The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer

MARGARET WARNER: Good evening. I'm Margaret Warner. Jim Lehrer has the day off. On the NewsHour tonight, a summary of today's news, a report from the Middle East on more killings from both sides, a conversation with the mother of the alleged 20th hijacker, a progress report on airline luggage screening, analysis by Mark Shields and David Brooks, and an end to this year's U.S. dreams in World Cup soccer.

NEWS SUMMARY

MARGARET WARNER: The FBI issued a new terrorism warning today, this one involving fuel tankers. The alert, which went to local police nationwide, said terrorists may use fuel trucks to attack Jewish neighborhoods, schools, or synagogues. Wire service reports said it was based on uncorroborated information from al-Qaida and Taliban detainees. There was nothing specific on place or time. At the White House today, leaders of several major unions offered to help with homeland security. Teamsters head James Hoffa, Jr., said truckers would watch for anything suspicious.

JAMES HOFFA, JR.: I offered the fact that we have 500,000 truck drivers on the road at any one time. And these people can be the eyes and ears of the Homeland Security Office. They are in secure buildings. We have 250,000 UPS workers. They're out in the community. And as the eyes and ears, they can report what they see.

MARGARET WARNER: The head of the Seafarers Union made a similar offer to keep watch at sea and in U.S. ports. Israeli tank fire killed four Palestinian civilians in the West Bank town of Jenin. Hospital officials said three of the dead were children. The Israeli army said the action was a mistake. Later, Jewish settlers opened fire in a West Bank neighborhood, killing a Palestinian man. Last night, a Palestinian raid had killed five settlers. We'll have more on all this in a moment. A fast-moving wildfire in eastern Arizona has grown to 120,000 acres, double the size it was yesterday. The blaze now threatens at least two towns northeast of Phoenix, and up to 8,000 people have fled their homes. The giant fire has already destroyed at least a dozen homes. Officials say it threatens to grow even more dramatically, with temperatures in the 90s, and winds gusting up to 45 miles-an-hour. A federal grand jury in Pennsylvania today indicted four current and former executives of Rite Aid, the nation's third largest drugstore chain. They are accused of conspiracy to defraud investors with a scheme to manipulate earnings, as well as lying to regulators and witness tampering. Indicted were the company's former chairman, vice chairman, and chief financial officer, and a current vice president. After discovering accounting irregularities two years ago, the company's new management revised Rite Aid's earnings downward by $1.6 billion, the most in U.S. History. Germany knocked the United States out of the World Cup soccer tournament in South Korea today. The Germans won the quarterfinal match 1-0. The Americans took more shots, but twice the German goalie made diving saves. Still, it was the best performance by a U.S. men's squad at the World Cup in 72 years. We'll have more on this later in the program. Also coming, more killings in the Middle East, Moussaoui's mother, screening airline bags, and Shields and Brooks.

FOCUS - CONTINUING VIOLENCE

MARGARET WARNER: Gaby Rado of Independent Television News has our MidEast report.

GABY RADO: Inhabitants of Jenin ventured out of doors believing the curfew imposed by the Israeli occupiers had been lifted for the day. It appears to have been a fatal mistake. (Gunfire) In the mayhem which follows, four Palestinians, including a six-year-old boy and a seven- year-old girl, are killed. Dozens are wounded. The cause of the terrible misunderstanding may never be unraveled. The Israelis have apologized, saying their soldiers appear to have fired in error. The inhabitants say they'd been told the three-day curfew had been lifted. One of the most harrowing incidents happened late last night near Nablus on the West Bank. The house burning is that of the Zabo family. A Palestinian terrorist infiltrated the Jewish settlement of Itamar where they lived and shot dead five people. They barricaded themselves in the house and an hour-long gunfight took place. At the end of it, a 40-year-old mother, her three sons aged fifteen, twelve, and five, and a male neighbor have been found dead. The gunman was also killed. Their funerals took place today, friends and family having rushed to Itamar from all parts of Israel. Their death has sprung to 30 the number of Israelis killed in terrorist incidents since Tuesday. Like these mourners, the nation is numbed by sorrow and bewilderment. Their government has attempted to crush Palestinian militancy, heavy weapons and military rule with no apparent lessening of the violence. When we tried to reach Itamar this afternoon, we were not allowed through by Israeli security forces, but we did meet the twin brother of the man whose wife and children died. He had just attended their funeral.

GABY RADO: Do you think the wall which is being built between the occupied territories and Israel will help to save people like your family?

MAN: No, no. No, the Palestinians want to kill us, everything. Everything doesn't work.

GABY RADO: Do you know what the answer is?

MAN: No.

GABY RADO: As if to confirm his pessimism, nearby we encountered a group of Israeli soldiers attempting to keep alive a Palestinian who'd been shot in the chest. Young Jewish settlers tried to prevent us filming the incident. The roadside first aid attempt was a losing battle, and within minutes, the man died. The woman mourning for his death in the ambulance was apparently on her way to hospital. We were told the man, 21-year- old Adnan Idris Abdul Hamed, had been shot in the chest at his home a mile or so away by Jewish settlers. When we found his home, a group of mourners had already gathered to comfort his family. He had apparently been shot after he fled to the roof of his house as settlers threw stones and burned two cars.

MAN: We were here inside. Of course he had begun to throw stones and soldiers, soldiers began to throw on him. Then they saw that they are not affecting anyone, so began to shout-- began to shoot on him and on the house and everything.

GABY RADO: The women of the Palestinian village wailed outside. Everyone was convinced Jewish settlers, angered by the deaths of the five people in Itamar just a few miles away, had come here to exact revenge.

CONVERSATION

MARGARET WARNER: Now an interview with Aicha el-Wafi, the more of Zacarias Moussaoui, the alleged 20th hijacker. A French citizen of Moroccan descent, Mrs. el-Wafi was in the court last week when a federal judge ruled Moussaoui was mentally competent to represent himself on four capital charges of conspiracy in the September 11 attacks. Moussaoui fired his court-appointed lawyers and refused to meet with the Arab-American lawyer his mother had hired for him. Last week's court hearing was the first time Mrs. el-Wafi had seen her son in five years. Since then she has visited him in prison four times, each visit monitored by the FBI. Moussaoui's trial is expected to get under way in the Fall. I talked with Aicha el-Wafi earlier this afternoon short whether I before she left Washington to return to her home in southern France. She was joined by her translator Thomas Johnson.

MARGARET WARNER: Welcome, Mrs. el-Wafi. Are you surprised to find your son in in this situation, accused of plotting to murder Americans?

AICHA EL-WAFI: No. No. (Translated) My son, you can't say that he killed anyone in America. My son told me and he only says the truth to me, that he has nothing to do with the events of September and he has not killed anyone in the United States.

MARGARET WARNER: You told an interviewer in France - Argents France Press -- that you thought he was a scapegoat. What did you mean?

AICHA EL-WAFI (Translated): To all Americans, the first thing I want to say is that I am very touched and my pain is enormous for all the people who have died in -- during the 11th of September. I feel this pain very deeply because my son is also in this story and now he is in prison so I know the pain they are all feeling. So I'm very sorry to say that, but it seems to me that he has been turned into a scapegoat because it's as if America needs someone who is responsible. And I can say that because it seems that they have very little facts in their hands, they have very little things against him and they probably accuse him. He was arrested. He is an Arab. He was taking flight lessons, and they-- it seems to be enough for him to hold this role.

MARGARET WARNER: You've now had times to meet with him several times this week. Did he tell you for example, why he was taking flight lessons to learn how to fly the big jumbo jets?

AICHA EL-WAFI (Translated): I didn't go into that detail with him and he didn't talk about why he was flying or learning supposedly to learn to fly jumbo jets. No, what is enough for me is when he, my son, says to me, I didn't participate. I was nothing in that story. I believe him. He said please, I'm telling you the truth, Mother. And now I'm asking the American justice and the American government to, if they want-- if they say he is responsible for it, they have to prove it fact after fact, one by one. If they have to condemn him to death, it must be proof to all that.

MARGARET WARNER: What can you tell bus your conversations with him?

AICHA EL-WAFI (Translated): He told me that he loved me and that when in these hard times he is thinking of God of course and he, God will help him to get through these very long and suffering days, days full of suffering and that he continues to say that he is nothing in the story.

MARGARET WARNER: Now that you've had a chance to talk to him, do you think he is doing the right thing, insisting on representing himself in this trial?

AICHA EL-WAFI (Translated): No, this is the great mistake. Even the judge that has accepted this has done a very big mistake -- because even for the lawyers, it is very hard to work on this case. And my son, he is well educated, but he doesn't know the American law, and he doesn't have all the tools that are necessary to do this.

MARGARET WARNER: So why do you think he is insisting on doing this?

AICHA EL-WAFI (Translated): I think it's because he has been shut up and closed away from the world for the past nine months, that he doesn't eat well. He is not sleeping well. He has light above his head 24 hours a day. He doesn't see anyone. And they give him the information that the other side wants to give him and not more. And so I think that even the declaration he gave in April that was very harmful to him, it's because he was in a very bad situation. He couldn't pull himself together. And he is like an animal, trapped like an animal. Who wouldn't break down when they don't eat, they don't sleep they don't see anyone and they are kept in such conditions?

MARGARET WARNER: The lawyers that the government had hired for him, who have now been fired, said they thought his conspiracy theory, his insisting on representing himself showed that he was disturbed; that he was mentally not capable of doing-- of being able to represent himself. Do you think your son is sane, is mentally competent?

AICHA EL-WAFI (Translated): He has been closed in, and he doesn't see reality as it is anymore. He doesn't see reality as you and I.

MARGARET WARNER: Do you think he wants to, at the trial, really defend himself, or use it as a platform for his radical views as he did at the hearing in April?

AICHA EL-WAFI (Translated): I don't see how he is going to expose anything. If he continues like that, he is going straight in the wall. I'm sorry to say this, but he is not going to be able to defend himself and I feel that the government will just make this trial happen as quickly as possible and it is going to happen very quickly, and it is all going to go like lightning and he won't be able to defend himself at all and the truth will not be said. I want a real trial. And the lawyers that are working-- who worked for him and are still working for him now did a very good job and are still doing a very good job.

MARGARET WARNER: So you think that the lawyers that in fact the government appointed, whom he didn't trust, that they were good lawyers?

AICHA EL-WAFI (Translated): I think they are very good lawyers and all of what I have seen of the work they have been doing is incredibly good. I don't understand why my son is saying that they are so bad lawyers, that they're not doing their job. If he is saying that, it is because he is receiving very bad information about them and that people are giving him information, wrong information to make him think like that.

MARGARET WARNER: He has expressed a violent hatred of the United States. And at that hearing in April, as you mentioned, he prayed to Allah, he said for the destruction of the United States of America, for the destruction of the Jewish people and state. Where did that hatred come from?

AICHA EL-WAFI (Translated): The suffering. I think the suffering is very important and the suffering has-- and when you suffer as much as that, you say many things that are just completely wrong and out of your head. And there's anger, too. He has deep anger in him. And I know him. I know him well and I know where he has this anger, he is able to say things like this, but I don't believe, of course, in this. I believe in one God and God has taught us love, whether we are Jew, Muslim or Christian.

MARGARET WARNER: He also described himself as a slave to Allah. Now was that the kind of religious upbringing he had in your family, that kind of intense Islamic view of himself?

AICHA EL-WAFI (Translated): No, madam. But in Islamic, when you talk among-- between ourselves, we are all slaves of Allah -- slaves of God. God made us. It's not slave with blind eyes, of course. We are slaves in a good way, in with good meaning. I brought him up without these-- without all these religious beliefs. I brought him up in a republican way. And I didn't teach them the differences between races and one race is better than the other and one religion is better than the other and one color is better than the other. That's not what I taught at all. And all the people who work with me for 35 years in France, they could even witness and tell you that I've brought up my sons and my children in-- with love. And I haven't taught them these fascist and racist ideas.

MARGARET WARNER: Why do you think your son has now embraced a more radical form of Islam?

AICHA EL-WAFI (Translated): Maybe there are two factors that have paved the road: Racism in France and because of racism he really wasn't able to do the studies he wanted. He was rejected by the system. And the lack of father can be another reason, and maybe because of these two things he found people in Islam that knew how to use these feeble parts of him and drag him into things that he didn't really want to do.

MARGARET WARNER: Madam el-Wafi, thank you.

FOCUS - CHECKING BAGS

MARGARET WARNER: Still to come on the NewsHour tonight, the new meaning to having your luggage checked, Shields and Brooks, and America loses at the World Cup. Tom Bearden has the airport story.

TOM BEARDEN: Coming soon to an airport near you, equipment designed to look for bombs in every one of the more than one billion pieces of luggage that go through the U.S. commercial aviation system every year. The Aviation Security Act, passed last November, requires that the new Transportation Security Administration equip each of the nation's 429 airports with some sort of explosive-detection system by December 31. But the people who actually run the airports say the deadline is completely unrealistic. Ben de Costa runs the world's busiest airport, Atlanta's Hartsfield.

BENJAMIN R. DeCOSTA: Many of us believe that we ought to do it right the first time, and that the deadline should be shifted to give the T.S.A. A fair chance to do what we know they can do.

TOM BEARDEN: De Costa was one of 2,400 people who attended the annual meeting of the American Association of Airport Executives in Dallas, in May. Many of those attending said there just isn't enough time to install a system that will actually work. Jeff Fegan is CEO at the Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport.

JEFFREY P. FEGAN, CEO, Dallas/Fort Worth Airport: Many airports have such extreme challenges that they see no way in the world that they can meet January 1.

TOM BEARDEN: It's a complicated problem. Initially, the Transportation Security Administration, created after 9/11 to federalize aviation security, wanted to use about 2,000 machines like this one, called EDS, or explosive detection systems. They are mini-van sized x-ray devices similar to hospital cat- scanners. They're heavy, up to 17,000 pounds, and expensive, $1 million apiece. They're also fast and highly automated. But the manufacturers said they can only make about half of the machines the TSA wanted by the deadline. So the agency decided to order just 1,100 EDS machines and supplement them with about 5,000 much smaller devices called ETD's, or explosive trace detectors. An operator uses a cloth to swab the bags, and the machine can detect small amounts of explosive compounds. ETD's are smaller and cheaper, about $40,000 per copy, but they're also much slower and, some say, less effective. The manufacturers say they can do the job if used correctly, but the Federal Aviation Administration hasn't officially certified them as being equivalent to EDS machines. And both devices present airports with serious challenges to accommodate them.

JEFFREY P. FEGAN: The plan is not very firm right now, that many of these teams are now just getting to the airports to talk about what might have to happen from a physical standpoint. And you know, in the absence of knowing, you know, precisely, it does raise some questions about whether or not you have enough resources, enough manpower, enough equipment, and enough in the budget to accommodate all the airports' needs.

TOM BEARDEN: DFW's Fegan says ideally, they put the EDS machines into the conveyor belt systems behind the scenes. But that would mean reconstructing the whole area, and there isn't enough time for that. So they may have to go in the ticketing area of DFW's narrow, horseshoe-shaped terminals, where the trace detectors are also supposed to go. DFW has also been exploring unusual options, like putting EDS machines into the train stations that serve the airport's people-moving system. Wherever they go, the floors may have to be reinforced to hold their weight. At Houston's Bush Intercontinental Airport, the director of security, Mark Mancuso, says the space problems will impact passengers.

MARK MANCUSO, Deputy Director, Houston Airport System: If we put the trace-detection equipment, which are the small boxes, inside the terminal, we've estimated that it's probably going to take one piece of equipment for each two airline-ticketing positions and the associated tables and personnel to insure cross contamination doesn't occur. So you have two four-foot tables, the footprint of the equipment itself, the operators, and some working room within which they need to function. By the time we get finished, we may not have a place for the passengers to go.

TOM BEARDEN: At Seattle-Tacoma Airport, the managing director, Gina Maria Lindsay, predicts a nightmare.

GINA MARIA LINDSEY, Managing Director, Seattle-Tacoma Airport: Picture your own house, your own home, and all of a sudden, if you had to put in 30 washing machines in your house and still have your family function, that doesn't work. Most people don't have a house that's that big. Even if it that be done by year end, I'm afraid there's a huge impact on passenger processing.

TOM BEARDEN: Out the door?

GINA MARIA LINDSEY: Out the door, definitely. Or lined up across the bridges that go into the parking garage.

TOM BEARDEN: In the Seattle rain?

GINA MARIA LINDSEY: In the Seattle rain. It's lovely.

TOM BEARDEN: With problems like that, it's not surprising that airport executives turned out in large numbers to hear John Magaw, the head of the TSA, speak at their convention.

JOHN MAGAW, Transportation Security Administration: I understand your frustration as we move forward.

TOM BEARDEN: Magaw says the deadline can be met, and points to the experience of Salt Lake City, which was able to get a full bag-screening system up and running, with both types of equipment in time for the Olympics.

JOHN MAGAW: Well, there is a concern in airports, Dulles is another one. If you think of the lobby at Dulles Airport, or the one at DFW, those are very restricted lobbies, and how can we work that and get those in? Is there a build-on that can take place to the side or that lobby or the front of that lobby? Can we do it in an adjoining area and then being them into a secure area? All those have to be looked at, and we are going to be looking at them with each of the airport managers. That's their home. They know best what can be done there with the idea and the plan in mind.

TOM BEARDEN: Representative James Oberstar is the ranking Democrat on the House Transportation Committee. He says he's not inclined to change the deadline, giving past delays in implementing aviation security improvements.

REP. JAMES OBERSTAR, (D) Minnesota: I will not be tolerant of excuses now. We need relief today from these deadlines. Keep working at it. Put your best effort forward and then do even more because we're not going to tolerate this kind of loss of life again.

TOM BEARDEN: Complicating all this is the fact that the TSA doesn't yet know what combination of equipment will do the job.

SPOKESMAN: I'm going to close this back up for just a moment. I'm going to do my analysis.

TOM BEARDEN: They're testing a trace-only system at the Norfolk Airport, which may become the model for smaller airports that don't have the traffic volume to justify the million-dollar-per- copy EDS machines. Other airports are testing 100% EDS, and still others, a combination of the two. The results will help the agency decide what mix of equipment each airport will ultimately use. Until the decision is made, construction plans cannot proceed. The tests will also yield other critical information, such as how long, on average, it will take to check a bag. That depends on whether the user decides to swab just the exterior, or the interior as well. There are no public figures, but privately the agency has been telling members of Congress for optimum results it might have to open up as many as half of all bags, increasing delays and raising privacy concerns. At a congressional hearing, Senator Patty Murray, who heads the Senate Aviation subcommittee that votes on the Department Of Transportation's budget, raised those concerns with Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta.

SEN. PATTY MURRAY, (D) Washington: I don't believe we can expect passengers to accept the notion that their bags are going to be opened in the middle of the terminal for all other passengers to see while they're waiting in line to get their boarding pass.

NORMAN MINETA: The open-bag environment does not mean a dumping of the bag, because all you have to do is take that swab and put it around...

SEN. PATTY MURRAY: But the bag will be open?

NORMAN MINETA: It will be open. Now, it will not... they can go to a secure area behind a privacy panel.

SEN. PATTY MURRAY: Are we providing for those secure areas at airports?

NORMAN MINETA: We are. Or we will take them to a private room, if that's what they prefer.

SEN. PATTY MURRAY: Are those private rooms available now in airports? Will we have that provided for at all airports by the end of the year, when these trace detection systems will be in place?

NORMAN MINETA: I would hope there will be some kind of facility.

TOM BEARDEN: Many of the same legislators who worry about privacy and deadlines have been shocked at how much meeting these needs might cost. Congress is appropriating some money for the changes, but airports contend it's not enough. The TSA also wants more money. The agency says it needs about 67,000 employees, twice its original estimate. The agency ran into opposition recently, when it returned to Capitol Hill to seek another $4.4 billion for the rest of this year. Harold Rogers chairs the House Subcommittee that voted on the agency's budget.

REP. HAROLD ROGERS, (R) Kentucky: They have requested 3,400 shoe and bin runners. When you take your shoes off to check for weapons in your shoes or your feet, these would be the people that would carry your shoes back to you, assumedly. They're requesting 1,430 ticket checkers. That's what airlines are supposed to do, in my opinion. They're asking for 4,200 hand-wanders, which I think the newer magnetometers would obviate the need for -- most of them. They're asking for what's called queue coordinators, some 1,400 queue coordinators. These are the people that would be sure the lines are moving in a nice way. They're asking for 1,400 customer-service representatives to patrol the lines to make sure people are happy. Well, I thought the airlines were in that business.

TOM BEARDEN: Magaw says his agency's mission is bigger than originally envisioned when the law was passed, and more complex as well.

JOHN MAGAW: In the law, Congress said, "you now must do baggage." Well, there wasn't anybody doing baggage before, so that adds almost a double amount. So that's where you very quickly get to the 51,000 to 53,000 right there. Now then, you've got people at each of the 429 airports, and a staff there. They're saying, "you need a law enforcement person behind each one of the checkpoints." So that adds to the number. The Federal Air Marshall program is vastly increased. That adds to the number. So very quickly that number rises.

TOM BEARDEN: Many airport operators fear that whatever system goes into place by December will have to be heavily revised later as the kinks are worked out, at a further cost of millions of dollars.

BENJAMIN R. DeCOSTA, Manager, Hartsfield Atlanta Airport: What we ought to do is all get behind them and give them a chance to do it right, and move the damn deadline.

TOM BEARDEN: Recently, 39 airport executives, whose airports handle the majority of passenger traffic in the U.S., asked Secretary Mineta to seek a new deadline from Congress. He told them, "The law is the law," and he has no intention of trying to changing the deadline. The airports and the TSA have less then seven months to work out a solution.

FOCUS - POLITICAL WRAP

MARGARET WARNER: And now to analysis from Shields and Brooks; they're with Terence Smith.

TERENCE SMITH: That's syndicated columnist Mark Shields and David Brooks of the "Weekly Standard." Gentlemen, welcome.

I'm going to start with a little truth in advertising here by quoting you right back to yourselves. David Brooks, six weeks ago you said on this broadcasted that Don Rumsfeld and the White House had no better than a 50-50 chance of killing the Crusader artillery weapons system. And yet this week it died, at least as originally conceived. Do you want to revise and extend your remarks?

DAVID BROOKS: Well, 50-50, that was an act of courage on my part. Profiles in courage - I think only time will tell whether I was right about that. It did seem to be in trouble because it had a strong constituency in Oklahoma, some power members of Congress who wanted to defend it.

TERENCE SMITH: You mean, the administration seemed it was in trouble trying to kill it.

DAVID BROOKS: It did seem - a couple of things happened: One, it is tough to go up against the President in times of war. It is also-- you got sort of a feeding frenzy. And then have you this intellectual shift where it seemed like were you a knuckle dragger if you were for a Howitzer, when you should be for some smart system. So the Senate felt like, well, the modern thing to do would be faction forward to be for a system. Then there was sort of a tipping pointed where everybody starting fighting over the spoils, when the money was taken out of the Crusader system, where does it go, and so the body was sort of kept on life support so people could fight over the organs. And then, by then it was finished.

TERENCE SMITH: And it was finished. Mark, quoting you to you, you said the administration had overreached and would have "a real problem getting its way on this one."

MARK SHIELDS: Well, Terry, you dare to ask that of a man who predicted that President John McCain elected in 2000 would not seek a second term. If you are going to get into corrections and amplifications where we've made mistakes, we are going to need a longer segment on your show.

TERENCE SMITH: We'll be here all night. What do you think happened?

MARK SHIELDS: I think what happened was that when the President of the United States, David is right, as commander in chief is at 75%, and the grumbling and the mumbling in the ranks is strong -- if George W. Bush ever comes down to 52% or 53%, there will be rather than a simmering revolt, there will be an open revolt because they weren't consulted. The members of the delegation, Oklahoma, 27 states had a piece of this. But they were not enough, the delegations, to stop it and Don Rumsfeld made it a test of his own leadership and strength. But I'll tell you, the relations with Republicans on the Hill and the Hill on general are not good.

TERENCE SMITH: So you stand corrected but with an explanation.

MARK SHIELDS: I stand corrected and humbled.

TERENCE SMITH: Yes.

DAVID BROOKS: I didn't seethe humility though.

TERENCE SMITH: It's in there somewhere, very hard to see. Another subject: This week the Federal Election Commission spent two days writing the rules for the campaign finance law known as McCain/Feingold and defining how it would be interpreted. The authors immediately cried foul and said all kinds of loopholes were being written into the law. Were they?

DAVID BROOKS: If you wanted to get around the law, what the FEC did was give you the road signs, the detour signs to get around the law. So in that extent they did. What the FEC decided to do was to allow soft money in certain instances.

TERENCE SMITH: Soft money being...

DAVID BROOKS: The unregulated cash that doesn't go to candidates and is not regulated -- you don't have to report it; you don't adhere to limits, the $2,000 contribution limits. So that will still be in the system in a number of ways. You will be able to use it to advertise on the Internet. You will be able to use it to get out the vote. State parties will be able to use it and federal candidates will be able to appear at state events that raise soft money. So, in other words, members of Congress will still be involved in raising soft money. If you think that's terrible as John McCain does, then you're fuming. If you look at some of the practical things, I think it is a tougher call. The FEC decided not to try to regulate the Internet. Well, I don't blame them. It's tough to regulate the Internet. As for the state parties, do we really want to tell Hillary Clinton that she can't appear in a New York Democratic state event because there might be soft money raised there? That does really trample the First Amendment.

TERENCE SMITH: Mark, what is your view?

MARK SHIELDS: My view, Terry, is that in 38 years in Washington, I have never seen an act of arrogance, offensive arrogance that to rival the Federal Election Commission this week. The ink is barely dry on George Bush's mystery pen with which he signed this law, which doesn't become effective number the 6th of November, and they have gutted it. What it was about, what this law was about, everybody knew it who voted for it, who opposed it, was it was going to sever the relations between federal officials and these six-figure gifts. And what Republican commissioner-- there are three Republican commissioners and one Democrat. The three Republican commissioners, they're all sworn enemies of McCain/Feingold. And basically it is analogous-- I guess, appointing somebody as Drug Enforcement Agency head who champions the legalization of crack cocaine and heroin. I mean they don't believe in the law that they've sworn to uphold. And so what you've got, one of the commissioners said, we've carved out-- we've got a carve-out in this law. So David is right. I mean they can go to a state event. They just can't be there when the solicitation is made. So what do they do, step in the men's room? Go into a telephone booth? Well, but gee, the Senator was just here, the chairman was just here, the Vice President was just here. It is an outrage and indefensible and there are two groups that ought to be heard from, one is Dick Gephardt, the House Democratic leader to appointed this Democrat, Sundstrom, to the job who offered the Amendment and every conservative strict constructionist who says you got to believe in the letter of the law. Baloney. They've been mute on this. These guys just took the law and drove a truck through it and it was not the intention of the framers; it was not the intention of who voted for it.

TERENCE SMITH: So is it gutted, David?

DAVID BROOKS: I don't quite agree with that. I think they drove a micro-- a mini, whatever these new cars are -- not a truck. The prohibition on attacking candidates with soft money is still there. In fact, some people think it is so pure it will face a Supreme Court challenge. But a lot of the fundamental elements of the law are still there. I think where they pulled back is on the enforcement. They really face practical enforcement problems that one of the things a candidate could not do was solicit soft money. Does that mean you physically have to ask for soft money? Well, that's clearly a solicitation. But do I wink and nod? They said we are not going to enforce that because we're not going to get into court trying to enforce or prosecute somebody for winking and nodding. That's a practical issue.

TERENCE SMITH: Mark also this week, the President was expected to make a major speech on a new Middle East peace initiative by the United States. But in fact he did not make the speech. The speech is now delayed at least until next week at the earliest. I wonder why, what you know about it, why you think it was delayed, whether it was the terrible events of the week in the Middle East, or whether there are some divisions within the administration about the very policy.

MARK SHIELDS: I think, Terry, that there are divisions with the administration but there is no question that the assault, the destruction, the gruesome acts in Israel this week postponed the President's making a statement. And let's be very clear about one thing. Those of us who favor a Palestinian state and whose ranks I find myself and don't hesitate to identify myself that way, have to acknowledge that Hamas and Hezbollah, these are groups that don't want a Palestinian state. That's not their agenda. Their agenda is the destruction of Israel. I think that has to be understood. These are the groups that are sponsoring these most recent attacks -- and to derail it, to do anything - but to inflict pain and great suffering. But at the same time, any speech -- President's politics in speech begins usually this process. This is what I want to say, now let's find the best time and place to say this. This was just the opposite. It became the President has to say something. Now what is he going to say? That's when the battleground began. And it appears the president was going to come out in favor of a provisional Palestinian state, but, you know, it still wasn't absolutely clear and it was being debated as late as Thursday evening.

TERENCE SMITH: David, of course, one argument that is made is that the United States has to step forward with something that will break this cycle of violence, that rather than being delayed by the cycle of violence, you have to try to step in and do something.

DAVID BROOKS: You have to know what you believe in. For three months it's really been hard to tell what the administration believes in but there really was a sense in the White House that Bush made up his mind, that the Palestinian future state has to be a normal place with a constitution, one army, not half a dozen, real institutions of government. And the President was trying to go down that road. Now as for the timing, I lobbied for Friday afternoon because serving our own interests but they disrespected us. I think it was the violence. There is an effort now -- really a plan is in place with some whining from the State Department to get European support for it so they can present it as an international plan, not as a U.S. plan, and then just waiting for the violence to die down, so early next week.

TERENCE SMITH: We'll still here. All right. And finally, Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura announced this week that he would throw in the towel, in wrestling terms, after only one term. What do you think of that? What do you think of Jesse's time on the stage?

MARK SHIELDS: Jesse was a good times governor. He was a phenomenon. Let's be very frank about it. When he was elected in 1998, I think Minnesota had the highest voter turnout in the country, particularly among younger voters. He struck a spark there, he evoked support and enthusiasm and came in and he was not a bad governor but he became almost a whining-- I mean for a Navy Seal, he was constantly complaining. Terry, you don't want someone who's constantly griping whether it's a brother-in-law or your carpool. He was always complaining about the other politicians, about the press or whatever. He just got a little tiresome. I don't think he is going to be missed when he leaves.

TERENCE SMITH: David?

DAVID BROOKS: Mediocre at the end. He wasn't terrible but he wasn't great. It was all about him. A series of celebrity moments, Larry King interviews but didn't add up to anything, no grand vision where he was heading, no idea that he would create a third party, a real movement in American politics. His core base was people who are essentially apathetic about politics and who registered on election day and voted for him.

TERENCE SMITH: Doesn't seem to bode very well for third party efforts.

MARK SHIELDS: Well, I mean, really in a strange way, it hurts third party efforts because not simply the record but when he was this celebrity and this exciting office holder, he could go in for a third party or independent candidate and just generate publicity and attention by going into the state and identifying with him or her.

TERENCE SMITH: Gentlemen, that's it for us. Thank you both very much.

FOCUS - GLOBAL GOAL!

MARGARET WARNER: Finally tonight, one goal beyond reach. Ray Suarez has that.

RAY SUAREZ: At the 39-minute mark of today's game in Ulsan, South Korea, German Michael Ballack scored on a header, blasting it past American goalkeeper Brad Friedel. The lead would hold up, ending the surprising run for the United States in this year's World Cup tournament. Reaching the quarterfinals, it was the best performance for American men since the first World Cup in 1930. And even in this final game, the team had its share of chances to win. Early on, Landon Donovan made a nifty move, but German goalie Oliver Kahn made a better save. Later, a shot by the American, Gregg Berhalter, seemed to nearly make it into the goal when it hit the left hand of a defender who was standing on the goal line. Referees, however, ruled no goal. Earlier in the tournament, the U.S. team had defeated heavily favored Portugal and Mexico. And despite today's loss, players and Coach Bruce Arena were happy with their overall performance.

BRUCE ARENA, Coach, U.S. World Cup Team: I was just disappointed in the result, but I'm extremely proud of our team. I think if anything they demonstrated to the world that the U.S. belonged here, and possibly the U.S. belonged to go a step further, but a great showing for our team in this World Cup. And as I said previously in the last interview, if you look at the opening game of the '98 World Cup to the closing game of 2002, we've made a lot of progress. We can play with anybody in the world.

RAY SUAREZ: For several weeks now, soccer fans in the U.S. have been waking up in the middle of the night to watch games played on the other side of the world. The U.S. games have been watched by an average of more than two million households nationally. Today, some fans chose to watch together, at large stadiums. In Columbus Ohio, more than 7,500 people showed up. In Washington, D.C., more than 4,000 came to RFK Stadium early this morning to watch on a big screen.

KIM KLYBERG: We got here like around 5:30, but we were up at a friend's house watching the Brazil- England game. So I haven't slept yet and I have to go to work later. So it's going to be a long day.

RAY SUAREZ: Fans found comfort in suffering through the near misses together... providing morale from afar...

MAN: Good d, good D. Shut him down!

RAY SUAREZ:...And simply cheering the team's success.

PEOPLE (Chanting): U.S.A.! U.S.A.!

CARL CORDES: It's much better being out here with all of these crazy guys than being at home watching it on a small screen-- just a lot of fun to really cheer the team.

RAY SUAREZ: While the U.S. is eliminated, the tournament continues this weekend.

RAY SUAREZ: For more, I'm joined by Ray Hudson, coach of the professional soccer team DC United; and Stefan Fatsis, sports reporter for the "Wall Street Journal." Well, coach, I know you were up this morning, like people... sports... soccer fans all over America. What did you make of the game?

RAY HUDSON, Coach, DC United Soccer Team: It was an astounding game. You know, the best team lost, absolutely. The United States played players performed heroically, just like they've done all this tournament. And the United States and major league soccer are intensely proud of Bruce Arena and the lads over there they did everybody proud. And they were successful, hugely successful in this tournament.

RAY SUAREZ: Now, I know things can look a little different on television from what they are in real life, but was that American shot that bounced on the German player's hand as close as it looked to going in?

RAY HUDSON: Yeah, it's a very debatable call, and one that will haunt us for the next four years. We were this close from tying the game up. It's a controversial call. It struck the player on the hand. It stopped the ball from going into the net. So it's a tough call, but we are not going to cry about it for too long because we've got too much to be proud of. The players performed just out of their skins. And we've created countless opportunities to take the lead. And Germany got their goal on a set piece, one of the very few chances that Germany created, but that was enough. With the Germans, you knew as soon as they scored, it was going to be very difficult. But all credit to the states, the players, the entire team kept on pressing and pressing and butting the dam, but it just wouldn't burst.

RAY SUAREZ: Stefan Fatsis, what did you make of the game?

STEFAN FATSIS, Wall Street Journal: I thought they did great. And I thought it was a real... it was the greatest evidence that we've had so far that this gradual effort to improve the level of play among the American men is working. The U.S. Soccer Federation is spending more money, they're recruiting kids younger and younger to be part of summer camps and other federation programs, and the talent is really bubbling up from the bottom the way we've expected it for years. The difference now is that you're getting the proper coaching, you're getting the effort to track down kids at a younger age, and get them up into the system quickly, and it's paying off.

RAY SUAREZ: Now this is, Stefan, a team that was not favored early on in the competition, playing against one of the teams that's a perennial contender in world play. They acquitted themselves pretty well, didn't they?

STEFAN FATSIS: Oh, absolutely. The Germans are three-time World Cup champions. The U.S. has absolutely nothing to be embarrassed about by coming home. And this is one of the beautiful things about soccer, and I think that other soccer countries really understand this. Sometimes you play your heart out, you outplay your opponent, but at the end of the day, you go home a loser. And the U.S. goalie, Brad Freitel, who was spectacular throughout the tournament, really captured this at the end of the game. He said... he said, you know, "we did play really well and we'll go home knowing that we could have advanced even further." And for U.S. soccer, that's exactly what the men's program wanted. Four years ago, the U.S. Soccer Federation rolled out this ambitious program to win the World Cup by 2010. And a lot of people laughed at that, but one of the things that people have overlooked is that the first step was to get to the quarter finals of the World Cup in 2002, and they did it.

RAY SUAREZ: Well, Coach, am I right in saying that you weren't surprised by how well the U.S. side did?

RAY HUDSON: I wasn't surprised at all. You know, I think the rest of the world was shocked. We've known that in major league soccer we have been pervading Bruce Arena in previous coaching regimes with better improving- quality football. It's true bona fide players, not just athletes, but flair players, brave players, expressive players. And Bruce has taken them and galvanized them into a team. We are not saying that major league soccer is going to be... this is going to be the magic one; this massive success, this great respect that's been born today from this unbelievable success in this World Cup. It's not going to, you know, take us to the top floor right away. And nobody is saying that. We are not trying to push the sand through the hourglass, but we're building it step by step. And this was a massive leap. This was a Bob Beman leap that's catapulted all of the programs; anybody that's involved with soccer. It has just elevated the whole profile of the game. It has made people much more aware of the beauty and the intrigue and the drama of the game. And it's just... these are champagne days for everybody associated with major league soccer and U.S. soccer. It's wonderful.

RAY SUAREZ: Well, now that the United States is out, Coach, who do you like the rest of the way?

RAY HUDSON: I think Brazil's got to be everybody's sweetheart. Again, you know, the enthrall, they've got that x-factor against them, the they're unpredictable, they're beautiful, they're risky, they're shaky at the back still, but I think if you're a purist soccer lover, you've got to always love the yellow shirts. Spain looked threatening. Korea could, you know, really create an upset tonight against Spain. And don't dismiss Senegal and Turkey. But I'd put my money on Brazil, and I'd be rooting for them if I was a soccer fan there, because they're the most enjoyable, romantic team, and players that you can't take your eyes off and you just love to watch.

RAY SUAREZ: Stefan, which games are you particularly anticipating?

STEFAN FATSIS: I agree with Coach Hudson. The Brazilians looked lovely today. They've got that fluidity, they've got that explosiveness ability to score any time. But I love the fact that we had four underdogs, soccer nobodies, making it to the final eight here. The South Koreans have just been brilliant in front of their enthusiastic home fans, and there's a good deal of intrigue watching Senegal, an African team, get to the quarter finals and possibly making it to the semifinals, which would be a first for a country from that continent. It's a wonderful tournament here. And at the end, you always look to the established countries that have been playing the sport for a century or more. And Brazil and Germany and Spain fall into that category, so anyone... you would be foolish to pick against them at this point, but you never know, because we've seen so many upsets so far.

RAY SUAREZ: And where does American soccer go from here, Stefan?

STEFAN FATSIS: I think it goes where it has been going. It's very, very incremental. I mean, you have to understand that we are a country that does not have this ingrained soccer tradition the way that the Europeans and the South Americans and some of the Central American countries do. We have... we've been playing soccer for over 100 years, but the truth is that football displaced it very soon after the sports sort of went head to head in the 1860s and '70s. We adopted baseball very quickly. Basketball is ours; we invented it. So soccer is an afterthought in this country. It doesn't have the same sort of universal passion and universal acceptance the way it does in other nations. And what that means for us is that it has to be something that evolves very, very gradually. And that's what we're seeing. We had fits and starts in the '60s and '70s and '80s, but now, I think major league soccer has some committed investors, billionaires, that are willing to ensure that this league survives. And again, this development from the ground up that's been occurring over the last decade, is going to continue to penetrate more and more kids. You are going to get more Latin Americans who have grown up in America, in the United States. You're going to get more African American kids. The sport is only going to get better. So it really is a matter of time. 2010 isn't looking like such a long shot anymore.

RAY SUAREZ: Stefan Fatsis, Ray Hudson, thank you both.

RECAP

MARGARET WARNER: Again, the major developments of today: The FBI warned that terrorists may use fuel trucks to attack Jewish neighborhoods, schools, or synagogues. There was nothing specific on place or time. And Israeli tank fire killed four Palestinian civilians in the West Bank town of Jenin. Hospital officials said three of the dead were children. The Israeli army said the action was a mistake. A reminder that "Washington Week" can be seen on most PBS stations later this evening. Tonight they're broadcasting from San Francisco. We'll see you online, and again here Monday evening. I'm Margaret Warner. Thanks for being with us. Good night.