Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Wolf Blitzer Reports

Iraqi Insurgents Warn Of Impending Attacks On Election Day; Interview with Senator Ted Kennedy; Interview with William Safire

Aired January 27, 2005 - 17:00   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.


WOLF BLITZER, HOST: Happening now. Deep impact with an underwater mountain. This is the damage to a United States Navy submarine and these are the first pictures to be made public showing the aftermath. Now more details of the devastating injuries on the crew.
Stand by for hard news on WOLF BLITZER REPORTS.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(voice-over): Fight for Iraq, a final campaign push, and a final warning from the car bombers.

Exit strategy, the liberals' warhorse calls for an end to the war.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The U.S. military presence has become part of the problem not part of the solution.

BLITZER: I'll go one on one with Senator Edward Kennedy.

Train tragedy. A would-be suicide leads to murder charges.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was his car that caused the derailment. He put the car there. He certainly intended to commit the act of train derailment.

BLITZER: There are countless rail crossings in this country. How great is the danger?

William Safire speaks. After three decades, the conservative columnist calls it quits but he's ready for a new chapter. I'll ask him what's next.

ANNOUNCER: This is WOLF BLITZER REPORTS for Thursday, January 27, 2005.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: Three days ahead of election day, Iraq's insurgents today warned voters to stay home and they punctuated the threat with bombings of polling places and political offices, but the campaigners are carrying on. CNN's Jeff Koinange reports from Baghdad.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) JEFF KOINANGE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A last-minute campaign blitz as candidates in the predominantly Shiite town of Najaf canvass the city. These are supporters of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution, part of the Shiite-dominated United Iraqi Alliance which expects to do well in this weekend's election.

"We are optimistic because the Iraqi people especially in Najaf are united in one stand. We think that elections are the only way to end the crisis of the Iraqi people," says candidate Adnan Jaleel.

The Alliance has the blessings of Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, the Shiite's spiritual leader who lives in Najaf. Al-Sistani has urged his supporters to turn up in numbers on election day and to refrain from taking revenge against the mostly Sunni insurgents.

Those insurgent attacks continue with more explosions at schools that are due to be polling stations on Sunday. And in Kurdish northern Iraq, a suicide bomber commandeered a tractor and detonated in the gates of the Kurdish Democratic Party killing five.

And in Tarmiyah, in the Sunni Triangle a roadside bomb exploded just after a U.S. convoy passed, killing two Iraqis.

Despite the violence, the Baghdad neighborhood of Adhamiyah is getting into election mood, even as the ever present U.S. military swings through in its armored vehicles. And the voters' shopping list is familiar.

"We only want security," says Mohammed Jabar (ph). If whoever wins the election will bring security we will be very happy. Others are more cynical.

"This election is controlled by the Americans and the evidence for this is there," says Ahmed Hassan (ph).

Among one of Iraq's many minorities, its small Christian community, there's a simple wish: "whoever will rule Iraq should do so, but he needs to be a good and honest person who loves Iraq, who is fair," says Iman Victor (ph).

(on camera): Fairness and love are two things Iraqis haven't witnessed in a long time. Some, at least, are hoping against hope that Sunday's election will at least be the beginning of the end of the chaos. Jeff Koinange, CNN, Baghdad.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: A senior Iraqi official said today the insurgents are getting aid and instructions from a next-door neighbor. Our senior international correspondent Brent Sadler got an exclusive look at security or lack of it on the Syrian side of the border.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BRENT SADLER, CNN SR. INTL. CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A border fortress guarding an entry point to Iraq, manned by American machine gunners, clearly visible from neighboring Syria. Syria a staging post for insurgent sympathizers, claims Washington. Sympathizers who wreak bloody chaos in Iraq, directing, controlling and financing its alleged insurgent attacks.

PETER FORD, BRITISH AMBASSADOR TO SYRIA: Nobody is saying that they are the number one factor, but they are a significant factor.

SADLER: With significant players, claim western intelligence sources lying low in Syria, including its alleged high-level ex-Iraqi regimists possibly the jack and number 6 of diamonds on the U.S. most wanted list. An attempt, say senior officials here to make Syria a scapegoat for U.S. mistakes.

FAROUK AL-SHARAA, SYRIAN FOREIGN MINISTER: There is no solid ground for any allegations directed against Syria. I know why they are doing it. They are doing it because they have problems inside Iraq.

SADLER: Problems, Syria claims, it is trying to combat, raising and strengthening earth works to prevent vehicle-borne infiltrations across some 400 miles or around 700 kilometers of drab wilderness.

On the Syrian side here border security forces are undermanned, undertrained and starved of high-tech surveillance equipment while on the other side of this tense frontier, it's mostly American troops, not Iraqis, guarding those fortifications.

Behind, an American flag, uncomfortably close to Syria. Still, Syrian/U.S. cooperation is hard at work, though rarely seen on this simmering frontline. U.S. military officials arrive from Damascus, escorted by Syrian guards to survey border security. A frequent mission with courteous exchanges of formalities in Arabic.

FORD: The Syrians are bending with the wind. They're giving us some of the cooperation that we're requesting, but not yet giving us the rest.

SADLER: Holding back, it's alleged, on a crackdown of Iraqi militants, active, but largely invisible in Syria. On the plus side, Syrian border guards open the way for the American survey team to cross and link up with their own entrenched army. U.S. and Syrian views of Iraq are near to each other, but in policy, claims Washington, they are still far apart. Brent Sadler, CNN, Syria.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: The U.S. Navy is assessing the damage to a submarine that ran into an underwater mountain near Guam almost three weeks ago. The USS San Francisco arrived at dry dock yesterday. Now we can show you the pictures for the first time of the damage. Our senior Pentagon correspondent Jamie McIntyre standing by with that -- Jamie.

JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN SR. PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, we knew it was a close call, but the pictures really tell the story of how close it was.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(voice-over): The pictures of the USS San Francisco pulling into dry dock in Guam show how extensive the damage was to the bow of the submarine and how much worse the January 8 undersea accident could have been. The submarine was traveling at high speed, more than 30 knots, when it slammed into what the Navy says was an uncharted undersea mountain 350 miles south of Guam. The photos show the sub's sonar dome sheared off. What they don't show is the damage to some of the ballast tanks that keep the ship afloat. Were it not for the submarine's double hull and compartmentalized design, it could easily have sunk, officials say.

One crew member wrote in an e-mail, "it happened while chow was going on and most people were either sitting and eating or on watch. I don't remember much of the collision. People describe it as like in the movie "The Matrix" where everything slowed down and levitated and then went flying forward faster than the brain can process."

Machinist Mate Second-Class Joseph Ashley was thrown 20 feet into a metal pump. The blow to his head knocked him out and he died of the injury before he could be evacuated. Sixty other sailors were injured, 23 so seriously they could not stand watch, according to an internal Navy e-mail sent by a top admiral after the crash. The Navy has reassigned the skipper of the San Francisco Commander Kevin Mooney, while an investigation determines whether anything could have prevented the accident.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

(on camera): Wolf, as you know, submarines rely on charts, not sonar to avoid undersea mountains. If it turns out that this massive rock was in fact not on the map, then Commander Mooney could be found to have done nothing wrong.

BLITZER: Jamie McIntyre at the Pentagon. Jamie, thank you very much.

In Los Angeles today arraignment of the suicidal man blamed for yesterday's deadly commuter train wreck has been delayed. Eleven people died, and 200 were hurt in the multitrain collision. Police say it started when one train struck an SUV that one man, Alvarez, drove onto the tracks in a suicide attempt before changing his mind and getting out of his vehicle. Alvarez faces 11 counts of murder including with special circumstances. That means he could be eligible for the death penalty.

Deliberate or not, collisions between trains, cars and people happen much more often than many of us realize. And this latest tragedy is drawing new attention to the problem. Our Brian Todd joining us now live from Rockville, Maryland, with that part of the story in our "Security Watch" -- Brian

BRIAN TODD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, we're at a very busy intersection here in Rockville, Maryland. Right over my left shoulder here is where an intersection between a railway and a very busy street. This is the kind of intersection that railway officials say is all too commonplace, and as the case in California demonstrates, it can be a recipe for disaster.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TODD (voice-over): Law enforcement officials are still trying to determine whether Juan Alvarez parked on the road crossing these tracks or somewhere else. Either way, experts say there's virtually no way to prevent suicide attempts on the rails, but this incident does force a hard look at the often deadly encroachment between America's railways and outside traffic.

GERRI HALL, OPERATION LIFESAVER: The weight of the train -- the weight and mass ratio of that train to your vehicle is about 4,000 to 1, and that is almost exactly the same as the weight-mass ratio of your car to a soda pop can.

TODD: Federal officials tell CNN about every two hours either a vehicle or pedestrian is struck by a train in the U.S. In 2003, the last year complete numbers are available, there were nearly 3,000 collisions with vehicles on railway/road crossings resulting in more than 300 deaths.

But officials at the Federal Railroad Administration tell CNN these collisions and fatalities have declined dramatically over the past 30 years. More crossing signals and barriers have been installed. Those devices and safety features on trains themselves have become more sophisticated. And many crossings have been closed. Safety advocates say that's crucial.

HALL: ... at almost every mile, we have someone at risk. We're putting the highway and the railroad traffic at odds with each other. So wherever we can close crossings, that's a great thing.

TODD: Experts say so-called grade separation, having the road and railroad at different elevations, is a trend that's been developed widely in Europe and needs to be accelerated in the U.S. As officials point out, the safest railway/road crossing is the one that doesn't exist.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TODD: Now safety officials tell us that a train traveling at about 55 miles an hour takes a mile or more to stop after the emergency brakes have been applied. So they tell us that in the cases of these types of collisions, Wolf, the crews are simply helpless to do anything, really.

BLITZER: Brian Todd reporting for us out in Rockville, Maryland, Brian, thank you very much.

And to our viewers, please stay tuned to CNN day and night for the most reliable news about your security.

When we come back, calls for U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq. And harsh words aimed directly at the president.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) SEN. EDWARD KENNEDY (D), MASSACHUSETTS: The administration has been wrong in every one of their judgments on Iraq, every one of them. They were wrong in going in there, they never found the weapons of mass destruction, they never found al Qaeda.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Democratic Senator Edward Kennedy urges President Bush, and I'm quoting, now, "to swallow his pride." I spoke with Senator Kennedy just a short time ago. That interview coming up next.

Plus, entering retirement, conservative columnist William Safire joins me live in his first television interview since leaving his New York Times op-ed column.

And later, cartoon controversy, why this animated rabbit from the PBS show "Postcards from Buster" is now a focus in the nation's culture wars.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: He opposed sending U.S. troops to Iraq and now he wants to get them out, some of them immediately. In a fiery speech today, Democratic Senator Edward Kennedy blasted the Bush administration for leading the country into, quote, "quagmire," and laid out his own exit strategy.

Afterward, I sat down with the senator for what was also a spirited one-on-one interview.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: Senator Kennedy, thanks very much for joining us.

You make a very, very strong accusation. You say that the war in Iraq has now become President Bush's Vietnam. You lived through the Vietnam War. That's a strong accusation. Why do you say that?

KENNEDY: Well, I think it is. I think because those who were the basic supporters of the war in Vietnam thought there was a military solution to a political problem. I think that is basically the problem of today. This administration believes that they can solve this problem in Iraq with military force, and I think it's much more complicated than that.

I believe that, by and large, this expansion of the insurgency really demonstrates day in and day out, the reports from the intelligence agents, that the Iraqis are perceiving the American presence there not as liberators, but as occupiers.

And I think what we have to do is change and alter or policy so that we can have a safe and secure and independent Iraq. We're not going to do it with this policy, it's going to be enormously costly. It's risky to change and alter a policy, but the greatest risk to our American service men and women and to American prestige is continuing on this bankrupt policy. BLITZER: But they say, the administration, this is not a military solution, they say it is a political solution, starting with elections this coming Sunday.

KENNEDY: But the fact is they have -- basically have been calling all the shots, this administration has -- they're tied down in politically, they're tied down in militarily. The only way that you're ever going to get the target off the backs of American servicemen and -women is have the Iraqis believe that they're going to control their own destiny. That isn't the way it is perceived today. Iraqis perceive today that the Americans are part of the problem, not the problem but the solution.

BLITZER: Well, why not give this election a chance to succeed?

KENNEDY: We are. This election should go forward, and after this election goes forward, rather than the United States writing the constitution for a new Iraq, the United States ought to step back, let the international agencies, the U.N., other agencies, develop the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) so the United States is stepping back from that kind of -- and we are announcing...

BLITZER: On that constitution, what's wrong with the United States helping the Iraqis write a constitution? Isn't that what we did with Germany after World War II and Japan?

KENNEDY: Well, of course, those are completely different situations. There we found that the countries -- the occupations they were completely different. Those countries were absolutely devastated. Their greatest threat was from the communists, from the Soviet Union. Those are entirely different.

Look, the administration has been wrong in every one of their judgments on Iraq, every one of them. They were wrong in going in there, they never found weapons of mass destruction, they never found al Qaeda, they disbanded the military. They've been wrong on every single count.

When will this administration recognize that they've been wrong about it and when will this country recognize they have made mistake after mistake after mistake after mistake? They're part of the problem, not the solution, we need to change policy, and we've outlined a way where Iraqis will take control both of their political and also of their military. And that offers the best chance for a true, independent Iraq.

BLITZER: The Republicans say you're giving aid and comfort to the enemy, the terrorists in Iraq. Right now a statement put out by the RNC, the Republican National Committee, following your speech here at Johns Hopkins at the School of Advanced International Study says this:

"It's remarkable that Senator Kennedy would deliver such an overtly pessimistic message only days before the Iraqi election." The statement goes on and says: "Kennedy's partisan political attack stands in stark contrast to President Bush's vision of spreading freedom around the world. The world is watching whether America has the will to stand with the Iraqi people as freedom takes root in their nation. And no democracy has ever risen out of defeatism."

KENNEDY: This is the same group that has called all the shots in Iraq. They're the ones that have made blunder after blunder. They're the ones that have cost us the loss of so many American lives and American wounded and have cost the American taxpayers so much. This is a perpetuation and a continuation of a bankrupt policy. Don't we understand it?

We have to understand, we eventually found these are the same voices I heard in Vietnam. These are exactly the same kinds of quotes. You could change that and put a different date on it, and you would have heard the same thing when those of us said that we have got to change our policy in Vietnam. That is exactly the same statement. This is Vietnam again.

We are getting into the thinking that there is a military solution. There wasn't a military solution in Algeria for the French. There wasn't a military solution by the British in Northern Ireland. And there isn't going to be a military solution in the Middle East and there will not be a military solution in Iraq. The more that we read history, understand history, we'll understand that we need to have the Iraqis believe that they are controlling their own destiny.

They don't today. They think we're there, they think we're after their oil. They think we're going to build all these military bases. They see an embassy bigger than the other. You know, the old Pottery Barn analogy is very good. We broke it by going in there, but it's the Iraqis that have to put it together. If we think we're going to put it together, over there, we're never getting out.

BLITZER: But what happens if the elections work and a stable Democratic government goes ahead, a national assembly writes a constitution and it works?

KENNEDY: The fact is you're going to have a continued violence through this week -- we're saying that we're hopeful that that works. But they ought to understand that they're going to train their own troops and they're going to defend that constitutional government, but we are out with this, and that is -- the best way that we're going to give the assurance that that constitutional government is going to be successful is if the Iraqis believe that they own it, and that they have -- and the soldiers that are going to be in their military are going to believe it's worth fighting for. They don't today. They don't today.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: We'll have more of my interview with Senator Kennedy, that's coming up next.

Plus this...

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNIDENTIFIED MALE: As a citizen of the world, I can tell you that he has been a beacon of hope and inspiration for generations of people who have been oppressed either behind the Iron Curtain or anywhere else.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: When we come back, William Safire speaks out in his first television interview since writing his final op-ed page column in The New York Times.

Stricken vessel, Coast Guard units are on the way to help a disabled ship with almost 1,000 people on board. We'll update you on that.

BLITZER: And later this hour the world remembers a dark time in history. The 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Senator Edward Kennedy says it's time to get out of Iraq and he's pulling no punches. Here's part two of my interview.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: If the Iraqi insurgents, the Saddam loyalists, the foreign fighters, if they believe that the U.S. is going to pull out, that the time is certain, what's the incentive for them to stop their fighting, they could just wait this thing out?

KENNEDY: By that time, hopefully you will have had these elections, they will have gone forward. You will have a duly elected government in Iraq, and we have over a year in order to train Iraqi military to defend their own country, to defend their own country.

If they're not going to defend it, how many thousands more Americans are we going to continue to send over there? The troops are going to -- the insurgents, and the real question is about how many foreign insurgents are going to go someplace else and then try and come back? Iraq then has the best chance of being truly independent, viable and worthy of being defended.

BLITZER: The American people looked at both candidates during the election. Iraq was at the center of the debate between President Bush and John Kerry. Fifty-one percent voted for the president, knowing everything you know right now, that all of us know, there were no weapons of mass destruction, there was no direct evidence of a link between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, those kinds of issues were thoroughly debated, yet President Bush was overwhelmingly, at least by 3.5 million votes, reelected.

KENNEDY: I think included in that we could talk about the causes on the election, but included in that election was an overlay of fear about homeland security and about the dangers of al Qaeda and fear. And I think there was an unwillingness that we'd be able to change. It wasn't just the Iraqi issue, which I don't think was really kind of a decisive issue myself, but there's a general kind of concern about terror, and I think which is a legitimate kind of concern. See, my sense is Iraq has taken our focus off the battle against al Qaeda and the terror. We had al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden on the run, and what did we do, pursue that and do something about it? No, we got into war in Iraq.

What was possibly the sense for that? We should be focusing on terror and Osama bin Laden and deal with the homeland security. This Iraq is just draining us, draining us. It's draining us militarily, and it is draining us in terms of resources.

Did President Bush lie to the American people?

KENNEDY: Well, I don't think there's any question that we were misled on the weapons of mass destruction, and the the into the...

BLITZER: But do you think in his own heart, in his own mind, he believed there were weapons of mass destruction?

KENNEDY: I think he believed it. I don't question that he believed it, but that isn't the issue, is it, really? We should have -- why didn't we take the time to permit the inspectors to finish up their job? Why didn't this administration that said they had 146 sites where there were weapons of mass destruction, give it to the inspectors? They didn't.

Now, Secretary Rice said they did. The 9/11 Commission -- or the intelligence commission said that -- or the 9/11 Commission report said that never happened. We never gave to the inspectors our best information.

Why didn't we give the inspectors a chance? Why didn't we do that? If we had given the inspectors a chance, they would have found no weapons of mass destruction. Then there's no threat to our security, and we would have an entirely different situation. You would have focus on Osama bin Laden, focus on terror, and I think we would be in a much more secure situation.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: But you're not saying he deliberately lied to...

KENNEDY: I'm not -- I'm saying that the administration misled the American people. That's what I'm saying.

BLITZER: Condoleezza Rice got most of the Democrats and your colleagues in the Senate voted for her confirmation. You voted against her confirmation. She's the first...

KENNEDY: That's really yesterday's -- I'm glad to explain why. But, I mean, it's really yesterday's news.

BLITZER: I know, but...

KENNEDY: We're all hopeful of being able to work with her now. She's now our secretary of state.

BLITZER: And you voted against her.

KENNEDY: That's right.

BLITZER: Because -- and I just want you to explain to our viewers specifically why you think she was not qualified to be secretary of state.

KENNEDY: Well, because I think she was part and parcel of the whole war strategy and the bringing of the United States to war in Iraq.

And I think that was an absolutely failed and flawed policy. I think it is now, I think it was then. And I didn't think that she deserved to be promoted to secretary of state. It's that -- basically that simple. I have a high regard for her personal achievements and accomplishments. And she's a personable person that I've enjoyed a professional relationship with.

But I didn't think that you promote someone that has been a part of such a failed and flawed policy.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: You have heard what Senator Kennedy thinks about the president's plans as far as Iraq is concerned, but wait until you hear what the senator has to say about the White House proposals on Social Security reform. Will the Democrat negotiate a compromise with President Bush? That's tomorrow, part two of the interview coming up on WOLF BLITZER REPORTS.

And this additional programming note. This Sunday, the new secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, will join me on "LATE EDITION." That's Sunday, noon Eastern.

To our viewers, here's your chance to weigh in this story. Our Web question of the day is this. Should there be a detailed timeline for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq? You can vote right now. Go to CNN.com/Wolf. We'll have the results later this hour.

After three decades and more than 3,000 columns, an editorial icon stops the presses.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BOB SCHIEFFER, CBS NEWS: I think he's one of the most original columnists that we have in Washington.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Bob Schieffer talking about Pulitzer Prize winner William Safire. Mr. Safire standing by to join us live here. That's coming up next.

First, it was SpongeBob SquarePants. Now it's Buster Baxter. Find out why this PBS cartoon character is now getting caught up in America's culture wars.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Welcome back. Signing off, but still speaking out. Conservative columnist William Safire joins me live, his first interview, televised interview, that is, since retiring from "The New York Times" op-ed page.

First, though, a quick check of some other stories now in the news.

Ford is recalling almost 800,000 trucks and SUVs to repair a cruise control switch that's causing fire hazards under the hood. The vehicles are model year 2000 Fort F-150s, Expeditions, Lincoln Navigators, and some F-Series SuperCrew Trucks. Ford will disconnect the switches, then replace them with new switches when they become available.

The Coast Guard is rushing to help a ship that is having engine problems in heavy seas off the coast of Alaska. The Semester at Sea research and teaching vessel is sponsored by the University of Pittsburgh; 990 people are on board; 681 of them are students.

This week, syndicated columnist, "New York Times" columnist William Safire signed off after three decades, more than 3,000 columns and a Pulitzer Prize. While he will continue to write his weekly language column, his departure from the op-ed page is being lamented and his career honored.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SCHEIFFER: I think he's one of the most original columnists that we have in Washington.

JIM LEHRER, NEWS ANCHOR: Even those who disagree will always say, well, he really did express that well.

WILLIAM COHEN, CNN WORLD AFFAIRS ANALYST: He's capable of taking an issue that you would expect him to come down on one side and going in the complete opposite direction. So that makes him interesting.

BLITZER (voice-over): The object of all this praise? William Safire. His departure from "The New York Times" op-ed page was marked last night in Washington with a dinner, which I attended at the home of the Israeli ambassador.

DANIEL AYALON, ISRAELI AMBASSADOR TO UNITED STATES: He's been a beacon of hope and inspiration for generations of people who have been oppressed either beyond the Iron Curtain or anywhere else.

BLITZER: Such accolades from both the right and the left could hardly have been foretold in 1973, when the former Nixon speechwriter was broad aboard "The Times" amid some controversy to lend a different political perspective. Six years later, in 1979, he began his column on language, to the delight of grammarians, lexicologists and millions of others.

PAUL WOLFOWITZ, DEPUTY DEFENSE SECRETARY: I sort of feel like I finally made it, because I made it into his real column. He quoted my use of the word audible, as in calling audibles. I don't think I've ever been in the real column before, so I feel good about that, but I wish he weren't quitting.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: And William Safire is joining us now live here in our Washington studio.

Bill, thanks very much for joining us.

Let's talk about Senator Kennedy first. He says this is President Bush's Vietnam. You lived through Vietnam. You were in the Nixon White House. Do you see parallels?

WILLIAM SAFIRE, COLUMNIST, "THE NEW YORK TIMES": No. I see this as an opportunity to change the map and the mood of the Middle East.

BLITZER: How long is this going to take?

SAFIRE: Nobody knows. There's Kennedy, defeatist, saying, we've got to get out and essentially saying cut and run.

But if you try to corner him and say, when should we get out, it's kind of a fuzzy as soon as we can. Well, of course we'll get out as soon as we can. And, of course we'll turn things over to the Iraqis. That's the whole idea.

BLITZER: Is it worth it to the American public, 1,400 dead troops already, approaches $300 billion in taxpayer money? It seems like a major commitment and a lot of people are saying, is it worth it?

SAFIRE: I think history will look back and say it was definitely worth it, because, if we can turn around Iraq, which was the worst of all the countries in the Middle East, if we can instill some sense of democracy and freedom there, we can change the world.

Now, I know that sounds idealistic. And the president's inaugural was complained about as being not specific enough. But human rights and democracy and freedom, that's what America is all about.

BLITZER: All right. So what's next? Iran?

SAFIRE: No. We're not going to start new wars unless we're attacked.

But, yes, we'll put pressure on Iran, economic and diplomatic, and on North Korea as well. And we'll also root for and speak up for dissidents wherever they are. And you read Sharansky's book when he was in jail in the Soviet Union. The hope that he had was coming from the United States. BLITZER: Are you upbeat now that there's a possibility of revived Israeli-Palestinian negotiations after Yasser Arafat's death?

SAFIRE: I think the mood in the Middle East changed with our regime change of Iraq and, of course, with the demise of Yasser Arafat.

BLITZER: So you see a connection between Iraq and the Israeli- Palestinian conflict?

SAFIRE: Of course. Yes.

And now Ariel Sharon has been proven right in taking a tough hard line. But he's the sort of -- it's like de Gaulle in Algeria and Nixon in China. He's the hard-line right-winger who can bring the right wing over to the center and make a deal. And that's what Israel needs and that's what the Palestinians need.

BLITZER: So you're encouraged now by what you see with Mahmoud Abbas, Abu Maven, the new Palestinian leader?

SAFIRE: Well, I would like to see him deliver on the big challenge of confronting his terrorists. If he can do that, then there will be a real response from Israel.

BLITZER: As you know, a lot of liberals and some conservatives are blasting the neocons, the neoconservatives. Are you in that category?

SAFIRE: I'm in no particular category, because I usually bite the hand that feeds me.

But I'm a hard-liner on defense and on getting on the ideological offense against tyranny.

BLITZER: But you align yourself more or less with a lot of the views of the Wolfowitzes, the Rumsfelds.

SAFIRE: Oh, sure. Right. Yes. No doubt about it.

BLITZER: So you don't walk away from that?

SAFIRE: Quite the contrary. I was walking ahead of it 10 years ago.

BLITZER: What do you think of this recent phenomenon -- maybe it's not that recent -- the federal government paying columnists? We saw Armstrong Williams, Maggie Gallagher now. They're on the payroll to a certain degree, writing columns, but not disclosing that to their viewers after accepting money either from the Department of Education, the Department of Health and Human Services.

SAFIRE: That was stupid on the part of the government, just plain stupid, and wrong-headed on the part of the journalists. And I think it's been not blown out of proportion, but blown up, and I don't think this government or the next government will be caught red-handed again.

BLITZER: Armstrong Williams, without giving details, says there's a lot more of this going on that we don't know about.

SAFIRE: Everybody in every agency is looking madly for, has anybody paid any journalists or paid a company that paid a journalist? And we'll probably see some more. But it didn't affect really public opinion.

BLITZER: A lot of our viewers and your readers and millions of people disappointed you're giving up that column. You made a conscientious decision. But you've got a second career you're about to begin.

SAFIRE: Right.

I think, after 30 years or so, you ought to change a career and try something new. And I've been active with the Dana Foundation for brain science research for about 10 years. And now they've made me chairman. I told "The Times" a couple years ago this was going to be my last campaign.

And the brain scientists all tell you you've got to keep those synapses snapping. And the way to do it is to change things and try something new. And so that's what I'm going to do. And that's what I will urge everybody else to do, to get into the world that you don't know too much about yet.

BLITZER: Is there one quick little piece of recommendation you want to give young columnists just starting out right now?

SAFIRE: No. 1, never retire. That's when you're starting out. Think, where am I going to go next? And if you're starting out, always kick them where they're up, not when they're down, and go against the grain whenever you can. Be a contrarian, and don't worry about what you say in terms of stepping on people's corns.

Politicians are in this. You saw Ted Kennedy take a strong view against what the public policy and the public opinion is. And good for him. And so I'd take a pop at him if I were writing a column.

BLITZER: All right.

We're going to still see you in Washington. We hope you'll be a frequent guest on our program, even though you're not writing that column anymore. We're going to miss the column, though.

SAFIRE: I'll still read "The Times."

(LAUGHTER)

BLITZER: I will still read it, too.

Thanks very much, William Safire, retiring at least from one part of his life, the op-ed page of "The New York Times."

Thanks very much.

SAFIRE: Thank you, Wolf.

BLITZER: A cartoon controversy has the nation's education secretary up in arms. Why PBS cartoon character Buster Baxter -- there he is -- caught up right now in a culture war. We'll tell you what's going on. That's coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: A cartoon rabbit named Buster Baxter is the latest victim in the nation's culture wars. PBS has pulled an episode of its popular children television series "Postcards From Buster." And the secretary of education has denounced the episode because of its lesbian content.

CNN's Lindsey Arent reports.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

LINDSEY ARENT, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Meet Buster, the animated star a new PBS kids program called "Postcards From Buster." Funded in part by the Education Department, the shows combines video of real-life families from all over the country going about their daily lives.

JEANNE HOPKINS, V.P. OF COMMUNICATIONS, WGBH: This program is about presenting all kinds of children and the culture and the fabric of the United States to other children to see and learn about.

ARENT: But an as-yet-unreleased episode called "Sugar Time" has gotten Buster into trouble with the government and it's sparked debate over whether it's appropriate to expose young children to nontraditional families.

In the episode, provided to CNN by the show's producers, Buster goes to a farm in Vermont and meets children from two families, who show him how they make maple sugar. Then he meets their parents, who happen to be lesbians.

The episode prompted Education Secretary Margaret Spellings to send a letter to PBS earlier this week, saying -- quote -- "Many parents would not want their young children exposed to the lifestyles portrayed in this episode. We believe you should strongly consider refunding to the department the federal education funds that were used for the episode."

By the time the letter arrived, PBS officials say they had already decided not to distribute "Sugar Time," because they were concerned about the sensitive nature of the material. The move angered gay rights advocates and the show's producer, WGBH in Boston. This isn't the first time a cartoon has caused controversy. Conservative Christian groups recently accused animated character SpongeBob SquarePants of promoting homosexuality. In 1999, Jerry Falwell accused Tinky Winky, a handbag-toting Teletubby, also on PBS, of being a gay role model. HOPKINS: And what does it mean for the children in this family or the children in the many perhaps millions of families that are headed by gay parents? What does that say to those children?

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ARENT: Now, the show's producers, WGBH in Boston, say they plan to air the show in March and they are going to will offer it to any other PBS stations that want it. So far, the only takers, though, include Vermont, San Francisco, New York, and New Jersey -- Wolf.

BLITZER: All right, Lindsey Arent reporting for us -- thanks, Lindsey, very much.

Still ahead this hour, a very somber tribute 60 years after liberation.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MOSHE KATSAV, ISRAELI PRESIDENT (through translator): It seems as if we can still hear the dead crying out.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Today, the world gathers to remember the victims of Auschwitz. When we return, our Chris Burns, he is live from Auschwitz. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Sixty years to the day after the Auschwitz death camp was liberated, world leaders and survivors gathered at the site in Poland to remember the victims.

CNN's Chris Burns is there. He is joining us now live -- Chris.

CHRIS BURNS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, it's late into the night, but the candles are still flickering here from some more than 40 leaders from around the world, including U.S. Vice President Cheney, leaders from Europe, also the president of Russia, Vladimir Putin, who laid candles here, as well as on the other side here, on the opposite side, at a crematorium that was blown up by the Nazis before the Soviets came here to liberate the camp.

There are candles flickering from the survivors who left candles to their loved ones who died here as well. It's the end of a very emotional day, with emotional thoughts and feelings from both leaders from around the world, as well as from survivors.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BURNS (voice-over): Like the relentless stream of cattle trains that arrived here during World War II, the ghost of one rolls to the very spot where more than a million people, the vast majority Jewish, were brought to their deaths. At what many call the world's biggest graveyard, world leaders joined with more than 1,000 survivors, braving the kind of winter they endured back then to speak for those who didn't survive.

KATSAV (through translator): It seems as if I still hear dead crying out.

BURNS: Among the survivors, Mel Mermelstein Southern California, here with his son David to remember his family, his parents, two sisters and brother, who perished.

MEL MERMELSTEIN, SURVIVOR: I saw my mother, my two sisters among other women and children. They were lullabying some of them, crying and shouting and whatever else.

BURNS (on camera): As they were being taken.

MERMELSTEIN: Driven to No. 5 gas chambers.

BURNS (voice-over): This milestone of remembrance is in part a way to come to terms with the guilt many countries shared for pacifists or active complicity in the Holocaust. And it's a time for leaders to renew a commitment to fight anti-Semitism that is still very much alive.

VLADIMIR PUTIN, RUSSIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): Let us do everything that we can as modern people so that we can assure all those who have spent blood before us that this will never happen again.

BURNS: The horrors remain as difficult to fathom as they are important to remember, the inhuman living conditions, the torture, the brutal medical experiments, the executions of men, women and children by gas and gunfire. At a crematorium the Nazis blew up before retreating, Mel Mermelstein holds his own little ceremony.

MERMELSTEIN: And this is what I do annually when I come here, and I say a prayer to myself.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BURNS: Prayers both silent and out loud to pay respects to those who died here, with the hope of paying them perhaps the greatest honor, that it would never happen again -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Chris Burns reporting for us from Auschwitz on this 60th anniversary of the liberation of that death camp -- Chris, thank you very much.

And we'll have the results of our Web question of the day. That's coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Here are the results of our Web question of the Day. But, remember, when you look at this, it's not a scientific poll.

That's it for me. "LOU DOBBS TONIGHT" starts right now.

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


Aired January 27, 2005 - 17:00   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
WOLF BLITZER, HOST: Happening now. Deep impact with an underwater mountain. This is the damage to a United States Navy submarine and these are the first pictures to be made public showing the aftermath. Now more details of the devastating injuries on the crew.
Stand by for hard news on WOLF BLITZER REPORTS.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(voice-over): Fight for Iraq, a final campaign push, and a final warning from the car bombers.

Exit strategy, the liberals' warhorse calls for an end to the war.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The U.S. military presence has become part of the problem not part of the solution.

BLITZER: I'll go one on one with Senator Edward Kennedy.

Train tragedy. A would-be suicide leads to murder charges.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was his car that caused the derailment. He put the car there. He certainly intended to commit the act of train derailment.

BLITZER: There are countless rail crossings in this country. How great is the danger?

William Safire speaks. After three decades, the conservative columnist calls it quits but he's ready for a new chapter. I'll ask him what's next.

ANNOUNCER: This is WOLF BLITZER REPORTS for Thursday, January 27, 2005.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: Three days ahead of election day, Iraq's insurgents today warned voters to stay home and they punctuated the threat with bombings of polling places and political offices, but the campaigners are carrying on. CNN's Jeff Koinange reports from Baghdad.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) JEFF KOINANGE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A last-minute campaign blitz as candidates in the predominantly Shiite town of Najaf canvass the city. These are supporters of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution, part of the Shiite-dominated United Iraqi Alliance which expects to do well in this weekend's election.

"We are optimistic because the Iraqi people especially in Najaf are united in one stand. We think that elections are the only way to end the crisis of the Iraqi people," says candidate Adnan Jaleel.

The Alliance has the blessings of Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, the Shiite's spiritual leader who lives in Najaf. Al-Sistani has urged his supporters to turn up in numbers on election day and to refrain from taking revenge against the mostly Sunni insurgents.

Those insurgent attacks continue with more explosions at schools that are due to be polling stations on Sunday. And in Kurdish northern Iraq, a suicide bomber commandeered a tractor and detonated in the gates of the Kurdish Democratic Party killing five.

And in Tarmiyah, in the Sunni Triangle a roadside bomb exploded just after a U.S. convoy passed, killing two Iraqis.

Despite the violence, the Baghdad neighborhood of Adhamiyah is getting into election mood, even as the ever present U.S. military swings through in its armored vehicles. And the voters' shopping list is familiar.

"We only want security," says Mohammed Jabar (ph). If whoever wins the election will bring security we will be very happy. Others are more cynical.

"This election is controlled by the Americans and the evidence for this is there," says Ahmed Hassan (ph).

Among one of Iraq's many minorities, its small Christian community, there's a simple wish: "whoever will rule Iraq should do so, but he needs to be a good and honest person who loves Iraq, who is fair," says Iman Victor (ph).

(on camera): Fairness and love are two things Iraqis haven't witnessed in a long time. Some, at least, are hoping against hope that Sunday's election will at least be the beginning of the end of the chaos. Jeff Koinange, CNN, Baghdad.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: A senior Iraqi official said today the insurgents are getting aid and instructions from a next-door neighbor. Our senior international correspondent Brent Sadler got an exclusive look at security or lack of it on the Syrian side of the border.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BRENT SADLER, CNN SR. INTL. CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A border fortress guarding an entry point to Iraq, manned by American machine gunners, clearly visible from neighboring Syria. Syria a staging post for insurgent sympathizers, claims Washington. Sympathizers who wreak bloody chaos in Iraq, directing, controlling and financing its alleged insurgent attacks.

PETER FORD, BRITISH AMBASSADOR TO SYRIA: Nobody is saying that they are the number one factor, but they are a significant factor.

SADLER: With significant players, claim western intelligence sources lying low in Syria, including its alleged high-level ex-Iraqi regimists possibly the jack and number 6 of diamonds on the U.S. most wanted list. An attempt, say senior officials here to make Syria a scapegoat for U.S. mistakes.

FAROUK AL-SHARAA, SYRIAN FOREIGN MINISTER: There is no solid ground for any allegations directed against Syria. I know why they are doing it. They are doing it because they have problems inside Iraq.

SADLER: Problems, Syria claims, it is trying to combat, raising and strengthening earth works to prevent vehicle-borne infiltrations across some 400 miles or around 700 kilometers of drab wilderness.

On the Syrian side here border security forces are undermanned, undertrained and starved of high-tech surveillance equipment while on the other side of this tense frontier, it's mostly American troops, not Iraqis, guarding those fortifications.

Behind, an American flag, uncomfortably close to Syria. Still, Syrian/U.S. cooperation is hard at work, though rarely seen on this simmering frontline. U.S. military officials arrive from Damascus, escorted by Syrian guards to survey border security. A frequent mission with courteous exchanges of formalities in Arabic.

FORD: The Syrians are bending with the wind. They're giving us some of the cooperation that we're requesting, but not yet giving us the rest.

SADLER: Holding back, it's alleged, on a crackdown of Iraqi militants, active, but largely invisible in Syria. On the plus side, Syrian border guards open the way for the American survey team to cross and link up with their own entrenched army. U.S. and Syrian views of Iraq are near to each other, but in policy, claims Washington, they are still far apart. Brent Sadler, CNN, Syria.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: The U.S. Navy is assessing the damage to a submarine that ran into an underwater mountain near Guam almost three weeks ago. The USS San Francisco arrived at dry dock yesterday. Now we can show you the pictures for the first time of the damage. Our senior Pentagon correspondent Jamie McIntyre standing by with that -- Jamie.

JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN SR. PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, we knew it was a close call, but the pictures really tell the story of how close it was.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(voice-over): The pictures of the USS San Francisco pulling into dry dock in Guam show how extensive the damage was to the bow of the submarine and how much worse the January 8 undersea accident could have been. The submarine was traveling at high speed, more than 30 knots, when it slammed into what the Navy says was an uncharted undersea mountain 350 miles south of Guam. The photos show the sub's sonar dome sheared off. What they don't show is the damage to some of the ballast tanks that keep the ship afloat. Were it not for the submarine's double hull and compartmentalized design, it could easily have sunk, officials say.

One crew member wrote in an e-mail, "it happened while chow was going on and most people were either sitting and eating or on watch. I don't remember much of the collision. People describe it as like in the movie "The Matrix" where everything slowed down and levitated and then went flying forward faster than the brain can process."

Machinist Mate Second-Class Joseph Ashley was thrown 20 feet into a metal pump. The blow to his head knocked him out and he died of the injury before he could be evacuated. Sixty other sailors were injured, 23 so seriously they could not stand watch, according to an internal Navy e-mail sent by a top admiral after the crash. The Navy has reassigned the skipper of the San Francisco Commander Kevin Mooney, while an investigation determines whether anything could have prevented the accident.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

(on camera): Wolf, as you know, submarines rely on charts, not sonar to avoid undersea mountains. If it turns out that this massive rock was in fact not on the map, then Commander Mooney could be found to have done nothing wrong.

BLITZER: Jamie McIntyre at the Pentagon. Jamie, thank you very much.

In Los Angeles today arraignment of the suicidal man blamed for yesterday's deadly commuter train wreck has been delayed. Eleven people died, and 200 were hurt in the multitrain collision. Police say it started when one train struck an SUV that one man, Alvarez, drove onto the tracks in a suicide attempt before changing his mind and getting out of his vehicle. Alvarez faces 11 counts of murder including with special circumstances. That means he could be eligible for the death penalty.

Deliberate or not, collisions between trains, cars and people happen much more often than many of us realize. And this latest tragedy is drawing new attention to the problem. Our Brian Todd joining us now live from Rockville, Maryland, with that part of the story in our "Security Watch" -- Brian

BRIAN TODD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, we're at a very busy intersection here in Rockville, Maryland. Right over my left shoulder here is where an intersection between a railway and a very busy street. This is the kind of intersection that railway officials say is all too commonplace, and as the case in California demonstrates, it can be a recipe for disaster.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TODD (voice-over): Law enforcement officials are still trying to determine whether Juan Alvarez parked on the road crossing these tracks or somewhere else. Either way, experts say there's virtually no way to prevent suicide attempts on the rails, but this incident does force a hard look at the often deadly encroachment between America's railways and outside traffic.

GERRI HALL, OPERATION LIFESAVER: The weight of the train -- the weight and mass ratio of that train to your vehicle is about 4,000 to 1, and that is almost exactly the same as the weight-mass ratio of your car to a soda pop can.

TODD: Federal officials tell CNN about every two hours either a vehicle or pedestrian is struck by a train in the U.S. In 2003, the last year complete numbers are available, there were nearly 3,000 collisions with vehicles on railway/road crossings resulting in more than 300 deaths.

But officials at the Federal Railroad Administration tell CNN these collisions and fatalities have declined dramatically over the past 30 years. More crossing signals and barriers have been installed. Those devices and safety features on trains themselves have become more sophisticated. And many crossings have been closed. Safety advocates say that's crucial.

HALL: ... at almost every mile, we have someone at risk. We're putting the highway and the railroad traffic at odds with each other. So wherever we can close crossings, that's a great thing.

TODD: Experts say so-called grade separation, having the road and railroad at different elevations, is a trend that's been developed widely in Europe and needs to be accelerated in the U.S. As officials point out, the safest railway/road crossing is the one that doesn't exist.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TODD: Now safety officials tell us that a train traveling at about 55 miles an hour takes a mile or more to stop after the emergency brakes have been applied. So they tell us that in the cases of these types of collisions, Wolf, the crews are simply helpless to do anything, really.

BLITZER: Brian Todd reporting for us out in Rockville, Maryland, Brian, thank you very much.

And to our viewers, please stay tuned to CNN day and night for the most reliable news about your security.

When we come back, calls for U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq. And harsh words aimed directly at the president.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) SEN. EDWARD KENNEDY (D), MASSACHUSETTS: The administration has been wrong in every one of their judgments on Iraq, every one of them. They were wrong in going in there, they never found the weapons of mass destruction, they never found al Qaeda.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Democratic Senator Edward Kennedy urges President Bush, and I'm quoting, now, "to swallow his pride." I spoke with Senator Kennedy just a short time ago. That interview coming up next.

Plus, entering retirement, conservative columnist William Safire joins me live in his first television interview since leaving his New York Times op-ed column.

And later, cartoon controversy, why this animated rabbit from the PBS show "Postcards from Buster" is now a focus in the nation's culture wars.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: He opposed sending U.S. troops to Iraq and now he wants to get them out, some of them immediately. In a fiery speech today, Democratic Senator Edward Kennedy blasted the Bush administration for leading the country into, quote, "quagmire," and laid out his own exit strategy.

Afterward, I sat down with the senator for what was also a spirited one-on-one interview.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: Senator Kennedy, thanks very much for joining us.

You make a very, very strong accusation. You say that the war in Iraq has now become President Bush's Vietnam. You lived through the Vietnam War. That's a strong accusation. Why do you say that?

KENNEDY: Well, I think it is. I think because those who were the basic supporters of the war in Vietnam thought there was a military solution to a political problem. I think that is basically the problem of today. This administration believes that they can solve this problem in Iraq with military force, and I think it's much more complicated than that.

I believe that, by and large, this expansion of the insurgency really demonstrates day in and day out, the reports from the intelligence agents, that the Iraqis are perceiving the American presence there not as liberators, but as occupiers.

And I think what we have to do is change and alter or policy so that we can have a safe and secure and independent Iraq. We're not going to do it with this policy, it's going to be enormously costly. It's risky to change and alter a policy, but the greatest risk to our American service men and women and to American prestige is continuing on this bankrupt policy. BLITZER: But they say, the administration, this is not a military solution, they say it is a political solution, starting with elections this coming Sunday.

KENNEDY: But the fact is they have -- basically have been calling all the shots, this administration has -- they're tied down in politically, they're tied down in militarily. The only way that you're ever going to get the target off the backs of American servicemen and -women is have the Iraqis believe that they're going to control their own destiny. That isn't the way it is perceived today. Iraqis perceive today that the Americans are part of the problem, not the problem but the solution.

BLITZER: Well, why not give this election a chance to succeed?

KENNEDY: We are. This election should go forward, and after this election goes forward, rather than the United States writing the constitution for a new Iraq, the United States ought to step back, let the international agencies, the U.N., other agencies, develop the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) so the United States is stepping back from that kind of -- and we are announcing...

BLITZER: On that constitution, what's wrong with the United States helping the Iraqis write a constitution? Isn't that what we did with Germany after World War II and Japan?

KENNEDY: Well, of course, those are completely different situations. There we found that the countries -- the occupations they were completely different. Those countries were absolutely devastated. Their greatest threat was from the communists, from the Soviet Union. Those are entirely different.

Look, the administration has been wrong in every one of their judgments on Iraq, every one of them. They were wrong in going in there, they never found weapons of mass destruction, they never found al Qaeda, they disbanded the military. They've been wrong on every single count.

When will this administration recognize that they've been wrong about it and when will this country recognize they have made mistake after mistake after mistake after mistake? They're part of the problem, not the solution, we need to change policy, and we've outlined a way where Iraqis will take control both of their political and also of their military. And that offers the best chance for a true, independent Iraq.

BLITZER: The Republicans say you're giving aid and comfort to the enemy, the terrorists in Iraq. Right now a statement put out by the RNC, the Republican National Committee, following your speech here at Johns Hopkins at the School of Advanced International Study says this:

"It's remarkable that Senator Kennedy would deliver such an overtly pessimistic message only days before the Iraqi election." The statement goes on and says: "Kennedy's partisan political attack stands in stark contrast to President Bush's vision of spreading freedom around the world. The world is watching whether America has the will to stand with the Iraqi people as freedom takes root in their nation. And no democracy has ever risen out of defeatism."

KENNEDY: This is the same group that has called all the shots in Iraq. They're the ones that have made blunder after blunder. They're the ones that have cost us the loss of so many American lives and American wounded and have cost the American taxpayers so much. This is a perpetuation and a continuation of a bankrupt policy. Don't we understand it?

We have to understand, we eventually found these are the same voices I heard in Vietnam. These are exactly the same kinds of quotes. You could change that and put a different date on it, and you would have heard the same thing when those of us said that we have got to change our policy in Vietnam. That is exactly the same statement. This is Vietnam again.

We are getting into the thinking that there is a military solution. There wasn't a military solution in Algeria for the French. There wasn't a military solution by the British in Northern Ireland. And there isn't going to be a military solution in the Middle East and there will not be a military solution in Iraq. The more that we read history, understand history, we'll understand that we need to have the Iraqis believe that they are controlling their own destiny.

They don't today. They think we're there, they think we're after their oil. They think we're going to build all these military bases. They see an embassy bigger than the other. You know, the old Pottery Barn analogy is very good. We broke it by going in there, but it's the Iraqis that have to put it together. If we think we're going to put it together, over there, we're never getting out.

BLITZER: But what happens if the elections work and a stable Democratic government goes ahead, a national assembly writes a constitution and it works?

KENNEDY: The fact is you're going to have a continued violence through this week -- we're saying that we're hopeful that that works. But they ought to understand that they're going to train their own troops and they're going to defend that constitutional government, but we are out with this, and that is -- the best way that we're going to give the assurance that that constitutional government is going to be successful is if the Iraqis believe that they own it, and that they have -- and the soldiers that are going to be in their military are going to believe it's worth fighting for. They don't today. They don't today.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: We'll have more of my interview with Senator Kennedy, that's coming up next.

Plus this...

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNIDENTIFIED MALE: As a citizen of the world, I can tell you that he has been a beacon of hope and inspiration for generations of people who have been oppressed either behind the Iron Curtain or anywhere else.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: When we come back, William Safire speaks out in his first television interview since writing his final op-ed page column in The New York Times.

Stricken vessel, Coast Guard units are on the way to help a disabled ship with almost 1,000 people on board. We'll update you on that.

BLITZER: And later this hour the world remembers a dark time in history. The 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Senator Edward Kennedy says it's time to get out of Iraq and he's pulling no punches. Here's part two of my interview.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: If the Iraqi insurgents, the Saddam loyalists, the foreign fighters, if they believe that the U.S. is going to pull out, that the time is certain, what's the incentive for them to stop their fighting, they could just wait this thing out?

KENNEDY: By that time, hopefully you will have had these elections, they will have gone forward. You will have a duly elected government in Iraq, and we have over a year in order to train Iraqi military to defend their own country, to defend their own country.

If they're not going to defend it, how many thousands more Americans are we going to continue to send over there? The troops are going to -- the insurgents, and the real question is about how many foreign insurgents are going to go someplace else and then try and come back? Iraq then has the best chance of being truly independent, viable and worthy of being defended.

BLITZER: The American people looked at both candidates during the election. Iraq was at the center of the debate between President Bush and John Kerry. Fifty-one percent voted for the president, knowing everything you know right now, that all of us know, there were no weapons of mass destruction, there was no direct evidence of a link between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, those kinds of issues were thoroughly debated, yet President Bush was overwhelmingly, at least by 3.5 million votes, reelected.

KENNEDY: I think included in that we could talk about the causes on the election, but included in that election was an overlay of fear about homeland security and about the dangers of al Qaeda and fear. And I think there was an unwillingness that we'd be able to change. It wasn't just the Iraqi issue, which I don't think was really kind of a decisive issue myself, but there's a general kind of concern about terror, and I think which is a legitimate kind of concern. See, my sense is Iraq has taken our focus off the battle against al Qaeda and the terror. We had al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden on the run, and what did we do, pursue that and do something about it? No, we got into war in Iraq.

What was possibly the sense for that? We should be focusing on terror and Osama bin Laden and deal with the homeland security. This Iraq is just draining us, draining us. It's draining us militarily, and it is draining us in terms of resources.

Did President Bush lie to the American people?

KENNEDY: Well, I don't think there's any question that we were misled on the weapons of mass destruction, and the the into the...

BLITZER: But do you think in his own heart, in his own mind, he believed there were weapons of mass destruction?

KENNEDY: I think he believed it. I don't question that he believed it, but that isn't the issue, is it, really? We should have -- why didn't we take the time to permit the inspectors to finish up their job? Why didn't this administration that said they had 146 sites where there were weapons of mass destruction, give it to the inspectors? They didn't.

Now, Secretary Rice said they did. The 9/11 Commission -- or the intelligence commission said that -- or the 9/11 Commission report said that never happened. We never gave to the inspectors our best information.

Why didn't we give the inspectors a chance? Why didn't we do that? If we had given the inspectors a chance, they would have found no weapons of mass destruction. Then there's no threat to our security, and we would have an entirely different situation. You would have focus on Osama bin Laden, focus on terror, and I think we would be in a much more secure situation.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: But you're not saying he deliberately lied to...

KENNEDY: I'm not -- I'm saying that the administration misled the American people. That's what I'm saying.

BLITZER: Condoleezza Rice got most of the Democrats and your colleagues in the Senate voted for her confirmation. You voted against her confirmation. She's the first...

KENNEDY: That's really yesterday's -- I'm glad to explain why. But, I mean, it's really yesterday's news.

BLITZER: I know, but...

KENNEDY: We're all hopeful of being able to work with her now. She's now our secretary of state.

BLITZER: And you voted against her.

KENNEDY: That's right.

BLITZER: Because -- and I just want you to explain to our viewers specifically why you think she was not qualified to be secretary of state.

KENNEDY: Well, because I think she was part and parcel of the whole war strategy and the bringing of the United States to war in Iraq.

And I think that was an absolutely failed and flawed policy. I think it is now, I think it was then. And I didn't think that she deserved to be promoted to secretary of state. It's that -- basically that simple. I have a high regard for her personal achievements and accomplishments. And she's a personable person that I've enjoyed a professional relationship with.

But I didn't think that you promote someone that has been a part of such a failed and flawed policy.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: You have heard what Senator Kennedy thinks about the president's plans as far as Iraq is concerned, but wait until you hear what the senator has to say about the White House proposals on Social Security reform. Will the Democrat negotiate a compromise with President Bush? That's tomorrow, part two of the interview coming up on WOLF BLITZER REPORTS.

And this additional programming note. This Sunday, the new secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, will join me on "LATE EDITION." That's Sunday, noon Eastern.

To our viewers, here's your chance to weigh in this story. Our Web question of the day is this. Should there be a detailed timeline for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq? You can vote right now. Go to CNN.com/Wolf. We'll have the results later this hour.

After three decades and more than 3,000 columns, an editorial icon stops the presses.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BOB SCHIEFFER, CBS NEWS: I think he's one of the most original columnists that we have in Washington.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Bob Schieffer talking about Pulitzer Prize winner William Safire. Mr. Safire standing by to join us live here. That's coming up next.

First, it was SpongeBob SquarePants. Now it's Buster Baxter. Find out why this PBS cartoon character is now getting caught up in America's culture wars.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Welcome back. Signing off, but still speaking out. Conservative columnist William Safire joins me live, his first interview, televised interview, that is, since retiring from "The New York Times" op-ed page.

First, though, a quick check of some other stories now in the news.

Ford is recalling almost 800,000 trucks and SUVs to repair a cruise control switch that's causing fire hazards under the hood. The vehicles are model year 2000 Fort F-150s, Expeditions, Lincoln Navigators, and some F-Series SuperCrew Trucks. Ford will disconnect the switches, then replace them with new switches when they become available.

The Coast Guard is rushing to help a ship that is having engine problems in heavy seas off the coast of Alaska. The Semester at Sea research and teaching vessel is sponsored by the University of Pittsburgh; 990 people are on board; 681 of them are students.

This week, syndicated columnist, "New York Times" columnist William Safire signed off after three decades, more than 3,000 columns and a Pulitzer Prize. While he will continue to write his weekly language column, his departure from the op-ed page is being lamented and his career honored.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SCHEIFFER: I think he's one of the most original columnists that we have in Washington.

JIM LEHRER, NEWS ANCHOR: Even those who disagree will always say, well, he really did express that well.

WILLIAM COHEN, CNN WORLD AFFAIRS ANALYST: He's capable of taking an issue that you would expect him to come down on one side and going in the complete opposite direction. So that makes him interesting.

BLITZER (voice-over): The object of all this praise? William Safire. His departure from "The New York Times" op-ed page was marked last night in Washington with a dinner, which I attended at the home of the Israeli ambassador.

DANIEL AYALON, ISRAELI AMBASSADOR TO UNITED STATES: He's been a beacon of hope and inspiration for generations of people who have been oppressed either beyond the Iron Curtain or anywhere else.

BLITZER: Such accolades from both the right and the left could hardly have been foretold in 1973, when the former Nixon speechwriter was broad aboard "The Times" amid some controversy to lend a different political perspective. Six years later, in 1979, he began his column on language, to the delight of grammarians, lexicologists and millions of others.

PAUL WOLFOWITZ, DEPUTY DEFENSE SECRETARY: I sort of feel like I finally made it, because I made it into his real column. He quoted my use of the word audible, as in calling audibles. I don't think I've ever been in the real column before, so I feel good about that, but I wish he weren't quitting.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: And William Safire is joining us now live here in our Washington studio.

Bill, thanks very much for joining us.

Let's talk about Senator Kennedy first. He says this is President Bush's Vietnam. You lived through Vietnam. You were in the Nixon White House. Do you see parallels?

WILLIAM SAFIRE, COLUMNIST, "THE NEW YORK TIMES": No. I see this as an opportunity to change the map and the mood of the Middle East.

BLITZER: How long is this going to take?

SAFIRE: Nobody knows. There's Kennedy, defeatist, saying, we've got to get out and essentially saying cut and run.

But if you try to corner him and say, when should we get out, it's kind of a fuzzy as soon as we can. Well, of course we'll get out as soon as we can. And, of course we'll turn things over to the Iraqis. That's the whole idea.

BLITZER: Is it worth it to the American public, 1,400 dead troops already, approaches $300 billion in taxpayer money? It seems like a major commitment and a lot of people are saying, is it worth it?

SAFIRE: I think history will look back and say it was definitely worth it, because, if we can turn around Iraq, which was the worst of all the countries in the Middle East, if we can instill some sense of democracy and freedom there, we can change the world.

Now, I know that sounds idealistic. And the president's inaugural was complained about as being not specific enough. But human rights and democracy and freedom, that's what America is all about.

BLITZER: All right. So what's next? Iran?

SAFIRE: No. We're not going to start new wars unless we're attacked.

But, yes, we'll put pressure on Iran, economic and diplomatic, and on North Korea as well. And we'll also root for and speak up for dissidents wherever they are. And you read Sharansky's book when he was in jail in the Soviet Union. The hope that he had was coming from the United States. BLITZER: Are you upbeat now that there's a possibility of revived Israeli-Palestinian negotiations after Yasser Arafat's death?

SAFIRE: I think the mood in the Middle East changed with our regime change of Iraq and, of course, with the demise of Yasser Arafat.

BLITZER: So you see a connection between Iraq and the Israeli- Palestinian conflict?

SAFIRE: Of course. Yes.

And now Ariel Sharon has been proven right in taking a tough hard line. But he's the sort of -- it's like de Gaulle in Algeria and Nixon in China. He's the hard-line right-winger who can bring the right wing over to the center and make a deal. And that's what Israel needs and that's what the Palestinians need.

BLITZER: So you're encouraged now by what you see with Mahmoud Abbas, Abu Maven, the new Palestinian leader?

SAFIRE: Well, I would like to see him deliver on the big challenge of confronting his terrorists. If he can do that, then there will be a real response from Israel.

BLITZER: As you know, a lot of liberals and some conservatives are blasting the neocons, the neoconservatives. Are you in that category?

SAFIRE: I'm in no particular category, because I usually bite the hand that feeds me.

But I'm a hard-liner on defense and on getting on the ideological offense against tyranny.

BLITZER: But you align yourself more or less with a lot of the views of the Wolfowitzes, the Rumsfelds.

SAFIRE: Oh, sure. Right. Yes. No doubt about it.

BLITZER: So you don't walk away from that?

SAFIRE: Quite the contrary. I was walking ahead of it 10 years ago.

BLITZER: What do you think of this recent phenomenon -- maybe it's not that recent -- the federal government paying columnists? We saw Armstrong Williams, Maggie Gallagher now. They're on the payroll to a certain degree, writing columns, but not disclosing that to their viewers after accepting money either from the Department of Education, the Department of Health and Human Services.

SAFIRE: That was stupid on the part of the government, just plain stupid, and wrong-headed on the part of the journalists. And I think it's been not blown out of proportion, but blown up, and I don't think this government or the next government will be caught red-handed again.

BLITZER: Armstrong Williams, without giving details, says there's a lot more of this going on that we don't know about.

SAFIRE: Everybody in every agency is looking madly for, has anybody paid any journalists or paid a company that paid a journalist? And we'll probably see some more. But it didn't affect really public opinion.

BLITZER: A lot of our viewers and your readers and millions of people disappointed you're giving up that column. You made a conscientious decision. But you've got a second career you're about to begin.

SAFIRE: Right.

I think, after 30 years or so, you ought to change a career and try something new. And I've been active with the Dana Foundation for brain science research for about 10 years. And now they've made me chairman. I told "The Times" a couple years ago this was going to be my last campaign.

And the brain scientists all tell you you've got to keep those synapses snapping. And the way to do it is to change things and try something new. And so that's what I'm going to do. And that's what I will urge everybody else to do, to get into the world that you don't know too much about yet.

BLITZER: Is there one quick little piece of recommendation you want to give young columnists just starting out right now?

SAFIRE: No. 1, never retire. That's when you're starting out. Think, where am I going to go next? And if you're starting out, always kick them where they're up, not when they're down, and go against the grain whenever you can. Be a contrarian, and don't worry about what you say in terms of stepping on people's corns.

Politicians are in this. You saw Ted Kennedy take a strong view against what the public policy and the public opinion is. And good for him. And so I'd take a pop at him if I were writing a column.

BLITZER: All right.

We're going to still see you in Washington. We hope you'll be a frequent guest on our program, even though you're not writing that column anymore. We're going to miss the column, though.

SAFIRE: I'll still read "The Times."

(LAUGHTER)

BLITZER: I will still read it, too.

Thanks very much, William Safire, retiring at least from one part of his life, the op-ed page of "The New York Times."

Thanks very much.

SAFIRE: Thank you, Wolf.

BLITZER: A cartoon controversy has the nation's education secretary up in arms. Why PBS cartoon character Buster Baxter -- there he is -- caught up right now in a culture war. We'll tell you what's going on. That's coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: A cartoon rabbit named Buster Baxter is the latest victim in the nation's culture wars. PBS has pulled an episode of its popular children television series "Postcards From Buster." And the secretary of education has denounced the episode because of its lesbian content.

CNN's Lindsey Arent reports.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

LINDSEY ARENT, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Meet Buster, the animated star a new PBS kids program called "Postcards From Buster." Funded in part by the Education Department, the shows combines video of real-life families from all over the country going about their daily lives.

JEANNE HOPKINS, V.P. OF COMMUNICATIONS, WGBH: This program is about presenting all kinds of children and the culture and the fabric of the United States to other children to see and learn about.

ARENT: But an as-yet-unreleased episode called "Sugar Time" has gotten Buster into trouble with the government and it's sparked debate over whether it's appropriate to expose young children to nontraditional families.

In the episode, provided to CNN by the show's producers, Buster goes to a farm in Vermont and meets children from two families, who show him how they make maple sugar. Then he meets their parents, who happen to be lesbians.

The episode prompted Education Secretary Margaret Spellings to send a letter to PBS earlier this week, saying -- quote -- "Many parents would not want their young children exposed to the lifestyles portrayed in this episode. We believe you should strongly consider refunding to the department the federal education funds that were used for the episode."

By the time the letter arrived, PBS officials say they had already decided not to distribute "Sugar Time," because they were concerned about the sensitive nature of the material. The move angered gay rights advocates and the show's producer, WGBH in Boston. This isn't the first time a cartoon has caused controversy. Conservative Christian groups recently accused animated character SpongeBob SquarePants of promoting homosexuality. In 1999, Jerry Falwell accused Tinky Winky, a handbag-toting Teletubby, also on PBS, of being a gay role model. HOPKINS: And what does it mean for the children in this family or the children in the many perhaps millions of families that are headed by gay parents? What does that say to those children?

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ARENT: Now, the show's producers, WGBH in Boston, say they plan to air the show in March and they are going to will offer it to any other PBS stations that want it. So far, the only takers, though, include Vermont, San Francisco, New York, and New Jersey -- Wolf.

BLITZER: All right, Lindsey Arent reporting for us -- thanks, Lindsey, very much.

Still ahead this hour, a very somber tribute 60 years after liberation.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MOSHE KATSAV, ISRAELI PRESIDENT (through translator): It seems as if we can still hear the dead crying out.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Today, the world gathers to remember the victims of Auschwitz. When we return, our Chris Burns, he is live from Auschwitz. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Sixty years to the day after the Auschwitz death camp was liberated, world leaders and survivors gathered at the site in Poland to remember the victims.

CNN's Chris Burns is there. He is joining us now live -- Chris.

CHRIS BURNS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, it's late into the night, but the candles are still flickering here from some more than 40 leaders from around the world, including U.S. Vice President Cheney, leaders from Europe, also the president of Russia, Vladimir Putin, who laid candles here, as well as on the other side here, on the opposite side, at a crematorium that was blown up by the Nazis before the Soviets came here to liberate the camp.

There are candles flickering from the survivors who left candles to their loved ones who died here as well. It's the end of a very emotional day, with emotional thoughts and feelings from both leaders from around the world, as well as from survivors.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BURNS (voice-over): Like the relentless stream of cattle trains that arrived here during World War II, the ghost of one rolls to the very spot where more than a million people, the vast majority Jewish, were brought to their deaths. At what many call the world's biggest graveyard, world leaders joined with more than 1,000 survivors, braving the kind of winter they endured back then to speak for those who didn't survive.

KATSAV (through translator): It seems as if I still hear dead crying out.

BURNS: Among the survivors, Mel Mermelstein Southern California, here with his son David to remember his family, his parents, two sisters and brother, who perished.

MEL MERMELSTEIN, SURVIVOR: I saw my mother, my two sisters among other women and children. They were lullabying some of them, crying and shouting and whatever else.

BURNS (on camera): As they were being taken.

MERMELSTEIN: Driven to No. 5 gas chambers.

BURNS (voice-over): This milestone of remembrance is in part a way to come to terms with the guilt many countries shared for pacifists or active complicity in the Holocaust. And it's a time for leaders to renew a commitment to fight anti-Semitism that is still very much alive.

VLADIMIR PUTIN, RUSSIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): Let us do everything that we can as modern people so that we can assure all those who have spent blood before us that this will never happen again.

BURNS: The horrors remain as difficult to fathom as they are important to remember, the inhuman living conditions, the torture, the brutal medical experiments, the executions of men, women and children by gas and gunfire. At a crematorium the Nazis blew up before retreating, Mel Mermelstein holds his own little ceremony.

MERMELSTEIN: And this is what I do annually when I come here, and I say a prayer to myself.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BURNS: Prayers both silent and out loud to pay respects to those who died here, with the hope of paying them perhaps the greatest honor, that it would never happen again -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Chris Burns reporting for us from Auschwitz on this 60th anniversary of the liberation of that death camp -- Chris, thank you very much.

And we'll have the results of our Web question of the day. That's coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Here are the results of our Web question of the Day. But, remember, when you look at this, it's not a scientific poll.

That's it for me. "LOU DOBBS TONIGHT" starts right now.

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