That is very true and there have been grievances for decades on the part of society in any of the Arab Middle Eastern states. And these have been bottled up. There have been no channels of opposition that are legal. So now we are having a society that is radicalized and fundamentalism reigns almost and so if there is a instant democracy we are talking about, we are going to have a body politic of fundamentalists -- is that what the U.S. wants?

MARGARET WARNER: Finally, I hate to move on from that, but the third assertion the president made in this area was that democratization in Iraq, regime change in Iraq could bring progress on the Israeli-Palestinian front, do you agree with that and if so how?

PATRICK CLAWSON: Pres. Bush has been saying and Palestinians have been agreeing some time that democratic reform in the Palestinian Authority is key to restoring trust among Palestinians and in their own government and among Israelis in the actions of the Palestinians. So democratization of the Palestinian Authority would be a big step forward. And if there is progress towards democracy in Iraq, a lot of Palestinians are going to say, hey, we wanted that, too. We have got to do more in order get up there. Furthermore, if Israel is not at risk from Saddam's weapons of mass destruction, Israelis may be prepared to take a little more risk with the Palestinians.

MURHAF JOUEJATI: Democratization is wonderful, but the key to peace in the Middle East is the end of occupation and occupation that engenders and triggers terrorism. If we want to defeat terrorism we are going to have to take away its causes, which is the end of Israeli occupation. And if Mr. Bush is as adamant as he says he is about Iraq abiding by U.N. resolutions, then by God Israel too must abide by U.N. resolutions.

MARGARET WARNER: So, briefly, Mr. Jouejati, you don't agree then that a change in Iraq would make the Israelis feel more secure and thus more open and make the Palestinians turn toward more moderate leadership?

MURHAF JOUEJATI: There was the Arab-Israeli conflict before Saddam Hussein was in power; that should tell us something. So I do not think that the Palestinians need to wait for statehood for Iraq to democratize. I think the occupation needs to end now and that this administration needs to be more serious about Arab-Israeli peace.

MARGARET WARNER: We have to leave it there, Mr. Jouejati and Mr. Clawson, thank you both.

JIM LEHRER: Still to come on the NewsHour tonight, the Iraqi opposition, a space shuttle update, and so long Mr. Rogers.

FOCUS - IRAQI OPPOSITION

JIM LEHRER: Now, the anti-Saddam Hussein Iraqi opposition. More than 50 representatives of the major opposition groups began meeting in Kurdish northern Iraq yesterday. Among other things, they hope to appoint an interim government for Iraq, should Saddam be deposed. And they're beginning to address other issues involved in the post-Saddam administration of Iraq. We get an update from New York Times correspondent Judith Miller in Irbil. I talked to her late this afternoon.

JIM LEHRER: Judy Miller, welcome.

JUDITH MILLER: Hi. How are you, Jim?

JIM LEHRER: Just fine. What's the most important thing to come out of the meeting?

JUDITH MILLER: I think what we've really seen is the Iraqi opposition finally coming into its own. These people understand that this is the end game, that this is their moment, that they have to make a cogent, coherent statement, they have to have people believe them, and they have to walk a very fine line between asserting their independence, not being America's pawns, and yet still not angering the country to which they're going to owe the liberation of their country.

JIM LEHRER: Have they pretty much accepted the fact that the United States is going to run the country for a while, at least after the removal of Saddam Hussein? Are they accepting that?

JUDITH MILLER: You know, they really haven't accepted it. And I think the message that has come out of here is that, "you don't want to do that, America. You don't want to become the colonial occupiers. You need, from the very beginning, some Iraqi faces to tell other Iraqis who've just been liberated that this is not an occupation." And they've delivered that message very strongly to Zalmay Khalilzad, who is Pres. Bush's representative who traveled here at great difficulty to kind of reassure the opposition. Now they are telling him privately, not publicly, that America can't go it alone, that the Iraqi opposition has to be there from the beginning.

JIM LEHRER: What was Mr. Khalilzad's reaction to that message?

JUDITH MILLER: Well, he was available to the press yesterday, and today he has kind of been rather unavailable to us. I think it's hard for him, also, to kind of walk this fine line between making clear to the Iraqis that there is going to be a role for them, but that in the beginning many of the major tasks, like security, ridding Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, and even the political life in the beginning is going to have to be a kind of American show. Neither group's mission is easy, neither the American delegation, nor the Iraqi opponents who've come here to kind of really take a stand on Iraqi soil in favor of the liberation of their country.

JIM LEHRER: Is there any doubt among this group that Saddam Hussein's days are, in fact, numbered?

JUDITH MILLER: There really isn't any doubt about that in these corridors. You almost feel the sense of victory here, impending victory. There is great concern about what's going to happen to Iraq and their fellow Iraqis, but, in effect, what's really odd is that the concern of this group is beginning to shift away from Saddam Hussein. His ouster now seems to be a foregone conclusion, and these people are beginning to worry much more what's going on on their northern border with the Turks.

JIM LEHRER: Lay out their concerns about the Turks.

JUDITH MILLER: Well, they know that the Americans want a two-front war against Saddam Hussein, and they know that the Americans want to base American forces out of Turkey. And the Turks, for their part, want to be able to come into northern Iraq to both, they say, prevent the flow of refugees up into their country-- and that's what happened the last time; over a million people kind of headed for their corridor-- and they also want to have some control over this area, where in the past the PKK, which is a kind of terrorist group, at least according to the American State Department, has staged offenses and acts of terrorism against Turkey. They want a presence here, and that really terrifies the Iraqi opposition. And it's not just the Kurds who live in this region. Today the Iraqi opposition issued a statement saying that they would all send a delegation to Ankara to talk to the Turks about respecting the sovereignty of this country and its territorial integrity. So this is no longer just a Turkish-Kurdish dispute. Now the Iraqi opposition as a whole has embraced this Kurdish cause and says the sanctity, the territory of Iraq cannot be breached; we must all pull together as Iraqis to make sure that the American liberation does not result in the domination of northern Iraq by Turkey. That's a very strong concern here among the Iraqi opposition figures.

JIM LEHRER: And was that expressed to Mr. Khalilzad?

JUDITH MILLER: This has been expressed to him loud and clear, but he, too, is in a very difficult situation because America knows that the best way to oust Saddam Hussein is probably through a two-front war, that is, one group of people moving in from Kuwait and other countries and another moving in from the north. If America doesn't have those two fronts, it can still prevail according to the military people I have talked to, but it will be harder. Therefore, those Turkish bases are really important, Jim, and they're willing to pay a price for them. What the Iraqi people have said here at this conference is, "fine, pay a price, but just make sure that it's not our independence and sovereignty."

JIM LEHRER: All right. Judy Miller, thank you very much.

JUDITH MILLER: Thank you. It's my pleasure.

UPDATE - SEARCH FOR ANSWERS

JIM LEHRER: Now, the latest on the "Columbia" shuttle investigation, and to Terence Smith.

TERENCE SMITH: While investigators continued to probe for the cause of the "Columbia" disaster, newly released e-mails show a high level of concern among NASA engineers that the shuttle's problems could prove fatal. The series of e-mail exchanges from the last days of "Columbia's" flight were released by NASA in response to media requests under the Freedom of Information Act. The e-mails show some engineers debating among themselves possible "worst-case" and "what if" scenarios. One raised the possibility of potential damage to the shuttle's left wing upon reentry. On Jan. 31, for example, the day before the accident, a flight controller at Johnson Space Center, was worried that superheated air could get into the shuttle. Jeffrey Kling wrote: "If there was hot plasma sneaking into the wheel wells, we would see increases in our landing gear temperatures and likely our tire pressures. Ultimately our recommendation in that case is going to be to set up for a bailout (assuming the wing doesn't burn off before we can get the crew out)." Another e-mail said superiors should ask the Defense Department to photograph the shuttle's tile section during descent, a request that was first made, and then withdrawn. Other e-mails from different engineers refer to the possibility of "total crew loss," and describe an environment within NASA where "getting information is being treated like the plague." One of the most explicit e-mails came on Jan. 28, when engineer Robert Daugherty asked: "Any more activity today on the tile damage, or are people just relegated to crossing their fingers and hoping for the best?" At a NASA budget hearing before the House Science Committee today, the agency's administrator, Sean O'Keefe, was asked whether the e-mails had been adequately screened at the highest levels.

SEAN O'KEEFE: Based on what I can see, the vetting of all this information that occurred on orbit during the operational mission was handled by the individuals. They vetted those questions, satisfied themselves there were solutions that could be found, and determined if there was a safety-of-flight risk to be attendant to that, and ascertained that there was not in their judgment.

REP. LYNN WOOLSEY: You know what? We're in a new place right now with this e-mail, and I think there are questions people want answered. And I can say just for myself that supporting the NASA budget is going to depend on feeling absolutely sure that we've gotten real answers to those questions.

SEAN O'KEEFE: Absolutely. No, there's no question. We really have to work through this and be responsive. We will be accountable.

TERENCE SMITH: O'Keefe said if the investigation showed a systemic problem with NASA's chain of command and communication, the problem would be fixed.

TERENCE SMITH: For more about the shuttle investigation, I'm joined by Congressman Anthony Weiner, Democrat of New York, a member of the House Science Committee that conducted today's hearing. And by Lori Garver, former associate administrator for policy and plans at NASA; she is currently vice president of DFI International, an aerospace consulting firm in Washington. Welcome to you both.

Lori Garver these are painful to read, these e-mails. You have read a lot of them and dealt with this in the past. What did you learn from these e-mails?

LORI GARVER: Well there is no question in my mind the people at NASA were doing all of the questions because they care more about the health of this crew and the vehicle than any of us, the space community is tight. These people are like family and it's a good thing that they were investigating what they were.

TERENCE SMITH: And because they thought there was something wrong?

LORI GARVER: Well absolutely. When people review video and see that there could be a problem, I think it's a positive measure that you had teams at different centers taking an active look at what could happen. I think if there are any questions and the investigation will undercover this, it's in our modeling we didn't determine in fact, that the problems were as severe as they ended up being.

TERENCE SMITH: Congressman Weiner, what questions about these e-mails pose you now want to get the answers to?

REP. ANTHONY WEINER: Well, I think when the accident happened, all of us had the same image in our mind of the "Challenger" blowing up and we immediately said, it's the same thing all over again but policy makers and folks at NASA were saying, well, let's hope this isn't the same systemic problems that we found in 1986. You know, you put a headline up on the screen I'll read another one "NASA officials unaware of pre-launch objections engineers strongly urged against flight" -- that's from the Washington Post, Feb. 20, 1986. There is an eerie similarity in the problems that have occurred in terms of information from people on the ground -- the nuts and bolts scientists -- getting to the brass at the top. And what concerns me most is not so much that they were back and forth and that there were some people in the industry and in the organization that had warned about these things; it's that those warnings never reached the top. Today O'Keefe said quite simply I'm satisfied they were dealt with at an operational level and my concern if that you're the NASA administrator, you have nothing more important on your plate than that shuttle when it's up orbit. And for these types of concerns as urgent as they were going back and forth not to reach a decision making level is most troubling.

TERENCE SMITH: Were you satisfied they were dealt with at the proper level?

REP. ANTHONY WEINER: Frankly I'm going to leave it to folks to decide why this accident happened and I think we're going to get to the bottom of it. I'm very troubled that once again we're getting to the bottom of it relying on reporters via Freedom of Information Act requests, notifying the administrator, which he admitted to to today. I can't imagine in charge as a layman and he's not a scientist either the moment the crash happens I don't get my staff at the table and say I want to see every piece of information that might have had some insight into it and the idea that he was reading it in the paper with the rest of us just shows that we haven't learned the lessons.

TERENCE SMITH: Lori Garver, there was one particular thing raised in these e-mails that I want to ask you about; the reference to the request to the U.S. Strategic Command to give close up pictures and surveillance of the left wing and that request was submitted and then withdrawn. Why? What's -

LORI GARVER: Well, again , I really think NASA has been very clear that they did not believe that information would have helped them make a determination that would have caused anything to change. The very big difference here versus "Challenger" was all of those discussions before "Challenger" were whether to launch or not in the temperatures and whether the vehicle was safe. In this case the vehicle was already in orbit and there really wasn't ultimately as Ron Dittimore and others have said not much we could have done any way but we still want to find out what happened and make sure NASA doesn't have the systemic problem in the past but I argue it's quite different than "Challenger."

TERENCE SMITH: What about early why the flight however when it wasn't in its maximum orbit when in theory could something have been done then, had those pictures been taken as described in the e-mails, could they have learned enough and done something?

LORI GARVER: In the future NASA maybe able to take more real-time data but they didn't look at that video and see things until after they were already in orbit, after all that's eight minutes and really to be able to calculate you would have a loss of crew and vehicle and do something that has never been done either turn to launch site or transatlantic abort is not a call that you're really going to make based on the data they had.

REP. ANTHONY WEINER: What troubles me is I believe that that conclusion is what led them not to deal with the information fully. Their conclusion going in maybe at the upper reaches that there is nothing we can do so let's not ask too many questions is not the way I want shuttle administrators or staffers looking at it. Today -- USA Today O'Keefe was asked whether or not there was anything he could do. He harkened back to "Apollo 13," he said, well, you know, we didn't think we could get that down either. The fact is if you read the fine print of these emails going back and forth, it is some of the brightest minds in America trying to think about a way to save them if they did have to do some kind of a ditch. What is still mind-boggling to me despite all the problems that NASA had in the past, they still seem to have no better way to get information to the top rung. So here we are, we're talking about whether to increase their budget, lessen the budget and still we have the same exact problems in one important respect and that is decision makers at the top rung of the ladder are not getting information when it's bad news. Are they getting information when it's good news -- perhaps. If you remember, the early comments about this flight was how flawless it had been throughout, it turned out that that was anything but the truth.

TERENCE SMITH: Is the congressman right, is there a problem of communication between the engineers who know the most and the management people who have to make the ultimate decisions?

LORI GARVER: I don't think it's clear yet that that's what's going on here. We did have a situation where a Langley group -- a different center in Virginia was looking at information they think might happen if there was heating to that wheel well. The Johnson Space Center people because of their modeling decided there was no heating to the wheel well, so there was no need to transfer that information. Again too early to speculate on a lot of in this may or may not become something that was really critical to the investigation. I think looks like the focus may be somewhere else, which is does NASA know how to model this as far as damage as insulation off the tank. That may not even be ultimately what happened to the shuttle. It's still probably too early to say.

TERENCE SMITH: And yet these e-mails, Congressman, were haunting in the way they so accurately predicted or discussed what did happen -- what actually happened.

REP. ANTHONY WEINER: They were haunting even in the sequence that they said what to expect and at what altitude to expect it but the Rogers Commission when they looked at the stuff in 1986, one of the things they said there is too much of these decisions were made in isolation, that was pre e-mail. We're going to find out what's going to happen. I just hope the way we find out about it there truly is a sense at NASA that we're going to be right up at the front of leading the charge to get this information out there. We're not going to wait for reporters to pull it out of us; we're not going to be defensive when congressmen ask about it; and we're going to end this culture of isolation. If I was the administration in NASA after what happened in 1986, I would have a complaint box on my desk; if you have any problems, any concern, however remote it might be, I don't care if you're someone sweeping up the commissary, if you have a suggestion, we want to be able to hear about it. Never again should we hear a NASA administrator sit before Congress on the eve of something like this and say, you know, I heard about this vigorous debate by reading it in the newspaper. That's gut wrenching to someone who is so concerned about safety but we are going to find out what happened. I can say that with some certitude.

TERENCE SMITH: Do you agree that?

LORI GARVER: Sure and there is a suggestion box of course -- and never made it in there, I'm sure. This was real time engineering data -- people who care more about this than anyone trying to do the right thing and I think the free exchange was positive. We'll find out if it should have gone higher up the chain.

TERENCE SMITH: And you do believe that we'll come to a firm conclusion as to what caused this?

LORI GARVER: I do. I think the commission is already saying they're finding that they believe they'll pinpoint what happened.

TERENCE SMITH: Okay congressman Weiner, Lori Garver, thank you both very much.

REP. ANTHONY WEINER: Thank you.

LORI GARVER: Thank you.

SERIES - CANDIDATES

JIM LEHRER: Now, the fourth of our conversations about Iraq and foreign policy with the Democratic presidential candidates. Ray Suarez has tonight's.

RAY SUAREZ: Tonight we talk with Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Cleveland, Ohio. He's 56, a graduate of Case Western Reserve. He was 23 when first elected to Cleveland's city council in 1969. Eight years later, he was mayor of the city in severe economic distress. Within a year, Cleveland became the first major city to default on its debts since the Great Depression. Kucinich lost his re-election bid, but he staged a political comeback in 1994 with his election to the Ohio State Senate, then two years later, winning a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives. He joins us now from the House gallery. Dennis Kucinich, welcome.

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Hello.

RAY SUAREZ: Last night Pres. Bush laid out his vision for disarming, liberating, and rebuilding Iraq. Did you hear much in the speech that you could agree with?

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, certainly I think all Americans want to see Saddam Hussein disarmed. I think the inspections can work, and certainly America has a powerful deterrent force. However, the administration has not made a case for attacking Iraq. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, with al-Qaida's work in 9/11, with the anthrax attack upon this country. Iraq does not have missile technology, which can strike at this country. U.N. Inspectors have not found that Iraq has useable weapons of mass destruction, which constitute a threat to this country. So I think that the administration can be best advised to continue to support the United Nations' efforts and inspections, and that leads to containment.

RAY SUAREZ: Well, all along you have been calling fire solution to the Iraqi crisis within the context of the U.N. What if the Security Council approves this latest resolution, which would seem to give an opening if there is not Iraqi cooperation for military force?

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: We want to work with the U.N., but it's no secret that the United States is using every lever at its disposal to try to gain votes in the United Nations, whether it's through threats or wheedling or cajoling, or even outright buying the sport of a nation. The United States is doing everything it can to gain the support of the world community. I don't think that's the right path. I think that to try to gather support in that way for a war is taking this nation and the world in the wrong direction. Think instead of how powerful a force the United States could be if it proceeded to gather the support in the world community for continued containment and inspections. This war is not necessary, but the Bush administration is determined to have the war any way.

RAY SUAREZ: Well, do you consider Iraq or its president a threat to its region or to the security of the world?

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, not if the United Nations continues inspections. I mean, that's the whole thing. We need to find a way at some point to reintegrate Iraq into the world community. However, the policies of this administration will not do that. The policies of this administration will continue a path of war and will continue to plunge this nation into conflicts throughout that region and perhaps in other places in the world. I mean, look at the national security strategy, which is a doctrine of preemption and unilateralism, the nuclear posture review which calls for the first strike use of nuclear weapons. Those doctrines are not a way to keep peace in the world.

RAY SUAREZ: You're an experienced politician, but not someone who is thought of, I think, as a foreign policy experienced politician. How you would translate the work you've done so far to the oval office?

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: The work that I've done in the congress includes serving as the present ranking Democrat on an oversight subcommittee that has jurisdiction over international defense, the Department of State, and international relations. In that capacity, we cover the range of matters relating to security and international affairs. Furthermore, I'm also a board member of Parliamentarians for Global Action, which is one of the largest group of parliamentarians in the world, and I meet regularly with world leaders from countries throughout... around the globe. I'm no stranger to the complexities of international affairs or to working with people from other countries, and I think what we can do as a nation is have leadership which works to reinstate the nuclear posturing, which works to reinstate the nonproliferation treaty, which will eventually do away with all nuclear weapons, which works for the biological and chemical weapons conventions. The landmines treaty, small arms treaty, the national criminal court are all as a way of assuring international security. The president of the United States can lead the way in that, and I think I can make a major contribution in international relations towards taking that approach cooperation as opposed to unilateralism.

RAY SUAREZ: There are tens of thousands of sailors, airmen, soldiers already in the Persian Gulf region. Their weapons are there. Their equipment is there. Do you that this can really be stopped sort of war, or are you starting to feel that this country is on a path that will lead it there?

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: War should not be inevitable. Peace should be inevitable. The United States could still pull back. We do not have to bomb Iraq. We do not have to invade Baghdad, to occupy that city in the country, to reconstruct it after we ruin it. We can save the American taxpayers over a trillion dollars, which... money which would be surely needed for health or education or retirement security. We can spare the people of Iraq untold suffering and misery and death. We can pull back and we should. We do not have to launch into war. The president can say, stop.

RAY SUAREZ: This may be over one way or another before the first primary voter steps out into the snow to head for a polling station somewhere. Is foreign affairs going to end up being a centerpiece of this campaign, whatever happens in Iraq?

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: I think it's unavoidable. When you consider the fact this administration has in its national security strategy articulated a policy of unilateralism, of preemption, this is sure to continue. The administration is prepared to give a trillion dollar tax cut to the rich, spend a trillion dollars for war, and yet we do not have money for health care, guaranteed health care for all in this country. We do not have money to guarantee the retirement security of the people of this country. We do not have money for jobs programs or to rebuild our cities, but we have money for war and for tax cuts for the rich? I think that the foreign policy of this country is inexplicably woven into the fabric of domestic policy, because if we're going to war, we can't take care of our people here at home. And that's why I say it's time for America its effort toward unilateralism and to cooperate with the world community on matters of world security and to not waste our money waging war aboard, and instead address the needs of the people here at home.

RAY SUAREZ: Several times you've called this unilateralism, but the United States Government, the Bush administration, has been actively seeking and trying to locate allies around the world so this country won't be going into this alone. Why still refer to it as unilateralism?

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, because the energy and drive of the United States is what is the catalytic factor in moving this country and the rest of the world from a condition of peace to war. And we have to remember the powerful role the United States plays in the world, so the extent to which we have some nations joining us in an effort to go to war in Iraq is a statement of the power that we have in the world. It's not a state of the rightness of our cause. So let us hope that we can develop new policies, which can avert from war, which can create global security without war. We have to do that, because in a technologically complex society with so many nations possessing various weapons of mass destruction, we must learn to settle our differences without war, or we will surely find ourselves involved in war on a scale that perhaps this world has never seen.

RAY SUAREZ: Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, thanks for being with us.

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Thank you.

JIM LEHRER: We'll continue our conversations next week, with the remaining candidates.

FINALLY - IN MEMORIAM

JIM LEHRER: And finally tonight, a farewell to our friend, Mr. Rogers, who died today of stomach cancer at age 74.

FRED ROGERS: It's a beautiful day in this neighborhood -- won't you be mine won't you be my neighbor.

JIM LEHRER: Generations of children have been welcomed into the neighborhood by the gentle, soft-spoken Fred Rogers.

FRED ROGERS: Would you be mine could you be mine won't you be my neighbor...

JIM LEHRER: The ordained Presbyterian minister turned to television in 1954. He created a puppet show, called "the children's corner," on local Pittsburgh television.

FRED ROGERS: My name is Mr. Rogers.

JIM LEHRER: Rogers went on camera in 1963, starring in his own 15-minute program airing on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. In 1968, "Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood" came to U.S. Public television.

FRED ROGERS: It's a beautiful day in this neighborhood...

JIM LEHRER: The program lacked the flashy graphics and super- powered cartoon figures common to children's programming. Instead, Rogers talked to children in respectful, reassuring tones about tough subjects, like death and divorce.

FRED ROGERS: I know a little girl and a little boy whose mother and father got a divorce, and those children cried and cried. We feel on "The Neighborhood" that whatever is mentionable is much more manageable. And so for children to be able to see us dealing with the death of a pet or being able to live through the trauma of living through a divorce, these are all things that are allowed to be talked about and allowed to be felt.

FRED ROGERS: When you see scary television you can turn it off. So let's see what more they make of it now in the neighborhood of make believe. Okay, trolley.

JIM LEHRER: Rogers composed some of his songs, worked the puppets, and did some of the voices himself.

FRED ROGERS: It's you I like.

JIM LEHRER: Always, he urged children to love themselves and others. Over the years, the program won four Emmys, two Peabody's, and last year, Pres. Bush presented Rogers with the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation's highest civilian honor. Four years ago today, he was inducted into the Television Academy Hall of Fame. In his acceptance speech, he talked about the meaning of his nearly five decades in television.

FRED ROGERS: Fame is a four-letter word. And like tape, or zoom, or face, or pain, or life, or love, what ultimately matters is what we do with it. I feel that those of us in television are chosen to be servants. It doesn't matter what our particular job. We are chosen to help meet the deeper needs of those who watch and listen, day and night. We all have only one life to live on earth, and through television, we have the choice of encouraging others to demean this life or to cherish it in creative, imaginative ways.

JIM LEHRER: Rogers taped his last episode December 2000, but the program will continue in reruns. Every show concludes on a positive note. Here's how today's ended.

FRED ROGERS: I really liked being with you. You make my day such a special day by just you being yourself. I'll be back next time. Good-bye.

RECAP

JIM LEHRER: Again, the major developments of this day: The national terror alert status was lowered today, from "high risk" back to "elevated risk." The U.N. Security Council met behind closed doors on Iraq, but the talks ended in sharp division. The U.S. House approved a ban on all human cloning. We'll see you online, and again here tomorrow evening with Mark Shields and the return of Paul Gigot, among others. I'm Jim Lehrer. Thank you and good night.