The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer; September 15, 2006

I'm Jim Lara. Today's news, the terror stalemate, shields and brooks, and Iraqi view, and saving for all tonight on The NewsHour. Good evening, I'm Jim Lara.

On The NewsHour, tonight, the news of this Friday, excerpts from the President's tough words today about dealing with detainees, followed by the analysis of Mark Shields and David Brooks. Then, the week of violence in Iraq, a scene by the Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister, Barrim Saleh, and a look at the plan to save the Ford Motor Company. Major funding for The NewsHour with Jim Lara is provided by Somewhere west of Topeka, someone's getting out for a breath or fresh air, which is why a farmer is harvesting corn, and why a train is transporting corn, and why ADM is turning corn into ethanol, a renewable, cleaner burning fuel. Somewhere west of Topeka, someone's getting out for a breath of fresh air, and lots of us are helping make sure that fresh air is actually fresh, ADM, resourceful by nature. At CIT, we provide the financing to keep healthcare strong and healthy.

We help energy companies find new resources. We work with communications companies to make the world smaller and life bigger. We offer financial aid to make college possible for more students. At CIT, we help finance the future, because that's the place to be. See it with CIT. And by Pacific Life, BP, the Atlantic Philanthropies, and with the continuing subs of the institutions and foundations. This program was made possible by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and by contributions to your PBS station from viewers like you. Thank you. President Bush spoke sternly today to the Senate about handling terror suspects. He said CIA interrogators must have more leeway, plus guarantees they won't be accused

of war crimes. A Senate committee voted yesterday to give detainees full rights under the Geneva Conventions. Today, at a news conference, Mr. Bush said that could scotch the effort to get vital information. I will tell you this. I've spent a lot of time on this issue, as you can imagine. And I've talked to professionals, people I count on for advice. These are people going to represent those on the front line, protecting this country. They're not going forward with the program. They're not going to professionals. We'll not step up unless there's clarity in the law. So Congress has got a decision to make. You want the program to go forward or not? Senator John McCain and several other key Republicans opposed the President's plan. And a statement today, McCain said nothing in the alternative bill would force the CIA program to close. That bill and a House measure closer to the President's liking may come up for votes

next week. But I'm more on this story right after the news summary. And Ohio Congressman agreed to plead guilty today to conspiracy and making false statements. The federal charges against Republican Bob Nae stemmed from dealings with lobbyists Jack Abramoff. He pleaded guilty to corruption counts last January. Court paper said Nae accepted more than $170,000 in trips, including a lavish golf package to Scotland in 2002. In return, he offered legislation to help Abramoff's clients and others. Today, Nae apologized and he said he has an alcohol problem. He makes his formal plea next month and could get 10 years in prison. Ford Motor Company made a official today. It's buying out hourly workers and cutting white collar jobs as well. Seventy-five thousand employees are eligible to take the buyouts. The company will also eliminate another 10,000 salary jobs. In addition, it's closing two more plans in Mommy, Ohio, and Windsor, Ontario in Canada.

Ford Executive Mark Fields discussed the moves in a teleconference. We believe these changes, which are massive, will be enough to put us back on track. But we will remain quick, decisive, and flexible in reacting to changing conditions in the future. We know these decisions bring even more pain to the business in the short term. And they will require sacrifice from our employees, labor unions, dealers, and suppliers. Ford's announcement follows a similar buyout plan at General Motors earlier this year, and today Chrysler announced further cuts in its U.S. production through the end of the year. We'll have more on the Ford story later in the program tonight. The United States, Canada, and the European Union filed a major trade case against China today over auto parts. They asked the World Trade Organization to intervene. Their complaint said high tariffs discouraged the use of foreign-made parts on vehicles built

in China. Ultimately, the investigation could lead to punitive tariffs against China. Another 30 bodies were found across Baghdad today that made 130 in the last two days. In response, the Iraqi government announced a plan for trenches around the city to control access. It's the latest in efforts that included adding more U.S. troops. Some of those troops moved from violent and bar province in the West. Army Lieutenant General Peter Carelli confirmed that today. The main effort is Baghdad, and we must ensure that we wait the main effort. Armies that don't wait the main effort really don't ever have a main effort. And that's not the case with this force, General Carelli is totally focused on ensuring that we keep what we need in Baghdad to do the job we need to have done. The general also said the situation in and bar province is moving in the right direction. It was word earlier this week, a U.S. Marine report found little chance of securing

the region. A U.S. Marine was killed in Andbar today, and an American soldier died Thursday outside Baghdad. Another soldier was missing after a suicide truck bombing yesterday. So far, 38 Americans have been killed in Iraq this month. More than 2680 have died since the war began in 2003. We'll talk to the Deputy Prime Minister of Iraq later in the program tonight. Outrage spread in the Muslim world today against Pope Benedict XVI. That's after remarks he made Tuesday on Islam and Holy War. They have a report on the speech and the reaction narrated by John Snow of independent television news. Addressing an audience of scientists at his al-Mamata, Regensburg University in Bavaria, Pope Benedict was talking about the differences between Christianity and Islam. His speech included a quote from the 14th century Byzantine Emperor Manuel II, Pálelegas, who criticized the prophet Muhammad.

The emperor turned to his colleagues with the central question of the relationship between religion and violence. He said, I quote, show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword, the faith he preached. The theological musings have brought a scathing reaction from the Muslim world, echoing the protests over Danish cartoons earlier this year, the Pope was condemned at Friday prayers in Tehran, Beirut, and Cairo, and there were protests in at least two Indian states. The Pakistani parliament unanimously passed a resolution denouncing the comments, and Gaza, a Greek Orthodox church was damaged by a small explosion. This in the Shabla and Phyllis Leeneer, in the name of our Palestinian people, we express our condemnation of the statements of his excellency, the Pope, against Islam as a belief, Shari allure, history, and a lifestyle.

We wish that he had not said these things, but after this statement we expect him to offer an apology and to reflect on and be critical of what he has said. The Vatican has said the Pope was misunderstood, and that he meant no offense to Muslims, but it is not the first time the Pope has been criticized for in sensitivity to Islam. He opposed Turkey joining the EU, saying its future lies in a federation of Islamic states, Pope Benedict plans to visit Turkey in November. The German Chancellor Angela Merkel defended the German-born Pope today. She said his point was to reject any use of violence in the name of any religion. A scare involving contaminated spinach spread across the United States today, the Food and Drug Administration linked bagged spinach to an outbreak of E. coli bacteria. Nearly 60 cases and one death were reported in 10 different states. E. coli causes diarrhea, but can lead to fatal kidney problems.

The origin of the problem was unclear, so the FDA warned a people nationwide to throw out all bagged spinach. The World Health Organization today urged greater use of DDT to kill mosquitoes that carry malaria. He said developing nations should expand the spraying of inside walls of huts and other buildings. DDT was banned in the United States in 1972 after widespread outdoor spraying led to environmental damage. The WHO said low dose interior use does not pose the same danger. In US economic news, consumer inflation slowed in August, led by falling gasoline prices. The Labor Department reported today the consumer price index was up just two tenths of a percent. On Wall Street, the Dow Jones industrial average gained 33 points to close above 11,560. The NASDAQ rose more than six points to close at 22.35. For the week, the Dow gained one and a half percent.

The NASDAQ rose more than 3 percent. Journalists and author Ariana Folachi died today in a hospital in Florence, Italy. She had breast cancer. Folachi was best known for aggressive interviews of world leaders. After 9-11, her book The Rage and the Pride drew accusations of inciting hatred against Muslims. At her death, she was being tried in Italy on charges of defaming Islam. Ariana Folachi was 76 years old. And that's it for the news summary tonight. Now the president versus Congress on terrorism, shields and brooks. They Iraqi deputy prime minister and the big Ford cutbacks. The president's pitch for new, detainee rules. He wants them to be tougher than several key Senate Republicans are willing to support. He spoke about the legislation he wants during a one-hour news conference this morning in the White House Rose Garden.

We need the legislation because the Supreme Court recently ruled that military commissions must be explicitly authorized by Congress. So we're working with Congress. The Supreme Court said you must work with Congress. We are working with Congress to get a good piece of legislation out. The bill I have proposed will ensure that suspected terrorists will receive full and fair trials without revealing to them our nation's sensitive intelligence secrets. As soon as Congress acts on this bill, the men our intelligence agencies believed helped orchestrate the 9-11 attacks can face justice. What do you say to the argument that your proposal is basically seeking support for torture, coerced evidence and secret hearings? This debate is occurring because of the Supreme Court's ruling that said that we must conduct ourselves under the common Article III of the Geneva Convention. And that common Article III says that there will be no outrageous upon human dignity.

It's very vague. What does that mean? Outrageous upon human dignity. That's a statement that is wide open to interpretation. And what I'm proposing is that there be clarity in the law so that our professionals will have no doubt that that which they're doing is legal. And so the piece of legislation I sent up there provides our professionals that which is needed to go forward. The first question that we've got to ask is do we need the program? I believe we do need the program. And I detailed in a speech in the East Room what the program has yield. And there's a kind of information we get when we interrogate people within the law. You see, sometimes you can pick up information on the battlefield, sometimes you can pick

it up through letters, but sometimes you actually have to question the people who know the strategy and plans of the enemy. And in this case, we question people like colleague Sheikh Mohammed who we believe ordered the attacks on 9.11, or Ramsey Ben Alsheb, our Abu Zebeda, cold-blooded killers who were part of planning the attack that killed 3,000 people. And we need to be able to question them because it helps yield information, information necessary for us to be able to do our job. The court said that you've got to live under Article 3 of the Geneva Convention, and the standards are so vague that our professionals won't be able to carry forward the program because they don't want to be tried as war criminals. They don't want to break the law. These are decent, honorable citizens who are on the front line of protecting the American people, and they expect our government to give them clarity about what is right and what

is wrong in the law. And that's what we have asked to do. Now this idea that somehow we've got to live under international treaties, and that's fine we do, but oftentimes the United States government passes law to clarify obligations under international treaty. And what I'm concerned about is if we don't do that, then it's very conceivable our professionals could be held to account based upon court decisions in other countries. And I don't believe Americans want that. And the bottom line is simple. If Congress passes a law that does not clarify the rules, if they do not do that, the program is not going forward. Now perhaps some in Congress don't think the program is important. That's fine. I don't know if they do or don't. I think it's vital. And I have the obligation to make sure that our professionals, who I would ask to go conduct interrogations to find out what might be happening or who might be coming to this country.

I've got to give them the tools they need, and that is clear law. And to the analysis of shields and Brooks, syndicated columnists, Mark Shields, New York Times, columnist, David Brooks, Mark, saw the president says he didn't get his legislation the way he wants it, the program will end, Senator McCain issued a statement saying nonsense it wouldn't end anything. How do you see this argument? I see it first of all politically, Jim, is something the Republicans didn't want at this point. I mean, they were hoping to draw the line between the two parties. And with uncharacteristic discipline, the Democrats have gone mute. They've let this argument and this debate occur between the White House and the president and several his supporters on Capitol Hill, John McCain, John Warner, Senator Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, and an array of American military heroes, I mean, led by John's. Let's just call them. Plus, you know, the Republican name, Maine, who voted with them on the committee to give

the majority. And I just, you know, I see it right now that the president was losing support today. I mean, Olympia Snow came out, the other senator from Maine, Chuck Hagel, has indicated that he will back the McCain proposal. I think it's a good bet that Lincoln Chafee, who was re-nominated, will that Mike DeWine and Ohio probably, I mean, as others. So if the Democrats united, I think the president is going to have to do some serious compromising if he wants to get anything done. You agree? Yeah. First of all, why is this happening? Well, John McCain does not want to be bucking his president when he wants to run for president himself and face Republican primary voters. George Bush doesn't want this because they all want to be unified against the Democrats. So why is this happening? It's happening first because despite best efforts over months, they have been able to come together in part because the White House has not done a good job over the years of having congressional relations.

But in part because both McCain and Bush feel this in their core, McCain, that you don't torture, Bush, that I should prepare the way for presidents 50 years from now to do what they need to do. But who's going to win this? I think Mark's right. It's going to be McCain. Well, McCain is wondering, what about the other group? Why about John Warner, McCain? People are used to McCain being a maverick, but here's John Warner. How do you explain that? I think they think, A, it's a matter of national honor, national pride. This goes to the core of a lot of people. And a lot of people may think what I think is that maybe you do get some information out of torture. But there's an ideological conflict. And it's important to have a little moral clarity and there were a little moral standing in the world to fight the broader war. And one reason I think Bush knows he's going to be caving in is if you're, that's putting a little too boldly, but compromising, is that when he, the key word he used in that passage we just heard was the word clarity, he didn't lay any substantive grounds for where he will not cross. He said, I just wanted to be clear. And so if McCain and the White House, the Senate and the White House can come together on

something that's clear, he can say that's fine without violating anything he said today. Do you agree, he's got room, he's got room to, I just thought the whole tone today was sort of, you know, in your face and with a beggar as I think was the term, I think it's the most positive spin you could put on it. I mean, there was a, there was a, there was a, there was a, there was a, there was a little chance. It was like no one constantly about it. Jim, I think that there's another drama playing out here. And that is the American military, the leadership of it has the anger at what they see as the total mishandling of this war from the civilian leadership of this administration. And that, not only that, but the troops have, they have not been well served by their leaders, whether it's in the armoring of the, the troops themselves, the armoring of our enemies. And I think this was plainly with a line was drawn. I mean, I think when Colin Powell, I was going to ask you about totally circumspect man and total, Colin Powell comes

out and said, this is where America is going to, we're going to lose our moral leadership and our moral leverage. But Jack Vessy, Jack Vessy is, is the quintessential American soldier, 46 years in the military, Ronald Reagan's chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff, went in as a private, got a, got a World War Two. Also commissioned at Anzio, you know, saw Korea, saw Vietnam, and he just, his letter is absolutely compelling. He just, he just lays it out and says, and says, bluntly, look, this is a different enemy. But we were up against terrible enemies, the Japanese and the North Vietnamese and the North Koreans and the, and the Nazis that there were the rules and we kept the rules and that's who we are. We're going to define who we are. How do you see that? Particularly Colin Powell. Yeah, I agree. I think for a lot of people it's definition of being an honorable soldier. And this is something they were raised in from the time they went into whatever academy or they enlisted. And this is for a lot of people, obviously, the core of their being. Now the White House case, they do have

a case. One, as the president said, it's the Geneva Convention as vague. Two, that, you know, when our soldiers are, or, or Marines are captured, they're not going to be treated fine. The idea that there's going to be any reciprocity is nonsense. And third, that we are in a different technological age, that if we capture somebody, they know about some plot that's about to kill millions of people, but you want us to be able to do whatever we need to do. And the Israeli answer, and they face this every day, is that in that kind of extreme circumstance, you break the law. But otherwise, you keep the rules. And so I'm, you know, I'm with Mark on this, that I think overall it's important that we define ourselves the way we want to define ourselves. The president, though, and this goes to something where I said at the beginning about his confidence in his tone, I had a chance to join a group of fellow wackos to sit down with the president. I was mean, pun conservatives. Oh, sorry. And we had a chance to spend 90 minutes with the president. It was on the record. Not everything, but the thirds of it was on record. Okay.

And it was 90 minutes in the Oval Office. He was more confident, aggressive. He was like an actor just chewing up the scenery. He's someone who is now, I'm not wrong. I'm right about this in the long run. And he is just hyperconfident these days. And I think next week is going into New York. So talk to the UN. He's going to be talking about the freedom agenda. What about his speech on Monday night? He caught some heat for that, Mark. From the Democrats, Harry Reid on this program elsewhere had said that it was an opportunity to unite the nation, and he made a political speech about Iraq. What drives the Democrats' bats, Jim, is the president's attempt, as he did Monday night, to conflate the battle of against terrorism with war in Iraq. And the United States was attacked on 9-11, as we all know. It was attacked by Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda's headquarters was in Afghanistan. It was a dominant force there. It was a war of logic, if not necessity, for the United States, with other countries, to go into Afghanistan and to go after Al Qaeda and to destroy that military capacity. The war in Iraq was a war of choice. And that's the

president wants to make it one and the same, and kind of say to him, make it a work. I don't think he's going to make it work. I really don't. I mean, it's looked this week and to say he's up one or two points in the polls. The polls were conducted quite frankly during a four-day offensive when he was the commemoration of one speech. What about his speech? What about his speech? Did you think he stepped over the end? I just, I think he just slipped into what is the natural rule. Jim, we're in a time, in a political season. Let's be very blunt about it. John Boehner, the Republican House leader, made a statement that Democrats more concerned about protecting the terrorists than they are protecting Americans. What John Boehner is doing, okay, and the White House disavowed that statement. John Boehner's doing his John Boehner's running from a majority leader, okay? And John Boehner understands one thing. The Republicans that are in trouble in the House caucus are moderates from the Northeast and the Midwest. He's got to appeal to the conservatives. This is conservative logic and rhetoric and that's what we're going

to be hearing to generate and galvanize and energize the base. You see it, Sam Wayne? Well, I thought what Boehner said was clearly over the line, but what the president said Monday night, I don't think was over the line. I mean, the way he sees it is a perception of what the war is about. He sees it as a broad ideological conflict and the war in Iraq was an attempt to take ideologically the fight to the enemy and begin to transform them at least. So if you define the war as al-Qaeda attacking us, then Iraq was not part of that war. But if you define the war as Bush and many other people do, as an ideological conflict against a form of extremism that takes many different forms and is in many different terror organizations, then Iraq was an integral part of it and remains an integral part of it. So I don't think it was politicizing it was just seeing the conflict as he sees it. Speaking of Iraq, is there anything new to say about Iraq? I mean, we just report, I just reported in the news some of the more bodies found, 130 bodies in the last two days. What's going on there? Well, I would say something about the political situation here and mostly on the Republican side. You have a lot of Republicans who believed in the war at the start and who have hung

with Bush and with the war while growing increasingly depressed over these three years. And now you're beginning to see a lot of them say it's irreparably lost. And so you're seeing a lot of people who are writers and pundits and think tankers are more likely to say it publicly. But I think they represent politicians who can't say it publicly who believe in it. And you're beginning to see people like Newt Gingrich say, the strategy's not working. We need a total new strategy. You saw this week, Washington Post, Bill Crystal and Richard Lowry that is a weekly standard in the Republic saying, it's not working. We need more troops. And so a lot of people are saying, this is not working. We need radical changes. And that's not actually not coming from the White House. But you're beginning to see a sense. This is the hopelessness almost of it. What would you add to that, Mark? Just add that the public, that catching up with the public, for the last six months in the Wall Street Journal in BC, pull three out of five voters have lost confidence in the

outcome, that there would be a successful outcome. They've been unconfident, pessimistic. That hasn't changed with good stories or improvement of the President's rhetoric or excitations. And I think the public has concluded that the war is not going to be won. It's not going well. And I think that when they'll come down to Jim, is which party can make the case that we are redeploying? I think that will be the not retreating, not retreating, but that will be the rhetorical fight as well as the strategic and political fight for the next three months. I would say on the Republican Conservatives, I'm amidst all the depression about it, the idea of withdrawing within a year, within a set timetable, they're still great opposition to that because of what would come after. And that's where the fight is going to be. We're deploying as quickly Bob Nays agreeing to plead guilty today on an Abramoff-related scandal. What does that do? Does that affect anything in terms of November? Or is it just

Bob Nays problem? Well, it makes the case that the Democrats, to the sense that things are rotten in Washington. We told you that the lobbyists would too close the need for change, the need for checks and balances. And I think that's your perception. I don't think the election will win. We want to lost on corruption, but I think it's not helpful to the party. Yeah, I think corruption, I would say, is the fifth or sixth issue that's going to matter Iraq, the war on terror, gas prices, jobs, all that other stuff will come way before corruption, which a lot of us thought would be a big issue. So far there's little evidence of that. And Richard died the other day. Mark, you knew her. Did you know that? I did know, Jim. She was a remarkable human being. Unlike many liberals who are legitimately criticized for love and mankind and not liking people, in Richard's life people. She was a great friend. She was loyal. She was generous. She was incredibly thoughtful. But what she did in Texas, Texas didn't wake up in 1990 and say, you know, we're going to be an open-minded,

open-place opposite. This had been a good old boy place. And in Richard's, to a skill, I heard that. Political skill, political skill. I mean, Texas government, white male dominated. That's half of her appointments with female and highest number of Latinos and African Americans. Every future governor is going to be judged by that standard. Did you know her? I had met her a few times at Aspen Institute type of events. I would say that one thing that struck me in one of the opiates I read today, where she said it was a girl she realized early on if you tell jokes people like you. And she was a very funny. But she also spoke about the pressure that put on you to continue to be funny and continue to be liked. Then she talked about some of the troubles she'd have what she overcame in the second half of her life. And that pressure to continue to perform is of what a lot of politicians feel. And I thought she was quite open about that. As a newspaper reporter covering politics in Texas, I covered her very beginnings in politics. She was a housewife. She was a precinct chairman and a bone. Then I came to Washington next time I turned around. She was the governor. Did you know that in 1960 she and Congressmen

to be Charlie Wilson and Henry B. Gonzalez with a troika behind Jack Kennedy. Everyone else is for Linden and Texas in 1960 for the president. That was her. Thank you both very much. Still to come tonight, the deputy prime minister of Iraq and forage huge by out plan. Judy Woodruff has our Iraq interview. The violence in Baghdad that reached a new and bloody peak this week has been going on despite a major U.S. Iraqi operation to pacify the city. Joining us now to discuss security and political developments is Iraq's deputy prime minister, Dr. Barham Salah. Born in Kurdish northern Iraq, he was active in the Iraqi opposition to Saddam Hussein, mainly from outside the country, and he has been part of the post war governing efforts

since soon after the invasion. Deputy prime minister, thank you for being with us. Thank you. Let me begin by just citing what we reported earlier today. 130 dead bodies found in Baghdad over just two days. July and August, some of the deadliest months since the war began, began is a situation in your country getting better or worse. And then I believe the last few weeks have been very tough and we are faced with an onslaught by the terrorists, but it is important also to note that there are significant efforts underway to enhance the capabilities of Iraqi security services as well as to improve the political process so that it becomes more inclusive and solidify the unity of the Iraqis in the face of terrorists. We are trying to build a constitutional democratic government in the heart of the Islamic Middle East at the time when there

is this wave of international terrorism. In the case of Iraq, we are also dealing with the remnants of the former regime. It has not been easy admittedly, but at the same time is important not to forget the important successes and strides that we have made since liberation. Dr. Saleh, most of the bodies that were found in Baghdad in the last few days had been shot in the head. It's been reported. Many of them either showed clear signs of torture or they had been bound and gagged. They were found in Sunni Arab neighborhoods. What is all this say to you? It says to me that there is serious sectarian strife in Iraqi society. Certainly after the attack on the shrines in Samura, a few months back, this situation has escalated, tit for tat killing, sectarian killings have become an unfortunately hallmark of the situation. We are now engaged as a government of national unity in a campaign for national reconciliation prime minister Maliki

announced that soon after the government was formed and we are reaching out to the various communities and to ensure that the political leadership of the country understand the gravity of the situation. I cannot say that we are beyond the danger zone. We still have very serious challenges to deal with, but there are some significant changes that have taken place over the past, at least few weeks on the political track. We have agreed in the National Security Council that is bringing together key elected officials of the government on a very ambitious legislative agenda to deal with contentious issues to ensure that the government and the political process will be able to deal with the extremists, including the militias, including the terrorists, so that we can really bring stability and tranquility back to this country. And I want to ask you about the political front in just a moment, but first let me ask you about something you said at the Pentagon yesterday. You said the problems of today in Iraq pale in comparison to what you call the tyranny and the horrors that people had to endure under Saddam

Hussein. Are you saying that the reign of Saddam is worse than these massive numbers of civilian casualties? To any Iraqi, the answer to that question is undeniably yes. That is not to say one can take lightly the loss of innocent life in Iraq. Every life lost is one too many and invariably so. But if you understand the calamity that Iraqis had to endure for 35 years, you would understand why I say the pain of transition, the difficulties of transition, these unfortunate appalling terrorist incidents in Iraq. Really, it's a price of freedom that we have to be ready to pay for. I'm not trying to justify it or to take it lightly on the country. We must solidify our internal front in order to resolve the security situation. Every mass grave uncovered in Iraq for Iraqis and should be for outsiders as well should vindicate the legitimacy of the war and the morality of the war. If anything, the war came in too late to save so many

victims of Saddam Hussein who should have been saved early and all. Dr. Saleh, I don't know if you were able to hear, but just moments ago, David Brooks, who's a regular commentator on this program, cited a number of Republicans who he said originally supported President Bush and supported this war, are now in his words beginning to say it is irreparably lost. And he went on to say you hear them talk in terms of hopelessness almost. What do you say to those politicians and other leaders in the United States who were with this war from the beginning, but who are now beginning to lose confidence that it is going to turn out the way they originally saw. Really having arrived in Washington few days back, the tone of the debate is somewhat disparity and I have to admit to that here in Washington. I don't want to get involved in domestic politics in the United States. This is American democracy and it will debate these issues, but I can tell you how we feel about the situation in Iraq, from back that perspective.

And deniably, the situation is tough, the transition is difficult. It's not only that we're dealing with Iraq on its own and the Iraqi issues on their own. We're dealing with international terrorism, we're dealing with regional cross-currents that make in transition difficult for us, but their East progress and Iraqis have not given up hope on the country. Iraqis remain committed to making this democracy work, but we have to understand that building democracy in the heart of the Middle East is not an easy option and there are no quick fixes. I have met with the number of members of Congress and I made the point at the following point to them. I think we are talking about upheaval across the region. We are talking about the sea change across the region, manifested in this radicalization of Muslim societies and Islamic groups that are confronting by the way, not only the West, confronting a reformist agenda of the Middle East. This is a threat that we have to deal with as Middle Easterners, as Muslims, as Iraqis, as well as the civilized community of nations and it will take time and we need to take the long-term view. Iraqis are

adamant that we must build and complete this mission of building a democracy. In Iraq, we can do it. We must do it. Success is possible but difficult. Many challenges are out there but we determine to when failure is not an option and I think those who think it is a rapidly lost, they lose sight of the many, many important developments. When we assume sovereignty in June 2004, our forces were at a minimal level. Today, we have nearly 300,000 Iraqis underarm for both in the military and in the police services. By the end of this year, we will be having more than half of Iraqi provinces under direct Iraqi security control. There is progress taken place but admittedly, we are doing so while we are battling this lethal threat from al-Qaeda and the former regime loyalists and also the sectarian killing but we are adamant and we are determined to deal with it and we will deal with it. We are clearly dealing with a lot so to those who would say that your

original supporters who would now say radical changes need to be made, serious consideration needs to be given to redeploying U.S. forces, you say what? I do say we need to take stocks of the reality of Iraq and we need to evaluate tactics and strategy and deniably so this is a complex situation and I cannot say that things should stay as it is now. I mean, we are engaged inside the Iraqi government, inside the Iraqi political leadership to assess in the situation, I would say on a continuous basis and we do so with the United States as well and we definitely need to change tactics here and there but the fundamental of the mission of helping Iraqis build the first functioning democracy in the heart of the Middle East is not only where the mission it is an necessity to change the dynamics of the Middle East and if anyone who thinks that this will be easy they will be wrong and their expectations will not be realized what I'm trying to tell you is that this is a mission that will be difficult to attain but it is possible to do so and we must achieve achieve it for the sake not only of Iraqis but for the sake of the region and the world at

large and one other political question in your own country the legislation to turn Iraq into a federation into three autonomous regions this week the Speaker of the Iraqi Parliament pronounced this legislation dead. Do you agree with him? Is this is there going to be progress on that front? There is an active debate inside the Iraqi Parliament and this is important that you point to this issue this is one of the major issues debated by Iraqis it will define the character of the Iraqi state politics is breaking out in Iraq as a result of liberation Iraqis have different views about this thing but at the end of the day we will come to a national pact that will hopefully most Iraqis will accept I cannot tell you what the outcome of these negotiations and these debates will be it is definitely not that it is still an ongoing debate but certainly last week it will see the setback with a number of deputies signing against the signing a motion against the federation proposal proposed by the Shia majority party in parliament but the debate goes on and this is Iraqi

democracy some people want to point to this as a sign of divisions inside Iraq I want to celebrate it as a sign of healthy political debate that comes with any democracy. We certainly have debate in this country Dr. Barham Saleh deputy prime minister of Iraq thank you very much for being with us thank you for having me and finally tonight the big changes at Ford Motor Company Ray Suarez has our story it's the end of the line for tens of thousands of Ford workers executives at the nation's number two automaker announced they were slashing a third of the company's salary jobs that's an addition to offering buyouts to all of its 75,000 hourly workers it's part of the latest plan to turn the ailing company around according to Ford's president of the Americas Mark Fields who spoke at a morning teleconference the simple fact is that the business model

that serves us in North America for decades no longer works we must change to a new business model that delivers greater bottom line contributions from cars and crossovers continued leadership and pickups new products that drive revenue and actions that move rapidly to reduce our cost to achieve profitability. Fields also confirmed Ford would idle two more plants one in Ohio another in Canada for a total of 16 plant closures by 2008 it's the second time since January before it is moved to reduce its workforce scale back production and ramp up new products all is part of it so called way forward plan to return North American operations to profit just last week bill Ford stepped down as CEO and was succeeded by former Boeing executive Alan Malali Ford remains chairman of the company which lost 1.44 billion dollars during the first half of

this year the new cuts at Ford would reduce its total North American workforce by 29% from the current level of about 130,000 to about 92,000 by the end of 2008 the shake-up has left employees rattled. Under the terms of the voluntary buyout plan which the United Auto Workers Union agreed to yesterday workers will choose options that pay them between 35 and 140,000 dollars to leave the company those who opt for the more generous packages would have to give up their health benefits Dearborn michigan Ford plant employee Brent or has worked for the company for 12 years I'm probably going to take a buyout one of the buyouts that they're often just because they've redlined our trade no more carpet will ever be hired at Ford Motor Company ever again Ford like other American automakers has been battered by the car markets rapid shift from Ford staple trucks and sport utility vehicles to more fuel efficient foreign cars as gas prices have

soared earlier this year number one automaker general motors offered buyouts to its hourly staff and about one in three or thirty four thousand took the company up on the deal for more on what the Ford move means for the company its workers and michigan I'm joined by Rebecca Lindland associate director of the automotive group at global insight and economic research firm in Boston Ron Lair started on the assembly line at Ford nearly 30 years ago he's now a skilled tradesperson at the Dearborn michigan plant he's a member of the United Auto Workers but does not speak for the union and Chaba Cheta is editor in chief of car and driver magazine both Ford and the UAW declined our requests for interviews Rebecca Lindland you heard the Ford executive the business model that they used for decades no longer works is this new one the way forward what the company needs well most of it is what it needs you the the presentation this

morning addressed production cuts which they certainly need to do it also addressed the workforce where cutting costs is really is another big aspect of big of turning around the company the third part that still needs a lot of work in our opinion is on the product side and even though they talk about it being a product lead turnaround we still don't see those new and exciting models that really resonate with Ford heritage Chaba Cheta is a product lead turnaround going to be difficult for Ford well it's going to be very difficult because part of that business model was for Ford to put all of its eggs in the truck basket and that worked spectacularly well in the 90s but it stopped working in this millennium as other competitors went into the truck business as Ford continued to neglect cars and finally as gas prices went up it's really taken the amount of all segments and to really get back into the truck business and to build up a crossover

business almost from scratch is going to take some time although it's getting started already because there are two new crossovers about to be introduced in November well I was just going to ask you whether the company brings any market advantages or some strength in certain segments that will allow them to keep selling while they retool the company well Ford has done very well with SUVs over the years crossovers there are a form of SUV there simply an SUV that's built on a car platform not a truck platform so Ford knows a lot of those customers it has some connection there but then again you know these are new new name plates and getting them going in a market that has a lot of it crossovers out there already it's not trivial they're good products but they're not automatically going to take the market by storm run layer what kind of work do you do for Ford I'm a skilled tradesperson tool and die maker at the Ford Rouge plant and what does a tool and die maker do tool and die maker makes or maintains machines that stamp metal parts

and will Ford no longer need people like you when they offer a buyout to all 75,000 production workers how do they make sure they still have who they need well I think that's a very good question I think they are going to get more rid of more people than they can afford to I think the UAW members are their best resource and I think they're cutting back more than they need to and certainly I think this is the fault of bad management not the fault of the workers well what goes into your decision of whether or not to take the buyout what do you have to consider before you know whether you can take Ford up on the offer well there's some personal considerations I'm 59 years old but I have a young daughter I'd like to spend more time with her on the other hand I need to save for her education and I'd also like to stay in the fight to make the UAW stronger

because we're going to need that to be a fighting union again to have you had a chance to talk with fellow workers especially those in your boat who might have thought of themselves as a little too young to retire but kind of old to start over on a work career well yes I have and there's a very wide range of views from people some people are trying to recover from the news itself although it wasn't totally unexpected many are angry at Ford management and others say that the UAW and others like myself say that the UAW needs to organize the transplant facilities in the U.S. from other auto companies around the world and we can do that only with some changes in the UAW Rebecca Lindland a lot of guys and women like Ron Lehrer have lost their jobs working for the

big three over the last decade yet they're a foreign plants popping up all over the country why don't those workers get those new jobs well because they're non-union jobs as Mr. Larry Furch who the transplant new factories which are primarily moving into the south are non-union plants they tend to pay significantly less sometimes or in fact their health benefits are really the big difference that you'll see at a transplant location so and we talk about transplants basically the imports like Honda Toyota Nissan Kia Hyundai building plants here in the U.S. so but those plants are non-union and so even middle-aged workers workers still in their 30s and 40s if they were willing to relocate could they vie for jobs in Kentucky Alabama South Carolina some of the states where those new plants have gone you know Mr. Larry would actually probably be a better person

to answer that I'm not sure if the union prohibits you from taking a job with a non-union facility does it Mr. Larry? Ron Larry? Well one one would have to leave the company one is that now and give up a lot of seniorities so that would be a very risky proposition. Chobacheta for younger workers maybe yeah yeah especially if you're not in line for a lot of money the way the buyout plan has been structured it might look like more of a proposition for you Chobacheta this must be hitting Michigan hard. Well it's hitting Michigan extremely hard the state already has the highest unemployment rate in the country a lot of that unemployment is concentrated around the Detroit area and ultimately Detroit is still a company town and the company is the domestic auto industry and all three companies are hurting to greater or lesser extent there have already been a large number of layoffs both blue collar and white collar there is a large number of layoffs already scheduled that haven't even happened at General Motors and now Ford is bringing this

forward and it's extremely hard on southeastern Michigan and is there no compensating inflow of new manufacturing or investment that will soak up some of this this workforce not terribly much really part of the problem is that for an awful lot of the manufacturing in the United States it is going non-union and this is a very strongly union area of the country and there isn't really that much moving in here I believe in the last census Michigan actually didn't gain much population in the last five years that they looked at the state is losing people and it's because these jobs are going away. Well Ron Lair what's out there for you if you decide that the buyout package especially is a very senior worker is worth it for you. Well I'm in a much better situation than the young workers they're the ones who are really going to bear the brunt of this I may get an early retirement package but I'd like to respond to something another speaker said which is

talking about jobs going away I think that most of the jobs that have been lost the large majority if not virtually all of the jobs that have been lost in the US from the auto companies in fact are still inside the US in non-union or in union parts shops but at a lower pay they've left the big three they're still in the US the UAW needs to fight harder to get representation for all auto workers that means everybody that makes something that goes on a car wherever they are in the US and we need solidarity with Ford workers around the world we do have some leverage for it is profitable worldwide I think we need to get together with auto workers in other countries with joint contract expiration dates and joint strike deadlines. Rebecca Lindlin does that sound like a future that companies that manufacturers are willing to buy into the one just spelled out by Ron Lair.

Well I think that when you look at where new plants are going in your key I just put their announced Georgia Hyundai's put their plant in Alabama the new Nissan plant in Mississippi you're talking about a workforce that has not even had a job opportunity in a long time and so to unionize and cause that kind of disruption would really just push these plants someplace else potentially because there's a lot of state funding that goes into bringing these plants there and so if you can get your workforce to say you know we're not going to unionize especially if you bring this plant here unions are very controversial in this day where there's very few of them left and there's pros and cons to them quite frankly and so I think that that for a state to lure a plant to its location in some ways it needs to sometimes ensure that a workforce is not going to be unionized and you're not going to be faced with high cost of employment and high

benefits. Well Chubb at Chubb the union is often faulted for raising the base cost of an American-made vehicle with Ford is that where the fault lies and contribute to the company's problems? Well it's only a small part of the problem there's no question that the unionized workforce does cost more than the non-union workforce but when you look at the differences that people are willing to pay for some of the Ford products versus some of the more competitive imports that difference is much bigger than the cost difference imposed by the union and what that says is it's the wrong product for the market right now. The correct product would more than offset the union problem and you can't blame the factory workers for building the wrong cars because management is designed and engineered the wrong cars. Ford plans to finish this transition by the 2008-2009 model year guests thank you all. Again the other major developments of this day President Bush insisted the Senate agree to give

interrogators more leeway with terrorist suspects he spoke at a White House news conference. Ohio Congressman Bob Nay agreed to plead guilty to conspiracy and making false statements in a corruption probe and the Food and Drug Administration warned people not to eat bagged spinach after an outbreak of E. coli bacteria spread to 20 states. Washington Week can be seen later this evening on most PBS stations we'll see you online and again here Monday evening have a nice weekend I'm Jim Lara thank you and good night. Major funding for the news hour with Jim Lara is provided by in navigating towards retirement there are many courses you can take and Pacific life can help you reach your goals with over 135 years of experience Pacific life offers a wide range of financial solutions approach the future with confidence

Pacific life the power to help you succeed and by BP the Archer Daniels Midland Company CIT the Atlantic philanthropies and with the continuing support of these institutions and foundations and this program was made possible by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and by contributions to your PBS station from viewers like you to purchase video cassettes of the news hour with Jim Lara call one eight six six six seven eight news

we are PBS you

Good evening, I'm Jim Lara. On the news hour tonight, the news of this Friday, excerpts from the President's tough words today about dealing with detainees, followed by the analysis of Mark Shields and David Brooks. Then the week of violence in Iraq, as seen by the Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister, Barham Saleh, and a look at the plan to save the Ford Motor Company. Major funding for the news hour with Jim Lara is provided by. Somewhere west of Topeka, someone's

getting out for a breath of fresh air, which is why a farmer is harvesting corn, and why a train is transporting corn, and why ADM is turning corn into ethanol, a renewable, cleaner burning fuel. Somewhere west of Topeka, someone's getting out for a breath of fresh air, and lots of us are helping make sure that fresh air is actually fresh. ADM, resourceful by nature. At CIT, we provide the financing to keep health care strong and healthy. We help energy companies find new resources. We work with communications companies to make the world smaller and life bigger. We offer financial aid to make college possible for more students. At CIT, we help finance the future, because that's the place to be. We see it with CIT. And by Pacific Life, BP, the Atlantic Philanthropies, and with the continuing subs of the institutions and foundations.

And this program was made possible by the CIT.