Return to Transcripts main page

Lou Dobbs Tonight

Final Report on Columbia Disaster Released; Death Toll in Iraq Hits Unfortunate Milestone

Aired August 26, 2003 - 18:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


LOU DOBBS, CNN ANCHOR: Tonight: More Americans have now died in Iraq since the end of major combat than in the first phase of the war. Senior Pentagon correspondent Jamie McIntyre reports.
"Making the Grade," our special reports on schools that fail many students -- tonight, how those schools are spending our money.

The Ten Commandments. The protests continue. We'll have a live report from Montgomery, Alabama. And I'll add my thoughts about this controversy in my commentary tonight.

And Mars is close, it is spectacular, and it is dominating our night sky. NASA's chief scientist for Mars, James Garvin, joins us with spectacular pictures and his views about life on the red planet.

ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT for Tuesday, August 26. Here now, Lou Dobbs.

DOBBS: Good evening.

Seven American astronauts died in the Columbia disaster because NASA's management failed to understand and to assess the damage caused by a piece of foam that struck the shuttle on liftoff. That is the official finding today of a seven-month investigation by the independent Columbia Accident Investigation Board.

That board chose to focus on NASA's management culture, rather than individual decision-makers. The board found NASA's management culture has rendered the space shuttle program no safer today than it was 17 years ago, when the shuttle Challenger exploded two minutes after launch.

Miles O'Brien joins with us a report -- Miles.

MILES O'BRIEN, CNN SPACE CORRESPONDENT: Thanks very much, Lou.

This report is a very blunt assessment of NASA. And, yes, it states what we have been reporting for better than a month now, since the early part of July, that the probable cause, on the surface, at least, was the foam striking the wing of the space shuttle Columbia 81 seconds after launch, it breaching the thermal shield there, causing the disintegration 16 days later.

But the report goes much beyond that and looks at the organizational and leadership issues which might have led up to this. Big picture here: 29 recommendations; 15 of them, according to the independent board, need to be done before any return to shuttle flight; 14 are so-called continuing-to-fly recommendations, meaning need to be addressed or at least initiated, but not completed before the flight of Atlantis, which NASA would like to do in March.

Now, here are some of the specific return-to-flight issues. They want to come up with a way of stopping that foam from shedding or at least begin that process. They want to harden the tiles and panels, at least begin the process of trying to figure out how to do that, come up with a better inspection scheme for these panels, which you see shattering right there, and develop an emergency repair kit for spacewalking astronauts.

Also on the list: imaging issues. That is an important issue which came to the fore during this mission, as you well know. They want to mandate at least three useful views of any space shuttle launch. NASA has gone a step further than that and said, at least for the foreseeable future, all launches will be in daylight, so they will be able to see this kind of damage. Better and more frequent use of spy satellites and telescopes in order to catch a glimpse of a space shuttles in orbit.

Finally, this issue of schedules and safety. Keeping the schedule consistent with resources is what they say. They feel that meeting the manifest, meeting the schedule to supply the International Space Station compromised safety and caused their safety apparatus to sort of atrophy. They also -- and perhaps this is the most important thing to come out of this -- are suggesting that NASA develop an independent safety authority, Lou, which is outside of the shuttle program.

Currently, safety people answer to the shuttle program management team. They want to create something that is a separate entity, entirely funded separately, that has its own staffers. Now, the big question here, which we really don't know -- we could start a back-of- the-envelope calculation -- is what this is all going to cost and whether Congress and the administration is willing to pay for it.

A lot of those recommendations -- that safety agency in and of itself will be an expensive proposition. The question is, do the taxpayers want to foot the bill? -- Lou.

DOBBS: A big question, as we all know, because the NASA budget has declined for the past decade. The mantra miles, of the Dan Goldin era, faster, better and cheaper at NASA, that means -- according to this finding, at least, that means that that mantra is ended now.

O'BRIEN: Long gone.

Faster, better, cheaper, as it says, clearly in the report, pick your two favorite. Faster, better and cheaper just do not go together well. And to the extent that that mantra infected the manned space program -- and, primarily, that was aimed toward the missions to Mars and so forth. Nevertheless, that was a slogan which became so present during the Goldin years. To the extent that that infected the NASA organization, this board would like to see that end.

DOBBS: Important choices awaiting our policy-makers and our lawmakers as well, and, of course, the president.

Miles O'Brien, we thank you very much.

O'BRIEN: You're welcome, Lou.

DOBBS: We'll have much more on the Columbia report later in the show. We'll be joined by former shuttle astronaut Norm Thagard. He joins us from our bureau in Washington, D.C.

And in Washington today, the Pentagon continues to assert that no more U.S. troops are required in Iraq to establish law and order and to assure the safety of our forces and the Iraqi people. The number of American troops killed in Iraq since President Bush declared the end of major combat operations on the 1st of May has, however, now surpassed those killed in what is referred to by Washington as the first phase of the war. The death toll rose again today.

Senior correspondent Jamie McIntyre joins with us the very latest -- Jamie.

JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN MILITARY AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, as you remember, it was May 1st, just six weeks after the war in Iraq had begun, that President Bush made this announcement from the deck of the U.S. aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: My fellow Americans, major combat operations in Iraq have ended. And the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MCINTYRE: At the time, 138 U.S. troops had died in Operation Iraqi Freedom, 114 from hostile action. Since then, 139 more troops have died, 62 from hostilities, the rest from accidents, illnesses or suicides.

The mounting death toll underscores that, nearly three months after the major combat operations were declared over, the U.S. military is not just mopping up pockets of resistance, but is facing a determined foe that is employing ever more sophisticated tactics. The answer, the only effective response, say U.S. commanders, is more raids like this one conducted today north of Baghdad in which hundreds of U.S. troops went after Iraqi gang members believed responsible for recent attacks. About 20 suspects were rounded up.

The Pentagon continues to argue that the U.S. doesn't need any more troops in Iraq. But Defense Secretary Rumsfeld insists that, if U.S. commanders believe otherwise, they need only ask and they will get more forces -- Lou.

DOBBS: Jamie, is that a reasonable premise, that the commanders there will, given the politics -- and they are heated polemical politics now on the issue of Iraq -- is it realistic, given the attitudes within the Pentagon and the leadership there, that they would ask for substantially more troops?

MCINTYRE: Well, it gets really down to the sort of personal integrity of General John Abizaid, who is the U.S. central commander.

Clearly, he knows that the Pentagon is not in favor of sending more troops. But if, as a military commander, he believes it's necessary, it's really his obligation to make that request. And Rumsfeld has said publicly that he would support it, if that happens. So it really comes down his responsibility as a commander and his personal integrity. And, at this point, Abizaid insists that he doesn't believe he needs any more troops.

DOBBS: Jamie McIntyre, senior Pentagon correspondent -- thank you, Jamie.

In Gaza today, Israel launched a third attack in five days against radical Islamist terrorists, the group Hamas. An Israel helicopter fired three missiles at a car carrying two Hamas members.

Michael Holmes is in Gaza City and has the report for us -- Michael.

MICHAEL HOLMES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Lou, yes, that's right, the third such attack in less than a week.

This time, the targets got away. The main target was A man called Halaid Al Massoud (ph), a Member of Hamas' military wing, the Izzedine al Qassam. He was said by Israel to be at the forefront of the manufacture of Qassam rockets which are being fired into Israel at a fairly alarming rate at the moment. His brother Tito actually was killed in a targeted attack back in June for the same reasons, while he was traveling in a car with a fellow Hamas member, Wahil Ecelan (ph).

Now, both of them apparently, we are told, became aware of the Israel helicopters, got out of the car, ran away. As they did so, those three missiles pounded into the vehicle. And what I can tell you is that 23 bystanders were instead injured, several of them critically, and about six of them, we're told, children, the youngest aged 9, the oldest of the children aged 14, two of them in critical condition.

Also, an elderly man, a 65-year-old man riding a donkey cart, he was the only fatality of this action. And some great outrage once again we saw on the streets of Gaza City. It was only two nights ago we were at another missile attack. That time, four Hamas members were killed, and, again, several bystanders also injured, including a young girl. And a lot of concern about mounting civilian casualties in these operations, despite their accuracy in hitting cars in the streets of Gaza. It's a very crowded place, according to many accounts, the most populated place on Earth.

And when you put a missile into a car, there are going to be bystanders. Israel says it fights to avoid that and has called off such missions in the past when it feared that civilian casualties would be too high -- Lou. DOBBS: Michael, thank you very much. Outrage and violence is certainly not in short supply on either side of this dispute. Michael Holmes, reporting from Gaza, thank you.

U.N. inspectors have found traces of highly enriched weapons- grade uranium at an Iranian nuclear facility. Iranian officials say the particles originated from equipment imported from another country. The Iranians declined, however, to name that country. A spokesman for the United Nations' nuclear watchdog group said the traces have a higher percentage of weapons-grade uranium than would be necessary for a civilian power program. That is precisely what the Iranians claim is taking place at that facility, a power program.

Meanwhile, diplomats arrived in Beijing today for the latest rounds of talks aimed at curbing North Korea's nuclear ambitions. Representatives from six countries arrived just as tensions on the North Korean Peninsula and in much of world are reaching the boiling point over what one diplomat calls North Korea's nuclear blackmail.

Kitty Pilgrim reports.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KITTY PILGRIM, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The initial meet- and-greet is going on in Beijing, a few bilateral meetings. But the six negotiating teams, from the United States, South Korea, China, Russia, Japan and North Korea, are getting ready for the big day, Wednesday.

Despite the initial niceties, many expect this session with North Korea to be a tough struggle. Few expect North Korea to bargain willingly.

MICHAEL O'HANLON, BROOKINGS INSTITUTION: The North Koreans don't have anything except their nuclear weapons. So they're not likely to give that up first. That is their best bargaining chip.

PILGRIM: Tensions have escalated this week. In Japan, a North Korean ship was detained in a Japanese port on suspicion of drug running or weapons smuggling. It was allowed to leave when no evidence was found on board.

And a South Korean navy ship fired on a North Korean patrol boat across the disputed border today. Today, U.N. nuclear watchdog head Mohamed ElBaradei again pointed out, North Korea was using nuclear blackmail against the world.

The tone has turned hard-line. In the past two days, the State Department played downs talk that a key diplomat on North Korea, Jack Pritchard, was forced to resign.

PHILIP REEKER, STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN: But, obviously, he has made a personal decision which we respect and understand to move on to a new phase in his career.

PILGRIM: Pritchard was a member of President Clinton's team who facilitated former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright's trip to Korea in more conciliatory times.

But the more hawkish diplomat, John Bolton, has claimed headlines in recent weeks by publicly reviling North Korea's leader, Kim Jong Il. North Korea promptly responded, branding him -- quote -- "scum," an unusually undiplomatic exchange.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

PILGRIM: Now, the Chinese today, as host of the talks, called for a calm and patient attitude. Talks last April fell apart quickly after the initial discussions. And it may prove to be a very difficult session this time also -- Lou.

DOBBS: You referred to more conciliatory times, referencing the '94 agreements, at which Pritchard was involved, threat agreements violated by the North Koreans.

PILGRIM: Right. It was conciliatory a certain party's part.

DOBBS: Kitty, thank you very much -- Kitty Pilgrim.

Still ahead: President Bush vows, the war on terror continues. Suzanne Malveaux is traveling with the president tonight. She will have a live report for us from St. Louis.

And the Ten Commandments monument will be gone by week's end if one Alabama lawmaker has his way. David Mattingly will report from Montgomery. And I will share my views on this debate.

Also, billions of dollars are spent on education in this country every year. And still, many students are simply being failed by our educational system. Jan Hopkins will report.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: President Bush today defended U.S. military action in both Iraq and Afghanistan. The president said the United States helped rid the world of two terrorist regimes and, as a result, has made America a far safer place.

Suzanne Malveaux is traveling with the president. He's in St. Louis. She joins us now with the latest -- Suzanne.

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, he spoke to the American Legion.

And it's all a part of a concerted effort by the Bush administration to maintain support for the war on terror, President Bush talking about the progress, saying two-thirds of top al Qaeda have either been captured or killed; 42 of the 55 most wanted Iraqis in that deck of cards are accounted for in the destruction, of course, of Saddam Hussein's regime.

It was really a speech that was aimed at three audiences, the American audience, an international one, as well as the Iraqi people, President Bush defending his strategy on the war on terror, making the case that, despite the danger and the loss abroad, that it is better for U.S. soldiers to take on terrorists outside of the United States.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSH: We will strike them in their camps or caves or wherever they hide, before they hit more of our cities and kill more of our citizens. We will do everything in our power to deny terrorists weapons of mass destruction before they can commit murder on an unimaginable scale.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MALVEAUX: And the Bush administration, of course, is also hoping for more help from foreign countries. The president framed this as a struggle between civilization and chaos, asking those countries not to remain neutral, but get involved.

He also told the Iraqi people that they no longer have to fear that Saddam Hussein's regime will return. And he asked for their assistance in helping with their own reconstruction and the future of their country -- Lou.

DOBBS: Suzanne, as you pointed out, the president has a number of constituencies to whom he is talking. How was the reception there at the American Legion to the president and his remarks?

MALVEAUX: Well, as you can imagine, a very warm reception.

Veterans, these are people, of course, who served and also pretty much see eye-to-eye with the Bush administration's position on all of this. He thanked them very much for their service in their own communities and some of the wars that they have been involved in, that they have fought. There have been some small protests along the way that the administration has had to deal with. But, for the most part, it's been very, very positive, very warm here at the American Legion.

DOBBS: Suzanne, thank you very much -- Suzanne Malveaux traveling with President Bush tonight in St. Louis.

A person of interest is suing the federal government. Steven Hatfill was named a person of interest in the anthrax investigation, but no charges were ever filed against him. And no one has been arrested for those attacks. Those attacks killed five people, now two years ago. Hatfill, in his lawsuit, names Attorney General John Ashcroft, the Justice Department and the FBI. And he claims unspecified financial damages and seeks an injunction against future violations of his civil rights.

Coming up next: The United States needs the help of the international community to bring order to Iraq, at least according to the author of a book entitled "The Islamists and the West." Fawaz Gerges joins us next.

And the scene is set for another accident, according to the investigators of the Columbia disaster. I'll be joined by former shuttle astronaut Norm Thagard.

And divided over rights, the Ten Commandments. That battle is raging. We'll have a live report on the controversy from Montgomery, Alabama. And I will give you my opinion about this controversy in my commentary later here in the show.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: Still ahead: bracing for a close encounter with Mars. Bill Tucker will report on what is a once-in-a-lifetime event. We'll be joined by NASA's chief scientist to talk about his views on life on Mars -- that and a great deal more still ahead.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: Barricades still surround the Ten Commandments monument in Alabama tonight. The state's attorney general says that monument will soon be gone. But supporters who met with the attorney general today say they'll block any effort to remove the monument.

David Mattingly is in Montgomery and has the story for us -- David.

DAVID MATTINGLY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Lou, yesterday at this time, we were telling you about that lawsuit that was filed in federal court in Mobile by two people who said that, if the monument is moved from this building, that it would violate their constitutional rights.

Well, today, the Alabama attorney general representing the eight Supreme Court justices here filed a motion to dismiss that lawsuit. And now, the judge in Mobile will hear that case tomorrow and figure things out from there.

In the meantime, what you see here is exactly what's been going on for days, a lot of hot, tired people wondering when the monument is going to be moved. Attorney General Bill Pryor gave us our most definitive word yet today, saying it will be soon.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BILL PRYOR, ALABAMA ATTORNEY GENERAL: Well, I'm not going to announce exactly when and how we're going to do it, but we're -- we have a plan in place that's going to be done very soon. The federal court has agreed to postpone its hearing on the matter until this Friday. And there's no doubt, well before that Friday status conference, the monument will have been moved.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: And there's a great deal for the state to move on this quickly. If the monument is still there on Friday, that's when the state could face the possibility of those $5,000 fines. As for the demonstrators behind me, they're now engaged in their afternoon prayer meeting and rally. This is something they do every day at the close of business hours here at the justice building. They continue to find comfort in the fact that the monument hasn't moved the entire time that they've been here.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REV. PAT MAHONEY, CHRISTIAN DEFENSE COALITION: One week after the attorney general said the monument is going to be removed immediately, it's still here! It's still here!

(APPLAUSE)

MAHONEY: And so, we said from the beginning, every minute that monument stays in this building past 5:00 p.m., August 20, is a victory. We're now entering a week.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: But that one question, Lou, still lingers for everyone here. When will the monument move? And they have plans to kneel and try to obstruct the entrances to this building when that moment comes -- Lou.

DOBBS: David, thank you very much -- David Mattingly reporting from Montgomery, Alabama.

Now I'd like to share with you a few of my thoughts on this controversy.

The Ten Commandments haven't stirred up this much excitement since Charlton Heston and Cecil B. DeMille were responsible for tens thousands of busloads of kids getting out of school early to see the epic 1956 movie in matinees all over the country. Too many news accounts of what's going on in Montgomery have framed this controversy as a battle royal between stereotypical Bible thumpers and stereotypical Godless heathens.

The truth is, both sides have intelligent and I'm sure heartfelt arguments to support their positions. The issue is, for some, a matter of religion. For others, it's a matter of law. For others, it's all about politics. I see it a little differently. And certainly, for me, it is really a very simple matter.

The chief justice of Alabama, for what may have been the very best of intentions, put a 2.5 ton monument in a state-owned building without the approval of the governor, the legislature and the other justices who sit on the bench with him. I can't support any state official who unilaterally does something like that. It is still the people's government.

If the people of Alabama -- that is, the majority -- want that monument, well, that is up to them. Then a contest between states rights and the federal government could ensue. But, until they express themselves through a referendum or their elected representatives, this controversial 2.5 ton stone is now more a monument to the ego of the chief justice than to religious beliefs or even the law that devolves from them in our Judeo-Christian culture and heritage.

That heritage and culture, whether you are religious or not, is certainly worthy of preservation. And it is, in my opinion, not threatened by a monument removed from a government building by a lawful order of the courts. Nor will it be assured should the courts order it to remain in place.

By the way, that movie was a great movie.

Coming up next: Americans under attack. My next guest says the solution is to put an Iraqi face on security. Fawaz Gerges joins us next.

Also ahead: billions of dollars allotted for education and still teachers paying out-of-pocket for basic supplies and children being failed by our schools. Jan Hopkins reports.

And Mars is approaching. The red planet moves in to planet Earth. Bill Tucker will report. NASA's chief scientist joins to us talk about life on Mars.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: In the last week, radical Islamist terrorists have nearly 100 people in Israel, India, and Iraq. Today's attack in Israel killed one person, 23 others wounded in Gaza, as that cycle of violence continues.

Fawaz Gerges is the author of "The Islamists and the West," joins us now.

Good to see you, Fawaz.

This is turning into a -- I think, from the standpoint of the Bush administration, a very disappointing execution of policy, if we can frame the policy, for many of us, a concern for our soldiers who are there, and, certainly, for all of us, concerns about the stability of Iraq. What in the world can be done?

FAWAZ GERGES, AUTHOR, "THE ISLAMISTS AND THE WEST": Well, the big question, Lou, is not the lack of adequate troops or intelligence in Iraq. The big difficulty facing the United States is the lack of legitimacy of the process of political reconstruction.

DOBBS: Well, let's talk about legitimacy. We have 160,000 troops. We have just overthrown a regime. Our men and women are in harm's way. And for every American, that is a concern. What do you mean legitimacy?

GERGES: It is, in the eyes of the Iraqis, the process of...

DOBBS: Well, let's talk about it from the eyes of the United States. What can be done?

(CROSSTALK)

DOBBS: Because, for the Iraqis, what needs to be done, we understand, is to rebuild their infrastructure, to provide a safe and secure environment for them. What can be done?

GERGES: And the big question is you do you legitimize this particular process. You do it by three steps.

First, you bring in the international community as a real partner to shoulder the process economic, political and security costs in Iraq.

Secondly, that is, you really must give the United Nations some sharing power capacity in Iraq. Secondly -- secondly, you expedite the process by which you transfer power to Iraqis. I mean, you want to make sure -- you want to...

DOBBS: Which Iraqis?

GERGES: Iraqi people

DOBBS: Well, that's a wonderful concept. But which Iraqis? Because Chalabai is a highly controversial, some would say, illegitimate face. Certainly the Shia, the Sunni require representation. The provisional government is not -- is not endorsing U.S. policy. So to whom does the United States, which is in ineffective control -- to whom does it transfer power?

GERGES: The sooner the Iraqis choose their own representatives, the more legitimate the process of reconstruction...

DOBBS: When was the last time there was a democratic election in Iraq?

GERGES: Well, that's what I'm saying because the United States went into Iraq to...

DOBBS: Would you not say for us, Fawaz, -- because you are a very smart political scientist and a student of the region, the culture, the religion, would you not say that first we have to establish law, order and provide for the basic human needs of the Iraqi people?

GERGES: But so far, Lou, so far, in the eyes of many Iraqis -- so far in the eyes of many Iraqis -- basic services do not exist.

DOBBS: But that's what I just said to you. Don't you think it's required?

GERGES: What comes first? What comes first? I mean, don't you...

DOBBS: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) safety and security? What would you say? GERGES: And so far we don't have it in Iraq.

DOBBS: Correct.

GERGES: So far...

DOBBS: What do we do? You said the troops weren't important. How does one achieve it?

GERGES: You also put more Iraqi faces on the streets, in order...

DOBBS: Iraqi faces? More of a public government, as critics would suggest?

GERGES: The big challenge really for the United States, Lou, is how do you provide security for Iraqis, while at the same time reducing American military presence from urban towns? The answer is you do it by bringing...

DOBBS: Why not just arm every Iraqi in the country?

GERGES: Absolutely. But you see....

DOBBS: Well why isn't it being done?

GERGES: But you see what we did Lou....

DOBBS: The reason is...

GERGES: We dismantled the Iraqi army 400, 000 -- we dismantled the entire Iraqi army, 400,000 strong, and we have created larger blocks, larger blocks of dissatisfied, angry and well-trained soldiers who have a vested interest in undermining the American military.

DOBBS: Well, how well trained?

GERGES: The point -- the point, Lou, I'm trying to suggest here is that we need to let Iraq succeed. We could manage Iraq. But the question is how do you legitimize the process of reconstruction? How do you convince the Iraqis that you are there just for a short period? How do you bring in international...

(CROSSTALK)

GERGES: And that's why -- why not take chances on people's choice? After all, Lou, democracy implies risk.

The big question was -- I mean, you and I, we talked about it, that somehow, initially, we were terrified that somehow, if we have elections, the theocratic government would imagine Iraq based on the Iranian model.

DOBBS: Well I don't who's terrified. Whoa, whoa, whoa, Fawaz. I don't know that the U.S. government is terrified.

GERGES: I mean, initially.

DOBBS: I don't think that there is a practical -- excuse me, Fawaz. Let me ask the question. American soldiers are being killed. There is a debate in this country about even how many forces are required to maintain security. There is an absolute fragmentation, as you well know because you have just spent time there, of the entire society of Iraq, which was all expected.

GERGES: No. No, it was not expected at all. Actually, what was expected the Iraqi project was going to be an easy thing. Iraqis would welcome

DOBBS: That Sunnis and Shia would come together, that Ba'athists would suddenly embrace radical Islamist terrorists.

GERGES: The Shiites represent more than 60 percent of the Iraqi population.

DOBBS: I quite understand that.

(CROSSTALK)

DOBBS: But what I'm asking you, very simply, is how in the world a people that have never known democracy, who are content to watch, and many of them, simply insist upon continuing violence, how you can achieve...

(CROSSTALK)

DOBBS: Please.

...achieve stability and security and then lay the basis for whatever policies will follow.

GERGES: You want -- you want to bring the international community, bring the United Nations, shelter the burden of economic and security -- and security concerns in Iraq. You want to put more Iraq forces on the streets to provide security for Iraqis and you also want -- and you also want...

DOBBS: But we're sending 30,000 people as policemen in (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

GERGES: That's not enough. That's not enough. I mean, of course, we are beginning and this is -- the United States is beginning to train more Iraqi forces, and that's a very positive step. The United States is also now negotiating with the United Nations about a bigger multi-national force.

DOBBS: Right.

GERGES: And the big question is, we must expedite the process of transferring power to Iraqis as soon as possible by holding elections, yes. By holding elections.

DOBBS: Do you want them in two weeks? Two months? When? GERGES: Sooner the better. This is -- by the way....

DOBBS: But it's a very serious question and it has to have a concrete and specific answer because the Bush administration has said they wants elections, they want a democratic government. The issue is how soon and under what terms.

GERGES: Absolutely. And as you know, there was some major disagreements within the Bush administration. Do you remember General Garner came? I mean, he...

DOBBS: Well, there have been huge disagreements...

GERGES: ..and the question...

DOBBS: between the Department of Defense, the State Department.

GERGES: The policy now they're talking about between one and two years. The United States is in a race against time in Iraq. I think the Iraqi project could succeed. I think it could make it. But we must -- I mean, take...

DOBBS: Fawaz, I understand that. When do you want elections?

GERGES: The sooner the better.

DOBBS: I understand.

GERGES: Two months.

DOBBS: Two months?

GERGES: Absolutely. The sooner the better because you want to convince Iraqis...

DOBBS: I understand.

GERGES: ...that the United States is there for a limited period of time. We will take risk on people's choices, where a democracy...

DOBBS: Well, the risk has already been taken

GERGES: We promised the Iraqis democracies. Let's take risks. Let's show the Iraqis that we practice what we preach.

DOBBS: Fawaz Gerges, as always, good to talk with you and as always provocative. Thank you.

Turning now to our special reports on American education, upon which we're focusing this week. Last night, Education Secretary Rod Paige here said we spend half a trillion a year to educate our children.

Tonight, Jan Hopkins reports where that money goes and upon what it achieves.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JAN HOPKINS, CNNfn CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The Hillsboro school district outside Portland, Oregon ran out of money at the end of the last school year. Schools closed 17 days early.

This is a new school year. In Chicago, teachers are preparing their classrooms for students who arrive next week. They wish they had more money to spend for basic supplies.

BARBARA EGAN, KINDERGARTEN TEACHER: Most of the teachers, I think, all have to dip into their own pocket to get what they need in the classroom.

PRISCILLA PEREZ, FIRST GRADE TEACHER: I have spent so much money already and haven't gotten paid yet. But I do it because I want to have a nice classroom. I want to have a classroom that's welcoming for my students.

HOPKINS: The Chicago schools will spend just under $5 billion this year. Two billion comes from the local community, 1.5 billion comes from the state, less than a billion from the government. The biggest expense for Chicago and nearly every school district is teachers' salaries.

Chicago is lucky. Illinois did not cut back on education despite a budget shortfall. But the Chicago school superintendent did have to cut 500 administrators, but no teachers, to balance his budget.

ARNE DUNCAN, CEO, CHICAGO PUBLIC SCHOOLS: We're going to continue to streamline, continue to run the tightest ship possible from a management standpoint and get every single dollar out to where it needs to be, which is into our classrooms, into teaching and learning.

HOPKINS: Chicago public schools spend about $8,500 per student each year. That's above the national average.

Nationally, most of the money for education comes from the states and local communities. Relatively little comes from the federal government.

Parent organizations believe the federal government needs to kick in more if the president's "No Child Left Behind" program is to work.

ANNA WESELAK, PRE.-ELECT, NATIONAL PTA: Out of every federal dollar only 2.8 cents of that dollar is spent on U.S. Department of Education programs. So there's obviously a big shortfall. Right now the National PTA is working with other education organizations to increase that amount to at least five cents on every dollar, which we feel will help to adequately fund "No Child Left Behind."

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You can get a book, you can bring it back to your desk.

HOPKINS: Some think the problem boils down to demanding too much from schools.

HENRY LEVIN, COLUMBIA UNIV. TEACHER'S COLLEGE: Each of these activities demands resources and takes attention away from, let's say, some more fundamental types of educational needs. Certainly traditionally, more fundamental.

HOPKINS: While the adults argue what to spend on education, the children are beginning a new school year.

In Dallas, where they spend $6,300 dollars to educate each child a year, children are arriving for the new year.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Good morning.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Good morning, Lincoln (ph).

HOPKINS: Teachers and students come with high expectations of what the year will bring.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HOPKINS: Regardless of what is spent per child on education, whether it's close to the $5,000 spent in Arizona or Arkansas or the $20,000 spent by wealthy New York suburbs, the refrain of parents, teachers and schools seems to be, it's never enough -- Lou.

DOBBS: It's never enough, and in many states, it is certainly an inadequate amount that is being spent in the -- and the achievements are clear. Is there a definitive national correlation between money spent and improvement in the level of education achieved by the student?

HOPKINS: No. There isn't enough data.

DOBBS: No. I mean, and that's crazy.

HOPKINS: We have no -- yes, right. We have no information on the basis of national tests to tell us the answer to that question. The tests basically are done in states.

DOBBS: All right. Jan Hopkins...

HOPKINS: We may know in a few years. Not now.

DOBBS: OK. Jan Hopkins, thank you very much.

Coming up next year, the shuttle Columbia's final moments -- the definitive report on what went wrong and why. I'll be joined by former shuttle astronaut Norm Thagard next.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: As we reported, the independent Columbia accident investigation board today cited effectively the NASA management culture as responsible for the shuttle disaster in February. Joining me now to discuss this report with a view of some considerable expertise and experience, shuttle astronaut Norm Thagard, who joins us from Washington, D.C. Good to have you with us, Norm.

NORM THAGARD, FORMER ASTRONAUT: Thank you, Lou.

DOBBS: This report effectively chose to focus on management culture at NASA rather than individual decision-makers. What is your reaction to the report and its findings?

THAGARD: First, they pointed out the similarities between what happened with Challenger and what happened with Columbia, that you had a problem that an engineer or engineers had highlighted, and somewhere along the management chain that wasn't -- didn't get the proper attention. But there are also important differences. In the case of O rings with Challenger, that was thought to be potentially a catastrophic problem, whereas that was never the thought until the very last mission for the shedding of foam from the external tank.

DOBBS: And frankly, Norm -- and I should point out to our viewers that Norm has flown aboard four shuttle flights, also a visit to Mir, coming at this with great experience and perspective. What is your best judgment about the culture of NASA, that approach in this report and the individual decision-making that took place? And we should point out, this decision-making took place within the context of the Columbia mission in a very compressed amount of time.

THAGARD: Right. It's hard for me, knowing a lot of the folks involved to condemn NASA management, because the folks I know are wonderful people and certainly would never knowingly do anything that would put a crew in jeopardy. However, there's clearly communications problem when you have an engineer saying, we need to look at this, and clearly, anyone that watched that video on the launch of the foam hitting the leading edge of the wing would say, wow, and I think if a manager had seen that and ignored it, you would certainly wonder about that sort of thing. So that's the problem. Again, same thing we saw with Challenger, engineer saying there was a problem, and somewhere along the way in management it just doesn't get the proper attention.

DOBBS: Is it your feeling that -- and for those who do not know, NASA has a culture that, frankly, it separates culturally its engineers, and its managers, its administration, and the engineers are closest, I would say -- and I'd like you to confirm my judgment on this -- it seems to me far closer to the astronaut core themselves. Would you say that's right, Norm?

THAGARD: I think that's probably true. It wasn't at all unusual during my 17 and a half years at NASA for an engineer to come to me and try to sort of put a bug in my ear about something that certainly had come to their attention and they were concerned about.

DOBBS: Is it that the engineers, the people who know best how to design the operation, is it your judgment that they have sufficient access to both management and the astronauts, and the ability to drive their views into the heart of the organization? In this case, concerns about the foam that struck the wing of Columbia? THAGARD: I believe in general, Lou, that they do. But if you have even one problem like you had with Challenger and with Columbia that somehow escapes that system, that normally I think is fairly open, then a catastrophe can result, and that's unfortunately what's happened.

DOBBS: How soon in your judgment, would and should an astronaut feel safe and secure flying aboard a shuttle?

THAGARD: In general, you feel safe when management has reviewed everything and decides that it's safe. Some estimates have been they'll fly in the spring. It's hard to believe that's true, because you've either got to correct one or both problems. You've either got to beef up the structure so that it's not so susceptible to damage from foam or whatever else might hit it, or you've got to eliminate the foam shedding problem. Hard for me to imagine that that's going to occur that soon.

DOBBS: Norm, thank you. Norm, as we're concluding, I just wanted to tell you, I couldn't help this, I looked at the findings, think back to a fellow whom I respected a great deal in business and organization, Walt Rissen (ph), who headed Citibank for years, and he said, as you mentioned, these are some of the best -- the best of our society working at NASA, but Walt Rissen (ph) always said that bureaucracy is a state of mind. And that seems to have overtaken the organization. And certainly, obviously, from these findings, they're going to try to fix it.

THAGARD: Yes. Yes.

DOBBS: Norm Thagard, we certainly appreciate your being with us.

THAGARD: My pleasure.

DOBBS: Good to talk with you.

That NASA report points to a flawed culture. In our poll tonight, the question is, do you think individuals should be held accountable for the Columbia tragedy. Yes or no? Cast your vote at cnn.com/lou. We'll have the results for you later in the show.

When we continue, closing the gap. A once-in-a-lifetime close-up encounter with Mars. Bill Tucker reports. And we'll been joined by James Garvin, NASA's chief scientist for Mars. We'll be talking about life on Mars and the spectacular pictures and sights we can see next. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: Well, tonight, step outside and look up at the night sky. Mars will be there, barring any cloud cover, and it will be not only highly visible, it will be dominating the lights in the sky tonight. The Red Planet is at its closest proximity to Earth in more than 60,000 years. Bill Tucker has the story.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The last big encounter the Earth had with Mars, things got a little out of hand.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Special bulletin from Trenton, New Jersey.

ORSON WELLES: There's new evidence that these creatures have scientific knowledge far in advance of our own.

TUCKER: No such panic this time.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And I'm going to mount a camera, a 35 millimeter camera right here.

TUCKER: Just a lot of excitement, and for good reason. It's been 60,000 years since Mars was this close. Cromagnon man had yet to appear on the scene. Neanderthals roamed the Earth, and it's doubtful they even noticed.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The fact that Mars is going to be the closest that it's ever been in 60 millennia, I'm just glad to, you know, be here and be a part of that.

TUCKER: Mars will be this close again in 284 years, making this passing a true once-in-a-lifetime event, and something that everyone can experience.

MICHAEL SHARA, AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY: Oh, absolutely. It's going to be crystal clear. Really, all you need to do is look towards the east, and there it is. The brightest thing rising in the sky, reddish/orange in color, you literally can't miss it.

TUCKER: No telescope needed. Binoculars will do just fine, or even the naked eye. Mars is the brightest object in the night sky besides the moon. From a scientific perspective, there's not a lot to be learned. There are already two spacecraft in orbit around Mars and three more are on their way. For scientists and others, this is an event to be enjoyed.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think it should be really good. I am going to make sure to try and find a good place to have a look at it.

TUCKER: And while much is often made of Mars as the angry planet, as the planet of the Roman god of war, astrologists also remind us...

SUSAN MILLER, ASTROLOGYZONE.COM: Mars this is can-do planet. If you didn't have Mars at all, well, there wouldn't be energy and drive and courage and determination.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TUCKER: And as close as Mars will be, it will still be 35 million miles away -- Lou.

DOBBS: And in this close-up encounter, there's obviously something for everyone.

TUCKER: Exactly.

DOBBS: All right, Bill, thank you very much.

James Garvin is NASA's chief scientist when it comes to Mars, and he joins us tonight from Washington, D.C. Good to have you with us.

JAMES GARVIN, CHIEF SCIENTIST FOR MARS, NASA: Thanks, Lou. It's great to be here.

DOBBS: This is a big time for you. You have Mars in proximity. You have spacecraft on the way to Mars. And of course, you have a global surveyor there anyway. How do you feel this evening?

GARVIN: I'm ecstatic about the possibilities for exploring another world. We have Mars in the night sky as the most luminous object and an armada of science spacecraft approaching the planet.

DOBBS: Five spacecraft in all, correct, with the Europeans?

GARVIN: That's correct, and the Japanese and the Zomi (ph) spacecraft.

DOBBS: Exactly. And the fact that we are putting all of this attention, the spacecraft, the U.S. spacecraft will arrive there in January. What do you expect to find?

GARVIN: Lou, we're looking for the stuff of life. Essentially, the places where life may have left its record, in the rocks. So our mission is a rock explorer. And we're going to treat the rocks like the artifacts that Mother Nature will leave us. And we're kind of doing a variant on the "CSI" TV show, only we're exploring another world. And those rovers will give us a human's eye view, as like a field scientist will get, as we explore Mars.

DOBBS: And as we explore Mars from the planet Earth, those mortals of us who have a pair of binoculars, or a telescope, this is really a remarkable opportunity, is it not, because Mars is just dominating this night sky?

GARVIN: Oh, absolutely, Lou. It's the best it is going to get in our lifetime. And it gives us -- I think it gives us a little bit of moment for pause, as we imagine that we're going to actually be on the surface, albeit vicariously, in just another few months.

DOBBS: And of course, we have been there with global surveyor that sent back remarkable pictures, the Malen (ph) cameras that have shown the icecaps, in unexpected parts of Mars. Do you truly believe, you yourself, that this is the ice that we are seeing, what we -- carbon dioxide, frozen, do you believe it's the stuff of the basis for life, if not life itself?

GARVIN: Lou, I think the ice that's most interesting is the water ice. And Mars may be the ultimate water ice planet, second to Earth, in this neck of the solar system. So we want to get to that ice and explore what's in that. And that water ice -- that's the stuff -- one of the ingredients that we think is necessary for the kind of life we have. So part of our Mars exploration program is to follow the water, and following the ice is part of that water.

DOBBS: And as we look through our telescopes tonight and tomorrow and for some time, actually into September, some will see a little icecap up there, of -- on the top of Mars, won't they?

GARVIN: They will. In fact, they'll be seeing the southern polar icecap, the permanent icecap, which is capped by this frozen dry ice stuff. But underneath that, we think there is a reservoir of frozen water.

DOBBS: And do you personally believe that life ever existed on Mars?

GARVIN: I guess, Lou, the way I like to say is, why not? Mars is kind of like Mother Nature's great control experiment -- formed in the same neck of the woods as our planet. Early in its history, it may have had many of the similar ingredients, and that history on Mars may be preserved well enough for to us to go looking. So why not? We don't know today. And that's what we are trying to find out.

DOBBS: And for those who want to see Mars in the night sky tonight and tomorrow, of course, when it is closest in opposition to Earth, what's your best recommendation for people across the United States from east to west?

GARVIN: Well, Lou, I would say go out after sunset, of course, and look, starting in the south, for a bright orange/white object that will be as bright as normally we would expect Jupiter -- in fact it's brighter -- and follow it into the sky until near midnight. You can follow it as it rises across the south, and with just your naked eye you'll see this luminous bright red spot, or orange spot, and then with binoculars, you can actually see the disc, the disc of another planet, 35 million miles away. That's pretty remarkable.

DOBBS: And it is, if I may use just an elegant expression, which has been very serviceable over the years, it's just neat as it can be. James Garvin, we thank you very much.

GARVIN: Thank you, Lou.

DOBBS: Chief scientist for Mars, spectacular.

Coming up next, the results of our poll. Christine Romans with rampant rumors on Wall Street, and she'll just have the market as well. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: The results of tonight's poll. The question, do you think individuals rather than the management culture should have been held accountable for the Columbia tragedy? And it's pretty evenly split -- 49 percent of you said yes, 51 percent said no. On Wall Street today, stocks made modest gains, but they were impressive nonetheless. The Dow finished up almost 23, the Nasdaq up 6, the S&P 3. Christine Romans with the market -- Christine.

CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN FINANCIAL NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, the Dow was down 84 points at one point, and then turned on a dime and closed higher here. Another bath of good economic news. July's durable goods orders confirmed that strength we saw in June, marking now a full cycle of stronger economic reports. And existing home sales in July fell 2.9 percent, but it was the second highest level on record, and June's record was revised higher, and consumer confidence grew.

Now, the cyclical stocks wobbled early today. They didn't shock their multi-year highs in the past few sessions, but as you can see there, it doesn't take very much steam off what has been a stellar rally there.

Meanwhile, there's been much made of the low volatility number, the Vix. It closed today just above 20. Now, from 1998 through 2002, five times the Vix broke below 20. Each time the market sold off, but the Vix watchers, Lou, say have no fear, market is just going back to more normal levels of the 1990s. No worries from the low Vix.

DOBBS: No worries is always a good thing when we're talking about Wall Street. Christine, thanks. Christine Romans.

That's our show for tonight. We thank you for being with us. Tomorrow night, we'll be joined by Charles Lu (ph), astrophysicist at the Hayden Planetarium, and Anthony Principi, the secretary of the Department of the Veteran Affairs. Please join us tomorrow night. For all of us here, good night from New York. "LIVE FROM THE HEADLINES" with Anderson Cooper is next.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com





Iraq Hits Unfortunate Milestone>


Aired August 26, 2003 - 18:00   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
LOU DOBBS, CNN ANCHOR: Tonight: More Americans have now died in Iraq since the end of major combat than in the first phase of the war. Senior Pentagon correspondent Jamie McIntyre reports.
"Making the Grade," our special reports on schools that fail many students -- tonight, how those schools are spending our money.

The Ten Commandments. The protests continue. We'll have a live report from Montgomery, Alabama. And I'll add my thoughts about this controversy in my commentary tonight.

And Mars is close, it is spectacular, and it is dominating our night sky. NASA's chief scientist for Mars, James Garvin, joins us with spectacular pictures and his views about life on the red planet.

ANNOUNCER: This is LOU DOBBS TONIGHT for Tuesday, August 26. Here now, Lou Dobbs.

DOBBS: Good evening.

Seven American astronauts died in the Columbia disaster because NASA's management failed to understand and to assess the damage caused by a piece of foam that struck the shuttle on liftoff. That is the official finding today of a seven-month investigation by the independent Columbia Accident Investigation Board.

That board chose to focus on NASA's management culture, rather than individual decision-makers. The board found NASA's management culture has rendered the space shuttle program no safer today than it was 17 years ago, when the shuttle Challenger exploded two minutes after launch.

Miles O'Brien joins with us a report -- Miles.

MILES O'BRIEN, CNN SPACE CORRESPONDENT: Thanks very much, Lou.

This report is a very blunt assessment of NASA. And, yes, it states what we have been reporting for better than a month now, since the early part of July, that the probable cause, on the surface, at least, was the foam striking the wing of the space shuttle Columbia 81 seconds after launch, it breaching the thermal shield there, causing the disintegration 16 days later.

But the report goes much beyond that and looks at the organizational and leadership issues which might have led up to this. Big picture here: 29 recommendations; 15 of them, according to the independent board, need to be done before any return to shuttle flight; 14 are so-called continuing-to-fly recommendations, meaning need to be addressed or at least initiated, but not completed before the flight of Atlantis, which NASA would like to do in March.

Now, here are some of the specific return-to-flight issues. They want to come up with a way of stopping that foam from shedding or at least begin that process. They want to harden the tiles and panels, at least begin the process of trying to figure out how to do that, come up with a better inspection scheme for these panels, which you see shattering right there, and develop an emergency repair kit for spacewalking astronauts.

Also on the list: imaging issues. That is an important issue which came to the fore during this mission, as you well know. They want to mandate at least three useful views of any space shuttle launch. NASA has gone a step further than that and said, at least for the foreseeable future, all launches will be in daylight, so they will be able to see this kind of damage. Better and more frequent use of spy satellites and telescopes in order to catch a glimpse of a space shuttles in orbit.

Finally, this issue of schedules and safety. Keeping the schedule consistent with resources is what they say. They feel that meeting the manifest, meeting the schedule to supply the International Space Station compromised safety and caused their safety apparatus to sort of atrophy. They also -- and perhaps this is the most important thing to come out of this -- are suggesting that NASA develop an independent safety authority, Lou, which is outside of the shuttle program.

Currently, safety people answer to the shuttle program management team. They want to create something that is a separate entity, entirely funded separately, that has its own staffers. Now, the big question here, which we really don't know -- we could start a back-of- the-envelope calculation -- is what this is all going to cost and whether Congress and the administration is willing to pay for it.

A lot of those recommendations -- that safety agency in and of itself will be an expensive proposition. The question is, do the taxpayers want to foot the bill? -- Lou.

DOBBS: A big question, as we all know, because the NASA budget has declined for the past decade. The mantra miles, of the Dan Goldin era, faster, better and cheaper at NASA, that means -- according to this finding, at least, that means that that mantra is ended now.

O'BRIEN: Long gone.

Faster, better, cheaper, as it says, clearly in the report, pick your two favorite. Faster, better and cheaper just do not go together well. And to the extent that that mantra infected the manned space program -- and, primarily, that was aimed toward the missions to Mars and so forth. Nevertheless, that was a slogan which became so present during the Goldin years. To the extent that that infected the NASA organization, this board would like to see that end.

DOBBS: Important choices awaiting our policy-makers and our lawmakers as well, and, of course, the president.

Miles O'Brien, we thank you very much.

O'BRIEN: You're welcome, Lou.

DOBBS: We'll have much more on the Columbia report later in the show. We'll be joined by former shuttle astronaut Norm Thagard. He joins us from our bureau in Washington, D.C.

And in Washington today, the Pentagon continues to assert that no more U.S. troops are required in Iraq to establish law and order and to assure the safety of our forces and the Iraqi people. The number of American troops killed in Iraq since President Bush declared the end of major combat operations on the 1st of May has, however, now surpassed those killed in what is referred to by Washington as the first phase of the war. The death toll rose again today.

Senior correspondent Jamie McIntyre joins with us the very latest -- Jamie.

JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN MILITARY AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, as you remember, it was May 1st, just six weeks after the war in Iraq had begun, that President Bush made this announcement from the deck of the U.S. aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: My fellow Americans, major combat operations in Iraq have ended. And the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MCINTYRE: At the time, 138 U.S. troops had died in Operation Iraqi Freedom, 114 from hostile action. Since then, 139 more troops have died, 62 from hostilities, the rest from accidents, illnesses or suicides.

The mounting death toll underscores that, nearly three months after the major combat operations were declared over, the U.S. military is not just mopping up pockets of resistance, but is facing a determined foe that is employing ever more sophisticated tactics. The answer, the only effective response, say U.S. commanders, is more raids like this one conducted today north of Baghdad in which hundreds of U.S. troops went after Iraqi gang members believed responsible for recent attacks. About 20 suspects were rounded up.

The Pentagon continues to argue that the U.S. doesn't need any more troops in Iraq. But Defense Secretary Rumsfeld insists that, if U.S. commanders believe otherwise, they need only ask and they will get more forces -- Lou.

DOBBS: Jamie, is that a reasonable premise, that the commanders there will, given the politics -- and they are heated polemical politics now on the issue of Iraq -- is it realistic, given the attitudes within the Pentagon and the leadership there, that they would ask for substantially more troops?

MCINTYRE: Well, it gets really down to the sort of personal integrity of General John Abizaid, who is the U.S. central commander.

Clearly, he knows that the Pentagon is not in favor of sending more troops. But if, as a military commander, he believes it's necessary, it's really his obligation to make that request. And Rumsfeld has said publicly that he would support it, if that happens. So it really comes down his responsibility as a commander and his personal integrity. And, at this point, Abizaid insists that he doesn't believe he needs any more troops.

DOBBS: Jamie McIntyre, senior Pentagon correspondent -- thank you, Jamie.

In Gaza today, Israel launched a third attack in five days against radical Islamist terrorists, the group Hamas. An Israel helicopter fired three missiles at a car carrying two Hamas members.

Michael Holmes is in Gaza City and has the report for us -- Michael.

MICHAEL HOLMES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Lou, yes, that's right, the third such attack in less than a week.

This time, the targets got away. The main target was A man called Halaid Al Massoud (ph), a Member of Hamas' military wing, the Izzedine al Qassam. He was said by Israel to be at the forefront of the manufacture of Qassam rockets which are being fired into Israel at a fairly alarming rate at the moment. His brother Tito actually was killed in a targeted attack back in June for the same reasons, while he was traveling in a car with a fellow Hamas member, Wahil Ecelan (ph).

Now, both of them apparently, we are told, became aware of the Israel helicopters, got out of the car, ran away. As they did so, those three missiles pounded into the vehicle. And what I can tell you is that 23 bystanders were instead injured, several of them critically, and about six of them, we're told, children, the youngest aged 9, the oldest of the children aged 14, two of them in critical condition.

Also, an elderly man, a 65-year-old man riding a donkey cart, he was the only fatality of this action. And some great outrage once again we saw on the streets of Gaza City. It was only two nights ago we were at another missile attack. That time, four Hamas members were killed, and, again, several bystanders also injured, including a young girl. And a lot of concern about mounting civilian casualties in these operations, despite their accuracy in hitting cars in the streets of Gaza. It's a very crowded place, according to many accounts, the most populated place on Earth.

And when you put a missile into a car, there are going to be bystanders. Israel says it fights to avoid that and has called off such missions in the past when it feared that civilian casualties would be too high -- Lou. DOBBS: Michael, thank you very much. Outrage and violence is certainly not in short supply on either side of this dispute. Michael Holmes, reporting from Gaza, thank you.

U.N. inspectors have found traces of highly enriched weapons- grade uranium at an Iranian nuclear facility. Iranian officials say the particles originated from equipment imported from another country. The Iranians declined, however, to name that country. A spokesman for the United Nations' nuclear watchdog group said the traces have a higher percentage of weapons-grade uranium than would be necessary for a civilian power program. That is precisely what the Iranians claim is taking place at that facility, a power program.

Meanwhile, diplomats arrived in Beijing today for the latest rounds of talks aimed at curbing North Korea's nuclear ambitions. Representatives from six countries arrived just as tensions on the North Korean Peninsula and in much of world are reaching the boiling point over what one diplomat calls North Korea's nuclear blackmail.

Kitty Pilgrim reports.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KITTY PILGRIM, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The initial meet- and-greet is going on in Beijing, a few bilateral meetings. But the six negotiating teams, from the United States, South Korea, China, Russia, Japan and North Korea, are getting ready for the big day, Wednesday.

Despite the initial niceties, many expect this session with North Korea to be a tough struggle. Few expect North Korea to bargain willingly.

MICHAEL O'HANLON, BROOKINGS INSTITUTION: The North Koreans don't have anything except their nuclear weapons. So they're not likely to give that up first. That is their best bargaining chip.

PILGRIM: Tensions have escalated this week. In Japan, a North Korean ship was detained in a Japanese port on suspicion of drug running or weapons smuggling. It was allowed to leave when no evidence was found on board.

And a South Korean navy ship fired on a North Korean patrol boat across the disputed border today. Today, U.N. nuclear watchdog head Mohamed ElBaradei again pointed out, North Korea was using nuclear blackmail against the world.

The tone has turned hard-line. In the past two days, the State Department played downs talk that a key diplomat on North Korea, Jack Pritchard, was forced to resign.

PHILIP REEKER, STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN: But, obviously, he has made a personal decision which we respect and understand to move on to a new phase in his career.

PILGRIM: Pritchard was a member of President Clinton's team who facilitated former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright's trip to Korea in more conciliatory times.

But the more hawkish diplomat, John Bolton, has claimed headlines in recent weeks by publicly reviling North Korea's leader, Kim Jong Il. North Korea promptly responded, branding him -- quote -- "scum," an unusually undiplomatic exchange.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

PILGRIM: Now, the Chinese today, as host of the talks, called for a calm and patient attitude. Talks last April fell apart quickly after the initial discussions. And it may prove to be a very difficult session this time also -- Lou.

DOBBS: You referred to more conciliatory times, referencing the '94 agreements, at which Pritchard was involved, threat agreements violated by the North Koreans.

PILGRIM: Right. It was conciliatory a certain party's part.

DOBBS: Kitty, thank you very much -- Kitty Pilgrim.

Still ahead: President Bush vows, the war on terror continues. Suzanne Malveaux is traveling with the president tonight. She will have a live report for us from St. Louis.

And the Ten Commandments monument will be gone by week's end if one Alabama lawmaker has his way. David Mattingly will report from Montgomery. And I will share my views on this debate.

Also, billions of dollars are spent on education in this country every year. And still, many students are simply being failed by our educational system. Jan Hopkins will report.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: President Bush today defended U.S. military action in both Iraq and Afghanistan. The president said the United States helped rid the world of two terrorist regimes and, as a result, has made America a far safer place.

Suzanne Malveaux is traveling with the president. He's in St. Louis. She joins us now with the latest -- Suzanne.

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, he spoke to the American Legion.

And it's all a part of a concerted effort by the Bush administration to maintain support for the war on terror, President Bush talking about the progress, saying two-thirds of top al Qaeda have either been captured or killed; 42 of the 55 most wanted Iraqis in that deck of cards are accounted for in the destruction, of course, of Saddam Hussein's regime.

It was really a speech that was aimed at three audiences, the American audience, an international one, as well as the Iraqi people, President Bush defending his strategy on the war on terror, making the case that, despite the danger and the loss abroad, that it is better for U.S. soldiers to take on terrorists outside of the United States.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSH: We will strike them in their camps or caves or wherever they hide, before they hit more of our cities and kill more of our citizens. We will do everything in our power to deny terrorists weapons of mass destruction before they can commit murder on an unimaginable scale.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MALVEAUX: And the Bush administration, of course, is also hoping for more help from foreign countries. The president framed this as a struggle between civilization and chaos, asking those countries not to remain neutral, but get involved.

He also told the Iraqi people that they no longer have to fear that Saddam Hussein's regime will return. And he asked for their assistance in helping with their own reconstruction and the future of their country -- Lou.

DOBBS: Suzanne, as you pointed out, the president has a number of constituencies to whom he is talking. How was the reception there at the American Legion to the president and his remarks?

MALVEAUX: Well, as you can imagine, a very warm reception.

Veterans, these are people, of course, who served and also pretty much see eye-to-eye with the Bush administration's position on all of this. He thanked them very much for their service in their own communities and some of the wars that they have been involved in, that they have fought. There have been some small protests along the way that the administration has had to deal with. But, for the most part, it's been very, very positive, very warm here at the American Legion.

DOBBS: Suzanne, thank you very much -- Suzanne Malveaux traveling with President Bush tonight in St. Louis.

A person of interest is suing the federal government. Steven Hatfill was named a person of interest in the anthrax investigation, but no charges were ever filed against him. And no one has been arrested for those attacks. Those attacks killed five people, now two years ago. Hatfill, in his lawsuit, names Attorney General John Ashcroft, the Justice Department and the FBI. And he claims unspecified financial damages and seeks an injunction against future violations of his civil rights.

Coming up next: The United States needs the help of the international community to bring order to Iraq, at least according to the author of a book entitled "The Islamists and the West." Fawaz Gerges joins us next.

And the scene is set for another accident, according to the investigators of the Columbia disaster. I'll be joined by former shuttle astronaut Norm Thagard.

And divided over rights, the Ten Commandments. That battle is raging. We'll have a live report on the controversy from Montgomery, Alabama. And I will give you my opinion about this controversy in my commentary later here in the show.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: Still ahead: bracing for a close encounter with Mars. Bill Tucker will report on what is a once-in-a-lifetime event. We'll be joined by NASA's chief scientist to talk about his views on life on Mars -- that and a great deal more still ahead.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: Barricades still surround the Ten Commandments monument in Alabama tonight. The state's attorney general says that monument will soon be gone. But supporters who met with the attorney general today say they'll block any effort to remove the monument.

David Mattingly is in Montgomery and has the story for us -- David.

DAVID MATTINGLY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Lou, yesterday at this time, we were telling you about that lawsuit that was filed in federal court in Mobile by two people who said that, if the monument is moved from this building, that it would violate their constitutional rights.

Well, today, the Alabama attorney general representing the eight Supreme Court justices here filed a motion to dismiss that lawsuit. And now, the judge in Mobile will hear that case tomorrow and figure things out from there.

In the meantime, what you see here is exactly what's been going on for days, a lot of hot, tired people wondering when the monument is going to be moved. Attorney General Bill Pryor gave us our most definitive word yet today, saying it will be soon.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BILL PRYOR, ALABAMA ATTORNEY GENERAL: Well, I'm not going to announce exactly when and how we're going to do it, but we're -- we have a plan in place that's going to be done very soon. The federal court has agreed to postpone its hearing on the matter until this Friday. And there's no doubt, well before that Friday status conference, the monument will have been moved.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: And there's a great deal for the state to move on this quickly. If the monument is still there on Friday, that's when the state could face the possibility of those $5,000 fines. As for the demonstrators behind me, they're now engaged in their afternoon prayer meeting and rally. This is something they do every day at the close of business hours here at the justice building. They continue to find comfort in the fact that the monument hasn't moved the entire time that they've been here.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REV. PAT MAHONEY, CHRISTIAN DEFENSE COALITION: One week after the attorney general said the monument is going to be removed immediately, it's still here! It's still here!

(APPLAUSE)

MAHONEY: And so, we said from the beginning, every minute that monument stays in this building past 5:00 p.m., August 20, is a victory. We're now entering a week.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: But that one question, Lou, still lingers for everyone here. When will the monument move? And they have plans to kneel and try to obstruct the entrances to this building when that moment comes -- Lou.

DOBBS: David, thank you very much -- David Mattingly reporting from Montgomery, Alabama.

Now I'd like to share with you a few of my thoughts on this controversy.

The Ten Commandments haven't stirred up this much excitement since Charlton Heston and Cecil B. DeMille were responsible for tens thousands of busloads of kids getting out of school early to see the epic 1956 movie in matinees all over the country. Too many news accounts of what's going on in Montgomery have framed this controversy as a battle royal between stereotypical Bible thumpers and stereotypical Godless heathens.

The truth is, both sides have intelligent and I'm sure heartfelt arguments to support their positions. The issue is, for some, a matter of religion. For others, it's a matter of law. For others, it's all about politics. I see it a little differently. And certainly, for me, it is really a very simple matter.

The chief justice of Alabama, for what may have been the very best of intentions, put a 2.5 ton monument in a state-owned building without the approval of the governor, the legislature and the other justices who sit on the bench with him. I can't support any state official who unilaterally does something like that. It is still the people's government.

If the people of Alabama -- that is, the majority -- want that monument, well, that is up to them. Then a contest between states rights and the federal government could ensue. But, until they express themselves through a referendum or their elected representatives, this controversial 2.5 ton stone is now more a monument to the ego of the chief justice than to religious beliefs or even the law that devolves from them in our Judeo-Christian culture and heritage.

That heritage and culture, whether you are religious or not, is certainly worthy of preservation. And it is, in my opinion, not threatened by a monument removed from a government building by a lawful order of the courts. Nor will it be assured should the courts order it to remain in place.

By the way, that movie was a great movie.

Coming up next: Americans under attack. My next guest says the solution is to put an Iraqi face on security. Fawaz Gerges joins us next.

Also ahead: billions of dollars allotted for education and still teachers paying out-of-pocket for basic supplies and children being failed by our schools. Jan Hopkins reports.

And Mars is approaching. The red planet moves in to planet Earth. Bill Tucker will report. NASA's chief scientist joins to us talk about life on Mars.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: In the last week, radical Islamist terrorists have nearly 100 people in Israel, India, and Iraq. Today's attack in Israel killed one person, 23 others wounded in Gaza, as that cycle of violence continues.

Fawaz Gerges is the author of "The Islamists and the West," joins us now.

Good to see you, Fawaz.

This is turning into a -- I think, from the standpoint of the Bush administration, a very disappointing execution of policy, if we can frame the policy, for many of us, a concern for our soldiers who are there, and, certainly, for all of us, concerns about the stability of Iraq. What in the world can be done?

FAWAZ GERGES, AUTHOR, "THE ISLAMISTS AND THE WEST": Well, the big question, Lou, is not the lack of adequate troops or intelligence in Iraq. The big difficulty facing the United States is the lack of legitimacy of the process of political reconstruction.

DOBBS: Well, let's talk about legitimacy. We have 160,000 troops. We have just overthrown a regime. Our men and women are in harm's way. And for every American, that is a concern. What do you mean legitimacy?

GERGES: It is, in the eyes of the Iraqis, the process of...

DOBBS: Well, let's talk about it from the eyes of the United States. What can be done?

(CROSSTALK)

DOBBS: Because, for the Iraqis, what needs to be done, we understand, is to rebuild their infrastructure, to provide a safe and secure environment for them. What can be done?

GERGES: And the big question is you do you legitimize this particular process. You do it by three steps.

First, you bring in the international community as a real partner to shoulder the process economic, political and security costs in Iraq.

Secondly, that is, you really must give the United Nations some sharing power capacity in Iraq. Secondly -- secondly, you expedite the process by which you transfer power to Iraqis. I mean, you want to make sure -- you want to...

DOBBS: Which Iraqis?

GERGES: Iraqi people

DOBBS: Well, that's a wonderful concept. But which Iraqis? Because Chalabai is a highly controversial, some would say, illegitimate face. Certainly the Shia, the Sunni require representation. The provisional government is not -- is not endorsing U.S. policy. So to whom does the United States, which is in ineffective control -- to whom does it transfer power?

GERGES: The sooner the Iraqis choose their own representatives, the more legitimate the process of reconstruction...

DOBBS: When was the last time there was a democratic election in Iraq?

GERGES: Well, that's what I'm saying because the United States went into Iraq to...

DOBBS: Would you not say for us, Fawaz, -- because you are a very smart political scientist and a student of the region, the culture, the religion, would you not say that first we have to establish law, order and provide for the basic human needs of the Iraqi people?

GERGES: But so far, Lou, so far, in the eyes of many Iraqis -- so far in the eyes of many Iraqis -- basic services do not exist.

DOBBS: But that's what I just said to you. Don't you think it's required?

GERGES: What comes first? What comes first? I mean, don't you...

DOBBS: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) safety and security? What would you say? GERGES: And so far we don't have it in Iraq.

DOBBS: Correct.

GERGES: So far...

DOBBS: What do we do? You said the troops weren't important. How does one achieve it?

GERGES: You also put more Iraqi faces on the streets, in order...

DOBBS: Iraqi faces? More of a public government, as critics would suggest?

GERGES: The big challenge really for the United States, Lou, is how do you provide security for Iraqis, while at the same time reducing American military presence from urban towns? The answer is you do it by bringing...

DOBBS: Why not just arm every Iraqi in the country?

GERGES: Absolutely. But you see....

DOBBS: Well why isn't it being done?

GERGES: But you see what we did Lou....

DOBBS: The reason is...

GERGES: We dismantled the Iraqi army 400, 000 -- we dismantled the entire Iraqi army, 400,000 strong, and we have created larger blocks, larger blocks of dissatisfied, angry and well-trained soldiers who have a vested interest in undermining the American military.

DOBBS: Well, how well trained?

GERGES: The point -- the point, Lou, I'm trying to suggest here is that we need to let Iraq succeed. We could manage Iraq. But the question is how do you legitimize the process of reconstruction? How do you convince the Iraqis that you are there just for a short period? How do you bring in international...

(CROSSTALK)

GERGES: And that's why -- why not take chances on people's choice? After all, Lou, democracy implies risk.

The big question was -- I mean, you and I, we talked about it, that somehow, initially, we were terrified that somehow, if we have elections, the theocratic government would imagine Iraq based on the Iranian model.

DOBBS: Well I don't who's terrified. Whoa, whoa, whoa, Fawaz. I don't know that the U.S. government is terrified.

GERGES: I mean, initially.

DOBBS: I don't think that there is a practical -- excuse me, Fawaz. Let me ask the question. American soldiers are being killed. There is a debate in this country about even how many forces are required to maintain security. There is an absolute fragmentation, as you well know because you have just spent time there, of the entire society of Iraq, which was all expected.

GERGES: No. No, it was not expected at all. Actually, what was expected the Iraqi project was going to be an easy thing. Iraqis would welcome

DOBBS: That Sunnis and Shia would come together, that Ba'athists would suddenly embrace radical Islamist terrorists.

GERGES: The Shiites represent more than 60 percent of the Iraqi population.

DOBBS: I quite understand that.

(CROSSTALK)

DOBBS: But what I'm asking you, very simply, is how in the world a people that have never known democracy, who are content to watch, and many of them, simply insist upon continuing violence, how you can achieve...

(CROSSTALK)

DOBBS: Please.

...achieve stability and security and then lay the basis for whatever policies will follow.

GERGES: You want -- you want to bring the international community, bring the United Nations, shelter the burden of economic and security -- and security concerns in Iraq. You want to put more Iraq forces on the streets to provide security for Iraqis and you also want -- and you also want...

DOBBS: But we're sending 30,000 people as policemen in (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

GERGES: That's not enough. That's not enough. I mean, of course, we are beginning and this is -- the United States is beginning to train more Iraqi forces, and that's a very positive step. The United States is also now negotiating with the United Nations about a bigger multi-national force.

DOBBS: Right.

GERGES: And the big question is, we must expedite the process of transferring power to Iraqis as soon as possible by holding elections, yes. By holding elections.

DOBBS: Do you want them in two weeks? Two months? When? GERGES: Sooner the better. This is -- by the way....

DOBBS: But it's a very serious question and it has to have a concrete and specific answer because the Bush administration has said they wants elections, they want a democratic government. The issue is how soon and under what terms.

GERGES: Absolutely. And as you know, there was some major disagreements within the Bush administration. Do you remember General Garner came? I mean, he...

DOBBS: Well, there have been huge disagreements...

GERGES: ..and the question...

DOBBS: between the Department of Defense, the State Department.

GERGES: The policy now they're talking about between one and two years. The United States is in a race against time in Iraq. I think the Iraqi project could succeed. I think it could make it. But we must -- I mean, take...

DOBBS: Fawaz, I understand that. When do you want elections?

GERGES: The sooner the better.

DOBBS: I understand.

GERGES: Two months.

DOBBS: Two months?

GERGES: Absolutely. The sooner the better because you want to convince Iraqis...

DOBBS: I understand.

GERGES: ...that the United States is there for a limited period of time. We will take risk on people's choices, where a democracy...

DOBBS: Well, the risk has already been taken

GERGES: We promised the Iraqis democracies. Let's take risks. Let's show the Iraqis that we practice what we preach.

DOBBS: Fawaz Gerges, as always, good to talk with you and as always provocative. Thank you.

Turning now to our special reports on American education, upon which we're focusing this week. Last night, Education Secretary Rod Paige here said we spend half a trillion a year to educate our children.

Tonight, Jan Hopkins reports where that money goes and upon what it achieves.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JAN HOPKINS, CNNfn CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The Hillsboro school district outside Portland, Oregon ran out of money at the end of the last school year. Schools closed 17 days early.

This is a new school year. In Chicago, teachers are preparing their classrooms for students who arrive next week. They wish they had more money to spend for basic supplies.

BARBARA EGAN, KINDERGARTEN TEACHER: Most of the teachers, I think, all have to dip into their own pocket to get what they need in the classroom.

PRISCILLA PEREZ, FIRST GRADE TEACHER: I have spent so much money already and haven't gotten paid yet. But I do it because I want to have a nice classroom. I want to have a classroom that's welcoming for my students.

HOPKINS: The Chicago schools will spend just under $5 billion this year. Two billion comes from the local community, 1.5 billion comes from the state, less than a billion from the government. The biggest expense for Chicago and nearly every school district is teachers' salaries.

Chicago is lucky. Illinois did not cut back on education despite a budget shortfall. But the Chicago school superintendent did have to cut 500 administrators, but no teachers, to balance his budget.

ARNE DUNCAN, CEO, CHICAGO PUBLIC SCHOOLS: We're going to continue to streamline, continue to run the tightest ship possible from a management standpoint and get every single dollar out to where it needs to be, which is into our classrooms, into teaching and learning.

HOPKINS: Chicago public schools spend about $8,500 per student each year. That's above the national average.

Nationally, most of the money for education comes from the states and local communities. Relatively little comes from the federal government.

Parent organizations believe the federal government needs to kick in more if the president's "No Child Left Behind" program is to work.

ANNA WESELAK, PRE.-ELECT, NATIONAL PTA: Out of every federal dollar only 2.8 cents of that dollar is spent on U.S. Department of Education programs. So there's obviously a big shortfall. Right now the National PTA is working with other education organizations to increase that amount to at least five cents on every dollar, which we feel will help to adequately fund "No Child Left Behind."

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You can get a book, you can bring it back to your desk.

HOPKINS: Some think the problem boils down to demanding too much from schools.

HENRY LEVIN, COLUMBIA UNIV. TEACHER'S COLLEGE: Each of these activities demands resources and takes attention away from, let's say, some more fundamental types of educational needs. Certainly traditionally, more fundamental.

HOPKINS: While the adults argue what to spend on education, the children are beginning a new school year.

In Dallas, where they spend $6,300 dollars to educate each child a year, children are arriving for the new year.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Good morning.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Good morning, Lincoln (ph).

HOPKINS: Teachers and students come with high expectations of what the year will bring.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HOPKINS: Regardless of what is spent per child on education, whether it's close to the $5,000 spent in Arizona or Arkansas or the $20,000 spent by wealthy New York suburbs, the refrain of parents, teachers and schools seems to be, it's never enough -- Lou.

DOBBS: It's never enough, and in many states, it is certainly an inadequate amount that is being spent in the -- and the achievements are clear. Is there a definitive national correlation between money spent and improvement in the level of education achieved by the student?

HOPKINS: No. There isn't enough data.

DOBBS: No. I mean, and that's crazy.

HOPKINS: We have no -- yes, right. We have no information on the basis of national tests to tell us the answer to that question. The tests basically are done in states.

DOBBS: All right. Jan Hopkins...

HOPKINS: We may know in a few years. Not now.

DOBBS: OK. Jan Hopkins, thank you very much.

Coming up next year, the shuttle Columbia's final moments -- the definitive report on what went wrong and why. I'll be joined by former shuttle astronaut Norm Thagard next.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: As we reported, the independent Columbia accident investigation board today cited effectively the NASA management culture as responsible for the shuttle disaster in February. Joining me now to discuss this report with a view of some considerable expertise and experience, shuttle astronaut Norm Thagard, who joins us from Washington, D.C. Good to have you with us, Norm.

NORM THAGARD, FORMER ASTRONAUT: Thank you, Lou.

DOBBS: This report effectively chose to focus on management culture at NASA rather than individual decision-makers. What is your reaction to the report and its findings?

THAGARD: First, they pointed out the similarities between what happened with Challenger and what happened with Columbia, that you had a problem that an engineer or engineers had highlighted, and somewhere along the management chain that wasn't -- didn't get the proper attention. But there are also important differences. In the case of O rings with Challenger, that was thought to be potentially a catastrophic problem, whereas that was never the thought until the very last mission for the shedding of foam from the external tank.

DOBBS: And frankly, Norm -- and I should point out to our viewers that Norm has flown aboard four shuttle flights, also a visit to Mir, coming at this with great experience and perspective. What is your best judgment about the culture of NASA, that approach in this report and the individual decision-making that took place? And we should point out, this decision-making took place within the context of the Columbia mission in a very compressed amount of time.

THAGARD: Right. It's hard for me, knowing a lot of the folks involved to condemn NASA management, because the folks I know are wonderful people and certainly would never knowingly do anything that would put a crew in jeopardy. However, there's clearly communications problem when you have an engineer saying, we need to look at this, and clearly, anyone that watched that video on the launch of the foam hitting the leading edge of the wing would say, wow, and I think if a manager had seen that and ignored it, you would certainly wonder about that sort of thing. So that's the problem. Again, same thing we saw with Challenger, engineer saying there was a problem, and somewhere along the way in management it just doesn't get the proper attention.

DOBBS: Is it your feeling that -- and for those who do not know, NASA has a culture that, frankly, it separates culturally its engineers, and its managers, its administration, and the engineers are closest, I would say -- and I'd like you to confirm my judgment on this -- it seems to me far closer to the astronaut core themselves. Would you say that's right, Norm?

THAGARD: I think that's probably true. It wasn't at all unusual during my 17 and a half years at NASA for an engineer to come to me and try to sort of put a bug in my ear about something that certainly had come to their attention and they were concerned about.

DOBBS: Is it that the engineers, the people who know best how to design the operation, is it your judgment that they have sufficient access to both management and the astronauts, and the ability to drive their views into the heart of the organization? In this case, concerns about the foam that struck the wing of Columbia? THAGARD: I believe in general, Lou, that they do. But if you have even one problem like you had with Challenger and with Columbia that somehow escapes that system, that normally I think is fairly open, then a catastrophe can result, and that's unfortunately what's happened.

DOBBS: How soon in your judgment, would and should an astronaut feel safe and secure flying aboard a shuttle?

THAGARD: In general, you feel safe when management has reviewed everything and decides that it's safe. Some estimates have been they'll fly in the spring. It's hard to believe that's true, because you've either got to correct one or both problems. You've either got to beef up the structure so that it's not so susceptible to damage from foam or whatever else might hit it, or you've got to eliminate the foam shedding problem. Hard for me to imagine that that's going to occur that soon.

DOBBS: Norm, thank you. Norm, as we're concluding, I just wanted to tell you, I couldn't help this, I looked at the findings, think back to a fellow whom I respected a great deal in business and organization, Walt Rissen (ph), who headed Citibank for years, and he said, as you mentioned, these are some of the best -- the best of our society working at NASA, but Walt Rissen (ph) always said that bureaucracy is a state of mind. And that seems to have overtaken the organization. And certainly, obviously, from these findings, they're going to try to fix it.

THAGARD: Yes. Yes.

DOBBS: Norm Thagard, we certainly appreciate your being with us.

THAGARD: My pleasure.

DOBBS: Good to talk with you.

That NASA report points to a flawed culture. In our poll tonight, the question is, do you think individuals should be held accountable for the Columbia tragedy. Yes or no? Cast your vote at cnn.com/lou. We'll have the results for you later in the show.

When we continue, closing the gap. A once-in-a-lifetime close-up encounter with Mars. Bill Tucker reports. And we'll been joined by James Garvin, NASA's chief scientist for Mars. We'll be talking about life on Mars and the spectacular pictures and sights we can see next. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: Well, tonight, step outside and look up at the night sky. Mars will be there, barring any cloud cover, and it will be not only highly visible, it will be dominating the lights in the sky tonight. The Red Planet is at its closest proximity to Earth in more than 60,000 years. Bill Tucker has the story.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The last big encounter the Earth had with Mars, things got a little out of hand.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Special bulletin from Trenton, New Jersey.

ORSON WELLES: There's new evidence that these creatures have scientific knowledge far in advance of our own.

TUCKER: No such panic this time.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And I'm going to mount a camera, a 35 millimeter camera right here.

TUCKER: Just a lot of excitement, and for good reason. It's been 60,000 years since Mars was this close. Cromagnon man had yet to appear on the scene. Neanderthals roamed the Earth, and it's doubtful they even noticed.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The fact that Mars is going to be the closest that it's ever been in 60 millennia, I'm just glad to, you know, be here and be a part of that.

TUCKER: Mars will be this close again in 284 years, making this passing a true once-in-a-lifetime event, and something that everyone can experience.

MICHAEL SHARA, AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY: Oh, absolutely. It's going to be crystal clear. Really, all you need to do is look towards the east, and there it is. The brightest thing rising in the sky, reddish/orange in color, you literally can't miss it.

TUCKER: No telescope needed. Binoculars will do just fine, or even the naked eye. Mars is the brightest object in the night sky besides the moon. From a scientific perspective, there's not a lot to be learned. There are already two spacecraft in orbit around Mars and three more are on their way. For scientists and others, this is an event to be enjoyed.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think it should be really good. I am going to make sure to try and find a good place to have a look at it.

TUCKER: And while much is often made of Mars as the angry planet, as the planet of the Roman god of war, astrologists also remind us...

SUSAN MILLER, ASTROLOGYZONE.COM: Mars this is can-do planet. If you didn't have Mars at all, well, there wouldn't be energy and drive and courage and determination.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TUCKER: And as close as Mars will be, it will still be 35 million miles away -- Lou.

DOBBS: And in this close-up encounter, there's obviously something for everyone.

TUCKER: Exactly.

DOBBS: All right, Bill, thank you very much.

James Garvin is NASA's chief scientist when it comes to Mars, and he joins us tonight from Washington, D.C. Good to have you with us.

JAMES GARVIN, CHIEF SCIENTIST FOR MARS, NASA: Thanks, Lou. It's great to be here.

DOBBS: This is a big time for you. You have Mars in proximity. You have spacecraft on the way to Mars. And of course, you have a global surveyor there anyway. How do you feel this evening?

GARVIN: I'm ecstatic about the possibilities for exploring another world. We have Mars in the night sky as the most luminous object and an armada of science spacecraft approaching the planet.

DOBBS: Five spacecraft in all, correct, with the Europeans?

GARVIN: That's correct, and the Japanese and the Zomi (ph) spacecraft.

DOBBS: Exactly. And the fact that we are putting all of this attention, the spacecraft, the U.S. spacecraft will arrive there in January. What do you expect to find?

GARVIN: Lou, we're looking for the stuff of life. Essentially, the places where life may have left its record, in the rocks. So our mission is a rock explorer. And we're going to treat the rocks like the artifacts that Mother Nature will leave us. And we're kind of doing a variant on the "CSI" TV show, only we're exploring another world. And those rovers will give us a human's eye view, as like a field scientist will get, as we explore Mars.

DOBBS: And as we explore Mars from the planet Earth, those mortals of us who have a pair of binoculars, or a telescope, this is really a remarkable opportunity, is it not, because Mars is just dominating this night sky?

GARVIN: Oh, absolutely, Lou. It's the best it is going to get in our lifetime. And it gives us -- I think it gives us a little bit of moment for pause, as we imagine that we're going to actually be on the surface, albeit vicariously, in just another few months.

DOBBS: And of course, we have been there with global surveyor that sent back remarkable pictures, the Malen (ph) cameras that have shown the icecaps, in unexpected parts of Mars. Do you truly believe, you yourself, that this is the ice that we are seeing, what we -- carbon dioxide, frozen, do you believe it's the stuff of the basis for life, if not life itself?

GARVIN: Lou, I think the ice that's most interesting is the water ice. And Mars may be the ultimate water ice planet, second to Earth, in this neck of the solar system. So we want to get to that ice and explore what's in that. And that water ice -- that's the stuff -- one of the ingredients that we think is necessary for the kind of life we have. So part of our Mars exploration program is to follow the water, and following the ice is part of that water.

DOBBS: And as we look through our telescopes tonight and tomorrow and for some time, actually into September, some will see a little icecap up there, of -- on the top of Mars, won't they?

GARVIN: They will. In fact, they'll be seeing the southern polar icecap, the permanent icecap, which is capped by this frozen dry ice stuff. But underneath that, we think there is a reservoir of frozen water.

DOBBS: And do you personally believe that life ever existed on Mars?

GARVIN: I guess, Lou, the way I like to say is, why not? Mars is kind of like Mother Nature's great control experiment -- formed in the same neck of the woods as our planet. Early in its history, it may have had many of the similar ingredients, and that history on Mars may be preserved well enough for to us to go looking. So why not? We don't know today. And that's what we are trying to find out.

DOBBS: And for those who want to see Mars in the night sky tonight and tomorrow, of course, when it is closest in opposition to Earth, what's your best recommendation for people across the United States from east to west?

GARVIN: Well, Lou, I would say go out after sunset, of course, and look, starting in the south, for a bright orange/white object that will be as bright as normally we would expect Jupiter -- in fact it's brighter -- and follow it into the sky until near midnight. You can follow it as it rises across the south, and with just your naked eye you'll see this luminous bright red spot, or orange spot, and then with binoculars, you can actually see the disc, the disc of another planet, 35 million miles away. That's pretty remarkable.

DOBBS: And it is, if I may use just an elegant expression, which has been very serviceable over the years, it's just neat as it can be. James Garvin, we thank you very much.

GARVIN: Thank you, Lou.

DOBBS: Chief scientist for Mars, spectacular.

Coming up next, the results of our poll. Christine Romans with rampant rumors on Wall Street, and she'll just have the market as well. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: The results of tonight's poll. The question, do you think individuals rather than the management culture should have been held accountable for the Columbia tragedy? And it's pretty evenly split -- 49 percent of you said yes, 51 percent said no. On Wall Street today, stocks made modest gains, but they were impressive nonetheless. The Dow finished up almost 23, the Nasdaq up 6, the S&P 3. Christine Romans with the market -- Christine.

CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN FINANCIAL NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Well, Lou, the Dow was down 84 points at one point, and then turned on a dime and closed higher here. Another bath of good economic news. July's durable goods orders confirmed that strength we saw in June, marking now a full cycle of stronger economic reports. And existing home sales in July fell 2.9 percent, but it was the second highest level on record, and June's record was revised higher, and consumer confidence grew.

Now, the cyclical stocks wobbled early today. They didn't shock their multi-year highs in the past few sessions, but as you can see there, it doesn't take very much steam off what has been a stellar rally there.

Meanwhile, there's been much made of the low volatility number, the Vix. It closed today just above 20. Now, from 1998 through 2002, five times the Vix broke below 20. Each time the market sold off, but the Vix watchers, Lou, say have no fear, market is just going back to more normal levels of the 1990s. No worries from the low Vix.

DOBBS: No worries is always a good thing when we're talking about Wall Street. Christine, thanks. Christine Romans.

That's our show for tonight. We thank you for being with us. Tomorrow night, we'll be joined by Charles Lu (ph), astrophysicist at the Hayden Planetarium, and Anthony Principi, the secretary of the Department of the Veteran Affairs. Please join us tomorrow night. For all of us here, good night from New York. "LIVE FROM THE HEADLINES" with Anderson Cooper is next.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com





Iraq Hits Unfortunate Milestone>