Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

Helicopter Crash in Afghanistan; Making the Discovery Shuttle Safer

Aired June 29, 2005 - 08:00   ET

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

SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: President Bush vows to stay the course in Iraq.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We will stay in Iraq as long as we are needed, and not a day longer.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

S. O'BRIEN: But will Americans buy the president's push to keep troops in Iraq?

To Afghanistan, the Taliban claiming responsibility for a downed helicopter along that border with Pakistan. But what happened to the 17 Americans on board? We're live at the Pentagon for the very latest on that.

And Richard Scrushy not guilty on all counts. It is the first major acquittal under a law to crack down on corporate fraud. Did the former HealthSouth leader get off easy? We'll take a look at that on this AMERICAN MORNING.

ANNOUNCER: From the CNN broadcast center in New York, this is AMERICAN MORNING with Soledad O'Brien and Miles O'Brien.

S. O'BRIEN: Good morning.

Welcome back, everybody.

Also ahead this morning, has NASA done everything it can do to make sure that the shuttle is safe to fly again. Discovery is scheduled for launch next month, the first mission since the Columbia disaster.

MILES O'BRIEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: I'll be talking to a former astronaut, a shuttle commander, the most seasoned of all, as a matter of fact, about all of the work done to make sure this mission is safe. And there are some precautions that are left undone. We'll ask about those.

S. O'BRIEN: First, though, let's get a look at the headlines this morning with Carol Costello -- good morning again, Carol.

CAROL COSTELLO, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning.

Good morning to all of you.

Some Democrats are calling on President Bush to be more specific about his policy in Iraq. In his prime time address last night, the president said he would not send more troops to Iraq, but he gave no indication of when Americans already there would be coming home.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSH: Sending more Americans would undermine our strategy of encouraging Iraqis to take the lead in this fight. And sending more Americans would suggest that we intend to stay forever, when we are, in fact, working for the day when Iraq can defend itself and we can leave.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COSTELLO: We'll talk to one Democratic senator critical of the president's address. That's coming up this half hour.

A North Carolina congressman says there is clear evidence that Iraq was involved in the September 11 terrorist attacks. I talked to Representative Robin Hayes on DAYBREAK earlier.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ROBIN HAYES (R), NORTH CAROLINA: It's very clear that terrorists are connected to what Saddam Hussein was all about and that, again, faces us as the most severe threat going forward.

COSTELLO: But there is no...

HAYES: We have to do a good job explaining...

COSTELLO: ... evidence that Saddam Hussein was connected in any way to al Qaeda.

HAYES: Ma'am, I'm sorry, but you're mistaken. There's evidence everywhere. We get access to it, unfortunately others don't.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COSTELLO: Among those disagreeing is Republican Senator John McCain. He says there is no direct link between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, but warns of possible international terror connections in the future if the United States leaves Iraq now.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: I haven't seen compelling evidence of that. I do believe that the sanctions were eroding and if Saddam Hussein had remained in power, he would have continued to have attempted to acquire and use weapons of mass destruction. I don't think there's any doubt that he's been involved in some very bad activities. But I hadn't -- the point is now, if we fail in Iraq and the terrorists are there now, then clearly there would be all kinds of international terrorist connections. (END VIDEO CLIP)

COSTELLO: A commission appointed by President Bush presented its final report last year, finding no evidence of a link between Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein.

Aruba is asking for more help in the search for Natalee Holloway. Dutch Marines have apparently joined efforts to help look for the missing Alabama teenager. A Texas group has been conducting numerous searches, as well. Three suspects remain in jail in connection with Holloway's disappearance. No formal charges have been filed.

Firefighters in Arizona now gaining full control of a fast moving brush fire. The fire in Buckeye forced some people to flee, but only managed to burn some 300 acres. Elsewhere in the state, the Cave Creek fire has blackened 140,000 acres. It's being called the second largest wildfire in Arizona history. Heavy winds on Tuesday were said to fuel the flames there. Hopefully things are dying down now.

S. O'BRIEN: Oh, and it's so early in the season, if you think about it. I mean, I just don't think any of that portends well for what's going to happen there out West.

COSTELLO: The weird part is they said all the rain that Arizona got earlier, you know, all that undergrowth grew and...

S. O'BRIEN: And then it's catching on for everything else.

COSTELLO: ... then it's a fuel.

M. O'BRIEN: That's in the damned if you do, damned if you don't category, isn't it?

COSTELLO: Yes.

S. O'BRIEN: Absolutely.

M. O'BRIEN: You get a lot of rain, it causes fires. Go figure.

S. O'BRIEN: Right.

Carol, thanks.

COSTELLO: Sure.

S. O'BRIEN: An American helicopter has been shot down in Afghanistan. It is the first loss of an American aircraft to hostile fire there since the Taliban was driven from power. A search and rescue operation now underway for the 17 U.S. troops who were on board. That chopper went down in the rugged mountains along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border.

Barbara Starr live for us at the Pentagon this morning -- Barbara, good morning to you.

Any new information to tell us about this crash? BARBARA STARR, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Soledad, no word yet on the fate of the 17 service members on board that aircraft. They all are believed to be members of various special forces units.

What we have learned is that this was a so-called QRF -- quick response force. This is a special operations unit that moves in under fire to extract U.S. forces on the ground or to reinforce them. We don't know exactly which of those scenarios was underway at the time, but there may be indications that there were also U.S. troops on the ground, under fire at the time. These troops were on the way to help them.

Now, the U.S. military saying overnight that the aircraft was most likely brought down by hostile fire. The indication of that, sources tell us, is there was another Chinook helicopter flying with this one at the time. They fly in pairs. And it is believed that the second helicopter saw some indications of enemy fire at the time.

This is some of the roughest terrain that U.S. forces operate in. This is in the rough mountains of eastern Afghanistan, 7,000-foot mountain peaks, as you can see here.

We have traveled through this region before. There's snow- covered peaks year round, very, very rough terrain. These are pictures, in fact, that CNN took when it traveled through these mountains back in November of 2003.

So we've had a look at the area. It is very tough business up there.

There were counter-insurgency operations going on at the time. There's been a lot of concern about insight activity in this very area -- Soledad.

S. O'BRIEN: And, in fact, Barbara, you're just back from Afghanistan.

When you were talking with the commanders most recently, what did they tell you about the capabilities of the enemy in Afghanistan?

STARR: Well, for the commanders on the ground, it is quite serious. There is -- the war is not over in Afghanistan for them. What commanders told us was very interesting. They tell us that in the last several weeks, the insurgents that they have captured or killed appear to be equipped, many of them, with identical load outs, that is, identical equipment -- radios, communications gear, strobe lights, identical type weapons. And what they tell us is this is leading them, the U.S. commanders, to a great deal of concern that there is some kind of organization and money behind all of this and they are very concerned that that organization exists across the border in Pakistan, where they believe these insurgents are coming from -- Soledad.

S. O'BRIEN: That's a big problem.

All right, Barbara Starr for us at the Pentagon this morning. Barbara, thanks -- Miles.

M. O'BRIEN: It is the last big hurdle before the space shuttle fleet can return to flight. NASA holding a formal meeting in Florida today and tomorrow to assess whether the Space Shuttle Discovery is ready to launch. At the so-called flight readiness review, the shuttle team will pore through all those efforts to improve shuttle safety. NASA's chief, Mike Griffin, says based on what he knows now, Discovery is ready to go. This would be the first launch since the Columbia disaster, of course, in February of 2003.

Earlier this week, an advisory report said NASA had met only 12 of the 15 recommendations to return to flight. But it said it is safe to fly the shuttle.

Former NASA astronaut Dick Covey co-chaired that advisory panel.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DICK COVEY, "RETURN-TO-FLIGHT" PANEL: Our assessment showed that although NASA may not have met the complete intent of every one of them, they have certainly done an admirable job of addressing the issues that caused the Columbia accident. And in our opinion, we have told the administrator that the fact that they didn't complete the competent intent of all those is not a reason that this shuttle should be considered unsafe.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

M. O'BRIEN: Former astronaut Jim Wetherbee is in Houston this morning.

Good to have you with us, Jim.

First of all, do you agree with Dick Covey and NASA administrator Mike Griffin that the shuttle is probably safe enough to fly?

JAMES WETHERBEE, FORMER U.S. ASTRONAUT: Miles, great to talk to you again.

Yes, I do. I think it is safe to fly. If you think about it this way, if we had made no changes at all, the chances would be 111 out of 113 that you could successfully pull off the mission. We have made changes. We've eliminated the big piece of foam that came off. I think this flight will be safer than we've ever flown.

The interesting thing is we'll be accepting more risk on this flight simply because we now know about the dangers and the risks.

M. O'BRIEN: Interesting point. We're more aware of it.

Let's talk about some of the specific recommendations which come out of the independent investigation that looked into the Columbia accident.

There were 15 in all and there are three that are still unmet. One of them is the elimination of launch debris. A lot of work has been done in this regard, but to say elimination, of course, that's a very strong word. The second one is developing ways to repair the heat shield while in orbit with a spacewalking astronaut. And the final thought is to harden the heat shield in general, to make it more resistant to all these things.

When you take these three things together, it sounds like some very important things that have not been addressed.

WETHERBEE: Well, they are technically important. I think these recommendations were good ones. I think the Cabe Report was a very well written report. We'll talk about a little bit about that later. And NASA's giving it a best effort.

I don't think you can eliminate the debris completely from the external tank, unless you completely redesign it, which would be a multi-year effort.

The repair in orbit is very technically challenging, as with many of the technical decisions that we have to make at NASA, very difficult to do. I'm not sure it really can be done. We're giving it a best shot and we'll have something. I don't know whether or not it will work.

And with respect to the hardening, I think it's a good idea, especially if you're going to fly the shuttle long into the future. But it turns out they're making a decision to not do that. So maybe it doesn't make sense to -- economically -- to harden the vehicle.

I think we have the capability, the technical engineering know how. I'm not sure we have the vendors across the country anymore in place that were around when we designed the shuttle. You could do it, but it would be very expensive to harden the leading edge of the wing.

M. O'BRIEN: The Cabe Report, Columbia Accident Investigation Report, spoke a lot about NASA's culture, the way decisions were made, the way a big problem like this debris issue was overlooked.

I want to show a couple of pieces of tape to our viewers. The first one, sadly, is very familiar to people. This is Columbia about a minute after launch and that two pound piece of foam which came off of a strut area called the bipod area of the tank comes off, strikes the leading edge of the wing and that's what created that lethal blow to the leading edge of the wing.

Now, take a look at this next one. It looks kind of familiar, but this is Atlantis. This is the October prior to Columbia's last launch. And if you look very closely here, another piece from the same location hits right there, the lower part of the left solid rocket booster. When they fished it out of the water later, there was actually some very significant damage to the solid rocket booster.

Now, this should have been a giant red flag for NASA.

What was going on? Why were they ignoring that signal? WETHERBEE: That's the critical point, Miles. I think -- by the way, I think the Cabe, again, wrote a very well written report. Chapters five, six and seven explain it all. The technical recommendations were very good. NASA is attacking those technical recommendations like they do.

The problem is the unwritten recommendation -- fix the NASA safety culture. That's what we have not done. That's what created the accident. If you have a system in place with a ruler hierarchical structure, which has some very good advantages if you have a very technically complicated system, you need procedures to keep the people marching in the same direction. But it has some weaknesses. You don't ask the insightful question.

If the bosses are not rewarding people for asking insightful questions, then you miss your last chance to avert disaster.

M. O'BRIEN: All right, well leave it on that note.

Jim Wetherbee, former NASA shuttle commander, the most seasoned NASA shuttle commander.

Thanks for your time.

WETHERBEE: Thank you Miles.

S. O'BRIEN: At 12 minutes past the hour, it's time to take another look at the weather this morning.

Chad Myers is at the CNN Center.

He's got the latest forecast -- hey, Chad, what are you looking at this morning?

(WEATHER REPORT)

S. O'BRIEN: Ahead this morning, it is the hottest stock on Wall Street. Remember, I got my cupcakes yesterday? But how exactly does Google make any money? We're going to take a closer look at that this morning.

Also, Richard Scrushy cleared on all charges in a huge corporate fraud case. A former friend says a so-called religious transformation might have helped him.

And the president's speech on Iraq. He says a timetable for withdrawal would undercut U.S. troops. But one senator says he's got a plan that could work. We'll ask him how, up next on AMERICAN MORNING.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

S. O'BRIEN: In his address to the nation last night, President Bush made it clear, again, that he is firmly opposed to setting a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq.

Well, Democratic Senator Russ Feingold has been among those calling for a timetable.

He's in Washington, D.C. this morning.

Good morning, Senator.

Nice to see you.

SEN. RUSS FEINGOLD (D), WISCONSIN: Good morning, Soledad.

S. O'BRIEN: Thanks for talking with us.

FEINGOLD: Thank you.

S. O'BRIEN: Once again, the president said no.

In fact, here's specifically what he said while we listen to a clip.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSH: Setting an artificial timetable would send the wrong message to the Iraqis, who need to know that America will not leave before the job is done. It would send the wrong signal to our troops, who need to know that we are serious about completing the mission they are risking their lives to achieve. And it would send the wrong message to the enemy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

S. O'BRIEN: He's kind of laying it out there, Senator -- wrong message to Iraqis, wrong message to the troops, wrong message to the enemy.

So why are you among those who are pushing for a timetable?

FEINGOLD: Well, I regret saying it, Soledad, but I think the president is making America much weaker. This is a situation where we are getting stuck. The American people know very well that this is a situation that we have to actually identify a time line or some kind of a sense when we're going to finish the job.

The president was very happy with having a time line when it came to transferring sovereignty. He was very happy with a time line, and so were all of us, for the elections. These were positive steps. They were signs that we were trying to move forward and not occupy Iraq.

What this is doing is weakening the military of our country and causing the insurgency to use Iraq as a recruiting ground and a training ground. And this is what is the opposite of what the president seems to think.

S. O'BRIEN: But there is an argument to be made that, OK, you give a time line, then everybody just waits it out. The enemy waits it out, everybody just waits it out. I mean is there a point to that? FEINGOLD: You can use that slogan or you can look at history. You can look at the French in Algeria or the Soviets in Afghanistan. We are fighting an insurgency that is using the fact that we're perceived to be there as an occupier as a way to recruit and train terrorists who will not only fight us in Iraq, but go to other countries of the world, and then, ultimately, come to the United States.

It's the reverse of what the president says. We are playing into the terrorists' hands. We are playing into al Qaeda's hands. And we need to let the vision be out there that we intend to finish the job, give a sense of when we're going to finish the job so that it can clearly be a question of Iraq moving forward and not the United States occupying the area.

The old slogans have to be cast aside. The president is making us weaker, not stronger, as a country and he needs to reverse course.

S. O'BRIEN: We spoke to Senator John McCain a little bit earlier this morning and I want to play you just a little bit of what he had to say about our national security and the war in Iraq.

Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: This is an international war. People like Zarqawi, people like these terrorists that are pouring into Iraq from all over the Middle East, they would use Iraq as a base for further export of terror into the United States and throughout the world. There's a great deal at stake here.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

S. O'BRIEN: Exporting terror -- isn't that a big risk to the United States bailing out before the job is done, to quote those who talk about this?

FEINGOLD: Again, we're just playing into their hands. Iraq wasn't even one of the 45 countries where al Qaeda was operating, according to the White House after 9/11. We have allowed them to set up a base in Iraq and now we use our soldiers there as targets for those folks and they train against us. We need targeted attacks on terrorists, not getting stuck in a land war with more and more troops going over there and more and more terrorists being trained.

So this is the opposite of the reality of what's going on in Iraq.

S. O'BRIEN: But regardless of how we got to where we are, when you talk about what to do next and what to do now, isn't there an argument to be made that you've got this terrorist situation...

FEINGOLD: Oh, sure.

S. O'BRIEN: ... fermenting in Iraq and if you pull out now, well, you've got all these terrorists...

FEINGOLD: No, I'm not advocating pulling out now. What I've asked is simply -- and my resolution calls for the president to give us a plan for when we can complete the mission, what the steps are that have to be taken, when those steps will be done and then subsequently when we can withdraw the troops. So what I'm talking about has nothing to do with cut and run. There's not just two alternatives -- stay there forever and cut and run. There's a rational alternative, and that's where we need presidential leadership.

How long will this last? What makes sense? What should be done in what order? And when can the troops come home? That's how we can tell the world that we're not trying to occupy Iraq. The occupation of Iraq as it's perceived is the number one recruiting tool for terrorists throughout the world. It is hurting us, not helping us, and the president has it completely turned around.

S. O'BRIEN: Senator Russ Feingold is in Washington this morning.

FEINGOLD: Thank you.

S. O'BRIEN: Nice to see you, Senator.

Thanks.

FEINGOLD: Thank you.

S. O'BRIEN: Miles.

M. O'BRIEN: Shares of Google have soared past $300. We call it the cupcake line. Yes, if you were watching the show, we ate cupcakes on account of that. We'll explain that in a little bit. But we'll try to separate the search engine from the high flying tech stocks of the '90s. There is a difference, although on Google I still wonder how they make money.

Stay with us for more AMERICAN MORNING.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

M. O'BRIEN: Google is still amazing Wall Street, with shares topping $300 for the first time this week. But how does the Internet company actually make money? It seems like they give everything away on their site.

We asked CNN's Allan Chernoff to do a Google search.

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

ALLAN CHERNOFF, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Type in "Google stock bubble" and you'll get 485,000 hits. Bubble or not, Google's stock has sex appeal to investors not seen since the height of the Internet boom five years ago.

The difference, though, between Google and other high flying Internet stocks is that Google is making serious money, more than a billion dollars during the first three months of the year.

(on camera): Virtually all of Google's revenue comes from advertising.

Let's do a search for men's ties. The links on top and on the side are all sponsored. Any time somebody clicks on one of these, Google gets paid.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP FROM "STAR TREK")

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Captain's log, star date 1673.1.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHERNOFF (voice-over): Inspired by "Star Trek," Google's founders dreamed of building a computer as smart as the one on the Enterprise. Sergey Brin and Larry Page, who dropped out of Stanford's Ph.D. program, realized their dream by writing a program that turned Web searching into a popularity contest. Google links you to sites most visited by others who conducted the same search.

Standard & Poor's is no longer telling investors to buy Google, arguing the company's growth could slow down.

SCOTT KESSLER, STANDARD & POOR'S: At the end of the day, Google really makes money through one vehicle, and that is online advertising. And, frankly, that is a potential risk.

CHERNOFF: Google hopes to reduce the risk by making money from new services, including local neighborhood searching that generates ads from small business and 3D satellite maps.

JOHN HANKE, GOOGLE INC.: Our mission at Google is to organize the world's information and make it accessible and useful to people. And in the geographic space and the local information space, we're just trying to create products that are as compelling as we can possibly make them.

CHERNOFF: Google's stock has made Sergey Brin and Larry Page worth $11 billion each on paper, on top of the $.5 billion in shares each has already cashed in. And the company's value in the stock market is now $84 billion, more than the nation's biggest media company, Time Warner, parent of CNN.

Allen Chernoff, CNN, New York.

(END VIDEO TAPE)

M. O'BRIEN: Google is reported to be the world's 41st largest company by value, even though it is not in the top 500 in either sales or net -- Soledad.

S. O'BRIEN: Well, still to come this morning, we're going to meet the proud parents of a cute, not so little baby girl. In fact, her daddy nicknamed her "the big enchilada." There she is. She weighs in at 13 pounds, 12 ounces. So how do mom and dad explain their big bundle of joy?

First, a question, though. A newborn's head accounts for how much of its entire weight? Is it, A, one fourth; Bone third; or is it C, one half of the newborn's entire body weight?

The answer is later on AMERICAN MORNING.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

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