Return to Transcripts main page
Paula Zahn Now
Former Homeland Security Official Doubts Americans' Safety; Interview With Les Moonves
Aired January 10, 2005 - 20:00 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.
PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening to all of you, and thanks so much for being with us tonight.
After billions have been spent on homeland security since 9/11, a former top official at that agency has some serious doubts about our safety. I'll ask him why coming up.
And these images are unforgettable. Documenting abuse at the infamous Abu Ghraib prison. Now, the court-martial begins for the soldiers charged with leading the abuse.
But we begin tonight with a black eye at CBS News. Today four long-time CBS News employees lost their jobs because of Dan Rather's "60 Minutes Wednesday" story last September about President Bush's National Guard service. That story was built around documents that no one has been able to authenticate. An independent report today released examines how a respected news organization allowed the meltdown in the middle of a presidential race on a story that could have influenced the election. Here is Chris Huntington.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CHRIS HUNTINGTON, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): In early September, veteran CBS News producer Mary Mapes thought she had the story of the presidential election, that George W. Bush had shirked his duties in the Texas National Guard, and that four letters, purportedly written by Bush's commanding officer at the time, proved it.
DAN RATHER, CBS NEWS: Tonight we have new documents and new information on the president's military service.
HUNTINGTON: In fact, all that Mapes had were four ragged photocopies that neither she nor her colleagues at "60 Minutes Wednesday" nor several document specialists could authenticate at the time.
Now, a 224-page report prepared by former U.S. Attorney General Richard Thornburgh and Louis Boccardi, the former CEO of the Associated Press, finds, quote, "considerable and fundamental deficiencies related to the reporting and production of the September 8th segment." That, quote, "myopic zeal to break the story ahead of other news organizations resulted in a rush to air that overwhelmed the proper application of proper CBS News standards." UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't think there's any more destructive element in television news now than the competition to be first. This is a story about news people who fell in love with a story, and falling in love is a kind of madness, and it afflicts people in the news business just like as it afflicts all of us sometimes.
HUNTINGTON: Thornburgh and Boccardi present a revealing look at the chaotic pressure cooker at "60 Minutes Wednesday" trying to push through a controversial story in just a few days, including Mapes and an associate producer scrambling over Labor Day weekend to find document experts just days before the report would go to air.
Mapes is described in the report as dismissing objections raised by those experts and then convincing CBS News executives that the documents had been validated. Dan Rather is described as out of the loop, covering Hurricane Frances in Florida, but Rather did tell CBS News President Andrew Heyward that, quote, "the story could be radioactive," and that Heyward should "have it checked out thoroughly." Heyward then e-mailed Betsy West, the executive overseeing "60 Minutes": "We're going to have to defend every syllable on this one."
Betsy West, as well as two other executives at "60 Minutes Wednesday," have lost their jobs, all because a veteran producer thought she had a scoop.
LES MOONVES, CBS PRESIDENT: The vetting process didn't work, that people trusted the word of one person without checking the documents or the experts that produced them.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ZAHN: And that was Chris Huntington, reporting for us tonight. Dan Rather just back from covering the tsunami did not anchor the "CBS Evening News" tonight.
The report did come up during today's White House briefing.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: CBS has taken steps to hold people accountable. And we appreciate those steps. We also hope that CBS will take steps to prevent something like this from happening again.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ZAHN: And you heard a little bit earlier on in Chris' report what the chief executive of CBS is having to say about that. You could hear more now as I sat down with him earlier today, with Les Moonves.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ZAHN: First of all, thanks so much for joining us. How damaging is this investigation to CBS News' credibility? MOONVES: Well, clearly, this is a bit of a black mark against CBS News. And clearly things were done in this report that were unfair and untrue, and we brought in this panel, and they gave us 225 pages, very in-depth look at what occurred there. So it's our job now in terms of what we've done with people and the way the process works at CBS News, in terms of vetting documents and sources, that we change the process, and I think, you know, as I said, it's not a great day for CBS News, but it is an opportunity to re-examine ourselves, and hopefully move on and do better in the future.
ZAHN: How much blame to you put on Dan Rather for this story getting on the air in the form it did?
MOONVES: Right. Well, once again, judging from the panel report, and taking the panel's report at face value, and every decision we've made is based on a very, very thorough investigation by these people for three months -- their assessment was Rather was doing the Republican National Convention, he was doing the hurricane in Florida. He clearly was preoccupied with a lot of things going on at that time, and his biggest sin was to trust a producer who he had worked very successfully with in the past.
ZAHN: The report was critical of Dan Rather, though, for not being more involved, despite all those demands on his schedule. Dan Rather is a reporter's reporter.
MOONVES: Yes.
ZAHN: Why don't you think he was more personally involved in a story that was unfolding in the middle, an explosive story, the middle of an ugly election?
MOONVES: You know, unfortunately, you know, with every reporter, you get involved with certain things, and certain things you're able to check out and certain things you're not. As I said, Dan Rather and Mary Mapes had arguably a couple of months earlier broken the Abu Ghraib story, arguably, maybe one of the biggest stories of the year. They had done it successfully. They both got lauded for that. Dan Rather walks into this story from, you know, working with Mary Mapes, and she presents him with these sources and these documents. And Dan Rather at face value says, yes, they're accurate. Mary tells me they're accurate. And he reports accordingly.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RATHER: Tonight, we have new documents and new information on the president's military service.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MOONVES: You know, I don't know how a reporter or sometimes how a reporter does not get more involved. And it's a difficult question.
ZAHN: Dan Rather, in the middle of this controversy, announced that he'll be stepping down from his anchor chair...
MOONVES: Correct.
ZAHN: ... of 24 years in March. Can you honestly tell me today that his stepping down has nothing to do with this controversy?
MOONVES: We did begin discussing Dan's leaving this past summer, long before there was any mention of this story coming out, or any of the controversy doing that. We talked about Dan leaving some time in the first half of this year, of '05.
Come November, you know, once again, whether it had anything to do with this story or how Dan felt about this story, or the fact that it was an independent panel, I really can't tell you, Paula. He came in. We discussed it further. It was a continuation of what went on in the summer. I don't know what went on in his head. He came to see Andrew Heyward and me, and said March 9th will be my 24th anniversary, I feel it's fitting that that would be my last day in the chair. We agreed.
ZAHN: So you're telling me you're not forcing him to step down in March? This was Dan's decision?
MOONVES: This was Dan's decision in November, and we're supporting it.
ZAHN: The report also seems to indicate, though, that perhaps the most egregious sin was committed after the report aired, where people continued to defend the authenticity of the report. In your judgment, was that worse than the original airing that was made?
MOONVES: I think they were both terrible. I think the original story was not validated, and I think the idea of circling the wagons, as opposed to really getting down and dirty -- I mean, one of the mistakes that was made, once again, and there were numerous mistakes, which the good news can be and will be corrected for the future, was that to a certain extent, you know -- and once again, I'm referring to the panel report -- that the main producer of the report was also reporting the aftermath.
ZAHN: Sure.
MOONVES: That even at that point in time, it wasn't -- a red flag wasn't thrown up in the air saying, wait a minute, can we verify the documents? Can we verify the experts? Can we verify the sources? And are the sources unimpeachable? And the answer to most of those questions is no.
ZAHN: Has this affected morale at CBS News?
MOONVES: No question about it. No question about it. The comments from up and down the CBS News ladder have been extreme. I've been urged by senior, senior people, both on camera and off, don't put a Band-Aid on this. This is important. This is an opportunity for CBS News to look at itself carefully, and that's what we've done.
ZAHN: Do you think the punishment has gone far enough?
MOONVES: Yes, I do.
ZAHN: I guess what I still don't understand, when you take a story that potentially could have been as explosive as this story was, if it had been true, why the vetting process didn't hold?
MOONVES: I'm asking the same exact question. And that's why four people are out of work today, because the vetting process didn't work, that people trusted the word of one person without checking the documents or the experts that produced them.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ZAHN: And in a moment, I'll take up that pointed vetting question with the two men who ran the independent investigation into CBS. And in a statement tonight, it's worth noting that fired "60 Minutes Wednesday" producer Mary Mapes had this to say. Quote, "I am shocked by the vitriolic scape-goating in Les Moonves's statement. I am very concerned that his actions are motivated by corporate and political considerations -- ratings rather than journalism."
She went on to say: "It is noteworthy the panel did not conclude that these documents are false. Indeed, in the end, all that the panel did conclude was that there were many red flags that counseled against going to air quickly. I never had control of the timing of any airing of a '60 Minutes' segment."
All this leads to our "PZ Now" meter question tonight. Do you think Dan Rather should have been fired from CBS? Log on to cnn.com/paula. Let us know. We'll have the results for you at the end of the hour.
And still ahead, our CNN "Security Watch." Our CNN "Security Watch" with a revealing look at the agency in charge of keeping you safe.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: A single permanent department with an overriding and urgent mission.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ZAHN: Now three years after 9/11, a former Homeland Security official sounds the alarm.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ZAHN: What is it you saw that makes you believe we're even more vulnerable today than we were on September 11th, 2001?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ZAHN: And this Florida city was a haven for 9/11 terrorists. So why are these senior citizens now on the frontlines of the war in terror? All that and more tonight when "PAULA ZAHN NOW" continues.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ZAHN: And welcome back. Before we went to the break, we heard from CBS chief Les Moonves. And earlier today, I also sat down with the two men who conducted the investigation into the Tiffany Network, former Associated Press President Lou Boccardi and former Attorney General Dick Thornburgh.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ZAHN: Mr. Thornburgh, can you explain to me why there was so little vetting on a piece, an explosive piece in the middle of an ugly election that could have been very damaging to the president?
RICHARD THORNBURGH, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: There was one major villain for the shortcomings of this segment. It was haste. Entirely too much of a rush to get on the air. The documents were discovered and placed in the hands of CBS people. And within six days, the program was aired. And that did not allow enough time for thorough vetting of the documents, the sources, all of the things that have to be done to produce a first-class story. That just didn't happen.
ZAHN: What is your sense of what the truth is here, when it comes to allegations made about the individual producer, who people have alleged had a clear anti-Bush bias?
LOU BOCCARDI, FORMER ASSOCIATED PRESS PRESIDENT: We don't feel that we can make that accusation and prove it against anybody connected with the program. And the phrase I just uttered "and prove it" is very much part of the philosophy, if you will, of the panel's reporting. What we know is that there are some things done here that look really bad when you're looking at this question of bias. Contacts with the Lockhart campaign. Clearly in my view, absolutely out of bounds. No way that gets to be an approved deal. It's just not right.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RATHER: The military records of the...
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ZAHN: What can you tell us about your evaluation of Dan Rather's performance on this story?
THORNBURGH: Our report makes it clear that Dan Rather was only minimally involved in the preparation of this piece. On the other hand, in the aftermath, we did take note of the fact that some of his reporting on "The Evening News" was clearly erroneous. The -- I think you have to take Dan at his own word. After the apology was made by CBS, he said, "I didn't dig hard enough, long enough, didn't ask enough of the right questions." In fact, that could probably be applied to all the people involved in this.
ZAHN: Even during your investigation, you had producers fiercely defending the accuracy of this piece. THORNBURGH: To this day.
ZAHN: Do you have any doubt that this report was false? That the allegations were untrue?
THORNBURGH: I think our bottom line verdict on this program was that it was not substantiated by the facts that were developed during the course of its production, or in the aftermath of the showing on September 8th.
ZAHN: So is it fair to say, after this long, exhaustive investigation, that everybody agreed that the vetting process was flawed, but you can't tell America tonight that the story was absolutely false.
THORNBURGH: We'd be telling them more than we knew. I think our charge from CBS was to investigate the process by which this was produced, and the process by which this segment was defended, and determine whether it was flawed or not. We determined that it was flawed, and we set forth chapter and verse as to why we came to that conclusion. We can't make the same mistake that was made in the initial broadcast by coming to conclusions for which we have no definitive proof.
BOCCARDI: We can tell America, though, that this story should not have been put on the air.
THORNBURGH: Yes.
ZAHN: If CBS had owned up to the mistakes, during the beginning stages or the aftermath, would this furor have died down?
THORNBURGH: We wouldn't be sitting here today.
ZAHN: And on that note, I will end this interview.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ZAHN: And coming up next, an update on the aftermath of the tsunami. John King's portrait of one rescuer and his very solemn task.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ZAHN: More than 140,000 people lost their lives in the Asian earthquake and tsunami that followed. We have cleared up some duplicate and conflicting information which is why that number is 10,000 to 15,000 lower than what we were reporting last week. John King is in Banda Aceh, Indonesia with a remarkable story about the people who are helping with the recovery by doing the worst possible job.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JOHN KING, CNN SR. WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It is the walk of a tired man. Taqua (ph) is tired of searching, more tired of what he finds. A mother and her baby, breast-feeding when the wave hit. This roadside wrap, both a rescue from the rubble and a ticket to a mass grave.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I have to detach my feelings from all of this. I cannot dwell on it. If I stop and dwell on it, I will not be able to help people.
KING: Help the living, Taqua says, because the now badly decomposed corpses spread disease and help the dead, in his view, like the woman buried in the debris by at least getting them a burial.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is very difficult, but we try to rescue.
KING: Taqua is a 19-year search and rescue veteran. He and his team from the Indonesian province of (UNINTELLIGIBLE). In Banda Aceh ten days now and planning to stay another month. Four bodies in this alley, three women and a child. The smiles might seem odd, but part of his job is keeping his young team going. His matter of fact nature, part of a calculated effort to keep his distance.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is a natural phenomenon. It cannot be avoided. The sun was shining and the weather was nice. Then an earthquake struck. The tsunami followed. I just don't think about it too much. This is just another disaster.
KING: Of course, it is anything but just another disaster. Taqua says he initially expected 20,000, maybe 30,000 deaths. The toll in Indonesia is 100,000. He has lost count of how many he has found. In a filthy canal, the stench as numbing as the view. Gloves and masks, part of the job, but Taqua rarely wears his. Loading the cart means a busy stretch ahead. But a pause for a quick prayer here. Just a job he says, but this is a young boy. Taqua has two at home.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They know when they see the victims on TV. They're proud their father is in Aceh.
KING: More bodies across the field, this soldier says. Two weeks later the urgent challenge is to find them, rescue them in Taqua's words before they get tossed away again.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We are humans, corpses are human. They have to be treated like humans.
KING: Piles of debris everywhere. Approaching one, his request is a give away. A garbage bag, not a big plastic sheath. Yet another child who died alone. Around the corner, another soldier and another excavation. This, an upscale home that faces the water and faced death first. Two more here and then two at the mayor's house, the soldier says. In, carrying plastic. Bodies, not the only burden they carry out. Only midafternoon, but a draining day. All are tired, but they agree to press on. If they wash away the germs, Taqua says he'll wait. More searches and what he calls rescues, before the day is done.
(END VIDEOTAPE) ZAHN: So, John, you just showcased a remarkably strong man, and it was interesting to have you describe this calculated effort he makes to distance himself from what he's seeing, what he's smelling, what he's hearing. How do you think he and the men who work for him are able to do that?
KING: Well, in part, Paula, they are devout Muslims, and they pray as a group before they come out to do this search. He says that helps them. That way they don't stop at each and every victim. He did pause with the young child. When he became most emotional and he was trying to keep from being emotional was when he was talking about the children. You see the devastation. If I can indulge you for a second, this is where we are. And you see how much they've cleaned up the town center here. This is why thousands died.
Traditionally, a gathering place in town anyway, they were here because there was a race that day featuring students. They were here because the mayor has the morning exercise program here. All gathered by the thousands here. And they've done a fairly good job cleaning this up over the past few days but if you turn quickly to my left, this is the path to the water. You can't see it from here, but just behind those mosques over the horizon is where the wave came from. This is the priciest part of the city. The devastation you see here, imagine it, multiply it by 1,000 in your mind as we turn and turn and turn, you see more and more and more of it. Still stacks of debris, and unfortunately under the debris, still hundreds if not thousands of bodies. We'll never know their names maybe never find those bodies.
ZAHN: And poor Taqua has that task that seems to be neverending. John King, thank you very much for your report. Joining us from Banda Aceh Indonesia tonight.
Just ahead we change our focus again and move on to the abuse scandal at Abu Ghraib. The army reservist charged as the ringleader is put on trial but there is much more to the story than his guilt or innocence. That's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ZAHN: Few of us can forget the shocking images of abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison. And today in Texas, a court martial began of the alleged ring leader, Specialist Charles Graner. His defense: He was following orders.
This week's trial, as well as new allegations of abuse, could be a turning point in an already explosive story.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ZAHN (voice-over): Grotesque, repulsive images of hooded Iraqi prisoners, naked, posed in sexually suggestive positions. Some photos included U.S. service personnel smiling nearby.
The pictures were taken here at Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison. Notorious under Saddam Hussein, it fell to U.S. forces in the 2003 invasion only to become a detention center for suspected insurgents. This was going on by November or December of 2003. It came to light last January when a soldier saw the pictures on a CD that was being passed around and reported to his superiors.
Some 30 investigations since then have roughed out the story of what happened at Abu Ghraib. The soldiers claim they were ordered to soften up suspected insurgents for interrogation by U.S. intelligence or their civilian subcontractors.
Seven soldiers from the 372nd Military Police Company were charged with crimes, including assault, conspiracy, dereliction of duty, cruelty and maltreatment. Some pleaded guilty.
In the trials that remain, a key question will be: Were the soldiers acting on their own or under orders from above? there are other questions as well.
How widespread is the mistreatment of prisoners in U.S. military custody? An army investigation points to abuses by military intelligence and MPs going back to the 2001 war in Afghanistan.
There also are questions about the treatment of detainees at the U.S. military base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The military has announced a new investigation sparked by documents showing FBI agents at Guantanamo alleged abuse of prisoners by interrogators.
And finally, there are questions about the Bush administration's regard for international treaties on the treatment of prisoners.
SEN. ARLEN SPECTER (R-PA), JUDICIARY COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: Do you approve of torture?
ALBERTO GONZALES, ATTORNEY GENERAL NOMINEE: Absolutely not, Senator.
ZAHN: Last week, Attorney General nominee Alberto Gonzales was criticized for approving a 2002 Justice Department memo that defined torture so narrowly, critics say it could have opened the door for what eventually took place at Abu Ghraib. That definition was only recently withdrawn.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ZAHN: Charles Graner's trial is expected to last all week. His fate will be determined by a jury of four officers and six senior enlisted men, al of whom have served in Iraq and/or Afghanistan.
And Susan Candiotti is watching the case unfold from Fort Hood, Texas.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SUSAN CANDIOTTI, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): As Specialist Charles Graner, upbeat and jaunty, walked into his court martial, he stopped to say... SPEC. CHARLES GRANER, CHARGED WITH PRISONER ABUSE: You're going to find out how much of a monster I am today, and we're going to go fight the alligators.
CANDIOTTI: A man with a sunny smile, but dark moments in his past, Graner, a Reservist, was sent to Iraq and put in charge of the toughest cell block at Abu Ghraib because he had been a prison guard in Pennsylvania. What the Army didn't know: Graner had been sued by a Pennsylvania prisoner who said Graner put a razor blade in his food. That suit was dropped.
But back at Graner's home, Uniontown, Pennsylvania, with its proud military history, court records describe a husband with a violent temper in a bitter divorce, ordered to stay away from his ex- wife after she said he grabbed her by the hair and banged her head against the floor a year after their divorce.
As the trial began, Private Jeremy Sivitz, the first Abu Ghraib guard to plead guilty, described two dozen of the now notorious photos for the military jury. Just after this picture was taken, Sivitz said, Graner punched another detainee in the head.
Then the seven naked Iraqis suspected of leading a prison riot were stacked in a human pyramid. That's Graner signalling thumbs up. Sivitz said Graner did not arrange this scene of sexual humiliation. Another guard did. But he said the other MPs were "pretty much laughing like they were enjoying it, having a good time."
The defense blames military intelligence for the atmosphere of abuse. Three intelligence operatives can be seen at the right of this photo taken on another night. Graner's lawyer claimed that some of the Abu Ghraib prisoners were terrorists and admitted it in videotaped testimony.
GUY WOMACK, CHARLES GRANER'S ATTORNEY: We had three high-valued detainees admitting that they were insurgents from other countries, that they came into Iraq to fight a battle that was not theirs, to kill Americans and to kill coalition forces and create instability in Iraq.
CANDIOTTI: The ranking sergeant in the cell block area, Ivan Fredericks, who is serving eight years, testified military intelligence did give orders to soften up detainees, but not what the photos show.
(on camera): Fredericks may have helped the defense when he acknowledged asking intelligence agents how far the guards could go with prisoners and got the answer "Just don't kill them."
(voice-over): Graner was pleased.
GRANER: I think things went a lot better than expected.
CANDIOTTI (on camera): Why do you think so?
GRANER: Just in my heart. CANDIOTTI (voice-over): He said he will testify in his own defense.
(on camera): Are you expected to take the stand?
GRANER: Me?
CANDIOTTI: Yes.
GRANER: Yes, ma'am.
CANDIOTTI (voice-over): He is likely to be the final witness probably toward the end of this week.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ZAHN: And that was Susan Candiotti reporting for us tonight.
Joining me now from Texas is Charles Graner's attorney, Guy Womack, who we saw in Susan's report.
Welcome back, Mr. Womack.
I wanted to start tonight with this picture. It is the picture that you no doubt know quite well of the naked detainees piled on a pyramid with your client smiling and giving the thumbs up sign.
And you said, "Don't cheerleaders all over America form pyramids six to eight times a year? Is that torture?"
How do you compare this to cheerleading?
WOMACK: Well, what we're comparing is not whether they're naked, whether they're wearing sand bags on their heads. I'm sure the cheerleaders don't do that. But, rather, the physical act of being piled up in a pyramid. It's a gymnastic formation. Only the body weight of the individual persons are on any other person. It doesn't hurt them.
The testimony of the witness that testified about that today was that there was no crying. They were merely piled up. And we're having an expert witness testify that that is a valid control measure. It's a tactic that you would use when you were outnumbered by possible assailants.
These were violent individuals who had just led a riot in the prison yard. They were piled up in a pyramid so that, if one tried to move, the others would fall down, and it would give the MPs at least a few seconds to react to the movement.
ZAHN: So you didn't have any problems with someone ordering the prisoners to do just that?
WOMACK: To pile up in a pyramid? Of course not.
ZAHN: Let's... WOMACK: It was much better than strapping them by the neck or other techniques that could have been used. They were merely piled up in a pyramid.
Now what is offensive to all of us is that they were naked. But they were naked because they were just being processed. They had just come from a riot outside the prison wall. They were being in process. They had to be stripped.
They were wearing sand bags on their heads because that's what you do with enemy prisoners so that they cannot see that they outnumber you, that they cannot see exactly where friendly forces are standing, they can't see what avenues of egress they could use for escape. It's very important that you isolate them visually so that they can't escape or fight.
ZAHN: The accusation is that the soldiers should have been aware of the fact that nudity is extremely an humiliating thing to Muslim men.
But I want to move on to another photo today that you also have described, and this is the one of Private Lynndie England leading a prison on a leash, and you have said, "A tether is a valid tool. You're probably been at a mall or airport and seen children on tethers. They're not being abused."
These detainees were in a prison. Why did you need a tether for them?
WOMACK: Well, again, we're going to have more testimony on that. We had testimony today about that. A tether is a device that you use when you need to extract a prisoner from a cell.
If you heard the testimony in court today, you would have learned that that particular prisoner was not dragged out of the cell. He crawled out of the cell while a female was holding the tether. It's believed that the fact that a female was holding the tether averted the violence. The fact that the man was humiliated to be naked in front of an American woman perhaps kept him from fighting.
It's well known psychologically that, in this country, prisoners who are stripped of their clothing become more complacent, they're less likely to fight or try to run because they have no clothes.
ZAHN: I need a brief answer to my final question. How damaging was it to your client today that you had two soldiers accusing your client of beating up prisoners, in one case knocking a man out cold?
WOMACK: Wasn't damaging. That private who testified to that, Frederick, told the court that he'd hit a man in the chest so hard that he said he caused cardiac arrest.
That same witness said that he set up all of the sex scenes, masturbations, the simulated fellatio. That same witness did all of those things himself. He is the one who said that he had received orders from military intelligence and civilian contract intelligence, had passed the orders to Specialist Graner and others. He had also passed along the praise for the good job they were doing and the effect it was having in helping in these interrogations.
ZAHN: So you don't think it hurts your client at all? Well, it will be interesting to...
WOMACK: No.
ZAHN: ... watch you go through this process. Guy Womack, thanks for your time tonight.
WOMACK: You're welcome. Thank you.
ZAHN: A pleasure. And tomorrow night, my exclusive interview with Brigadier General Janis Karpinski, who was in charge of military police at Abu Ghraib.
Onto tonight's "CNN Security Watch" and a report card of sorts for the Department of Homeland Security.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CLARK KENT ERVIN, FORMER INSPECTOR GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY: I think the department as a whole, the whole leadership of the department, starting with the secretary, I think that the department did not live up to its promise.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ZAHN: A former homeland security official gives his colleagues low grades. Now he's out of a job. That's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ZAHN: Our "CNN Security Watch" now, an update on the train wreck that killed nine people and injured hundreds more in South Carolina just last Thursday.
Crews there are still trying to neutralize toxic chlorine gas leaking from one derailed car. It could be until Wednesday before it's safe for any of the 5,000 residents of Graniteville, South Carolina, to go back home.
The train struck another one that was parked on a siding, and investigators are trying to find out why a track switch sent the train on to that siding.
The accident has raised fears about the vulnerability of the nation's railing system, something that's also been a concern for those charged with fighting terrorism.
As we continue our series -- "Security Watch," that is, we have an inside look at the Department of Homeland Security. It comes from the man who, until just a few weeks ago, was the agency's top watchdog.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Tonight I ask the Congress to join me in creating a single permanent department with an overriding and urgent mission, securing the homeland of America and protecting the American people.
ZAHN (voice-over): With that announcement, 22 different agencies came together under the Department of Homeland Security with one mission, to fight terrorism in the United States.
Secretary Tom Ridge's new homeland security team included Clark Kent Ervin as inspector general.
ERVIN: Inspector general is the only person whose job, whose statutory obligation, whose moral responsibility is to call them as he or she sees them. And I did that.
ZAHN: And that outspokenness may have gotten Ervin into trouble. During his two-year tenure, Ervin released more than 200 reports, many of which were highly critical of the new department.
(on camera) How unpopular, Clark, did you become with the Bush administration after you unleashed a number of stinging reports about the operation of the homeland security?
ERVIN: Well, I guess the short answer and the honest answer is I really don't know. No one told me that I was unpopular. No one told me that I wasn't well liked. But I'm a big boy, and I understand certainly that there were people in the department who took offense at the reports that I issued.
ZAHN (voice-over): He alleged department mismanagement, mishandling of millions of dollars and out and out failure of security programs.
(on camera) What is it you saw that makes you believe we're more vulnerable today than we were on September 11, 2001, for another attack?
ERVIN: For example, in 2003, two years after 9/11, my auditors went on an undercover basis to 15 airports around the country of varying sizes to see whether guns, knives and explosive devices could still be sneaked past baggage and passenger screeners after DHS assumed responsibility for the screener force.
ZAHN: What did you find?
ERVIN: Unfortunately, we found that two years after 9/1, it was still far easier than it should have been to get these deadly weapons past the screener work force.
ZAHN (voice-over): Besides aviation security, another investigation revealed huge gaps in screening for nuclear materials at U.S. ports. And then there was the money. One of Ervin's investigations concluded there was $49 million in excessive profit paid to the Boeing company by the Transportation Security Administration for the installation and maintenance of equipment that detects explosives.
And his investigation into immigration and customs enforcement concluded the agency couldn't keep track of its money, spending at least $150 million more than it had, which he says didn't leave the agency with enough money to perform its counterterrorism role.
ERVIN: To be fair, there was outrage on the part of the relevant congressional committees that, even after pointing out weaknesses and problems and shortcomings like this, we continued to find a pattern of spending abuses and a pattern of inattention on the department's part to correcting these kinds of problems.
ZAHN (on camera): Whose fault is that?
ERVIN: Well, it's a combination of things. First of all, and most importantly, I think it's a failure of leadership in management attention.
ZAHN: Are you saying that Tom Ridge was a failure when he ran the Homeland Security Department?
ERVIN: Failure is a very, very incendiary term, of course. And...
ZAHN: What would be a more accurate word to describe how you felt about his performance?
ERVIN: Well, I think the department as a whole, the whole leadership of the department, starting with the secretary, I think that the department did not live up to its promise.
And I think we have a ways to go, a considerable distance to go before we're as safe as we need to be in this post-9/11 environment with a determined enemy like the one that we have.
ZAHN: At any point during your two years of service as inspector general, did anybody try to silence you or mute your criticism?
ERVIN: Happened all the time, and I resisted it very, very fiercely.
ZAHN: Clark, can you explain to me how pressure was put on you to mute your criticism along the way?
ERVIN: There were times I was urged not to release reports.
ZAHN: By whom? Would these be members of Congress?
ERVIN: Not by members of Congress but by senior members of the department. It happened on a number of occasions. And I resisted each time. The good news is that the law gave me the authority to do just that. ZAHN: So you say you felt pressure from high-ranking members of the Department of Homeland Security?
ERVIN: Yes.
ZAHN: Did Tom Ridge ever come to you personally and say, "You can't do this, Clark. This is making us look bad"?
ERVIN: To his credit, the secretary never did that. He did not. There's no question that on a number of occasions, there were hard- hitting reports about very, very sensitive topics that the senior leadership in the department -- I don't want to personalize this or name names -- would just as soon had not been released publicly or to the Congress.
ZAHN (voice-over): The White House decided in December not to reappoint Ervin as inspector general.
ERVIN: I'm not bitter. I'm disappointed. It was an -- it, being able to continue this job, was an opportunity for me to continue to shine the spotlight of not just public attention. This is public attention. But public official attention to the shortcomings of the department and the recommendations that we made for improvement.
ZAHN: What is your chief concern about our continuing vulnerability here in America as a terrorist target?
ERVIN: Well, my chief concern is that security gaps remain in every sector, in terms of aviation security, in port security, in terms of mass transit security.
The good news is we know what the answer is to these problems. We can solve these problems. We can make America safer. And I'm confident, with the kind of attention that my office and others were able to bring to bear with appropriate congressional oversight and media scrutiny and the participation and activism of the American people, which we saw, for example, on the 9/11 Commission, that we can, indeed, collectively together make America safer.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ZAHN: And we asked the Homeland Security Department for a response. The department gave us this statement. "The department's leadership fully recognizes the value and importance of the office of the inspector general. The department has always supported the full release of unclassified information to the public and any assertions to the contrary are not consistent with our current or past practices. DHS will continue to coordinate and cooperate with the office of inspector general on these important matters."
And in case you're wondering -- of course, we did -- here's how Clark Kent Ervin got Superman's name. He told us when he was born, his parents let his 11-year-old brother name him.
Remember, here at CNN we're always on the lookout for stories about your family's safety. Coming up next, one town with active patrols against terrorists, and if experience counts, you want these people on your side. Coming up, drafting senior citizens in the war on terror.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ZAHN: More now on tonight's "CNN's Security Watch."
You might remember the connection between the city of Delray Beach, Florida, and the 9/11 attacks. Almost half the hijackers had lived there at one point.
Well, now more than three years later, some Delray Beach citizens are taking matters into their own hands.
Here's John Zarrella.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JOHN ZARRELLA, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): For Charlie Goldberg and Dale McDairos this is about doing what's right, about being what so many of us are not: involved.
DALE MCDAIROS, HOMEFRONT SECURITY VOLUNTEER: They cleaned up a lot of the paint.
CHARLIE GOLDBERG, HOMEFRONT SECURITY VOLUNTEER: Thank goodness for that. That paint can cause a lot of problems.
ZARRELLA: Charlie and Dale are members of Delray Beach, Florida's homefront security unit, a unique counter terrorism team started by the police in the wake of 9/11. It's made up entirely of volunteer senior citizens.
GOLDBERG: It's all locked up, right, Dale?
ZARRELLA: In all, there are 14 of them on patrol five days a week. Charlie and Dale are working the 9 to noon shift today.
At city hall...
GOLDBERG: Hey, good morning.
ZARRELLA: ... they check every room, every cubicle. Their job: simply to keep an eye out. If anything or anyone looks suspicious, report it.
At the city tennis center, they inspect under the bleachers.
GOLDBERG: Yes, we are doing a great service for everybody, being the eyes and ears of the police department.
ZARRELLA: This is one of four stops they'll make this morning.
MCDAIROS: I get to see people, talk to people. And they're so appreciative of us being out here, especially at our age. ZARRELLA: What do you mean at your age? You guys are young!
GOLDBERG: I don't know why you mentioned that.
ZARRELLA: Charlie is 82. Dale will turn 78 in March. Each took a bioterrorism course before going on patrol.
There's nothing frivolous about what they do or that they are constant reminders.
For reasons that have never been fully explained, perhaps believing they could keep a low profile here, nine of the September 11 hijackers lived in Delray Beach. Ask Officer Skip Brown about the value of the patrols.
OFFICER SKIP BROWN, DELRAY, FLORIDA, POLICE: Every time I call, every time I ask, they're there. Extra eyes and ears, that's what we're looking for. Do they make a difference? I feel that they do. I don't think that they will ever know what they deterred out there or what could have been. Do we have any more in this city? I don't know.
ZARRELLA: Both Charlie Goldberg and Dale McDairos plan to be on the beat for a long time.
MCDAIROS: As long as I can walk, talk and tell the truth.
ZARRELLA: After all, it's all about doing what's right.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ZAHN: That was John Zarrella reporting for us tonight.
Please stay with us, because we've got some stunning new footage of nature's fury. An entire hillside on the move in Southern California. Deadly weather. Believe me, you will see the picture when we come back. Caught on camera. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ZAHN: We have some remarkable pictures to close our show with tonight, the truly frightening power of a mudslide in California. Look at this, from La Conchita, northwest of Los Angeles.
After a week of heavy rain -- there she goes -- a bluff above the town gave way, crushing homes and cars with tons of mud. One person died. At least nine people injured. Crews are searching for at least a dozen people.
These picks provided from our affiliate, KCAL, K-C-A-L.
And here are tonight's "PZN Meter" results: 50 percent of you said, yes, Dan Rather should be fired. Half of you said no. Dan, not a scientific poll, just a sampling from our web site.
Thanks so much for joining us tonight. Appreciate your dropping by. "LARRY KING LIVE" is next.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Aired January 10, 2005 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
PAULA ZAHN, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening to all of you, and thanks so much for being with us tonight.
After billions have been spent on homeland security since 9/11, a former top official at that agency has some serious doubts about our safety. I'll ask him why coming up.
And these images are unforgettable. Documenting abuse at the infamous Abu Ghraib prison. Now, the court-martial begins for the soldiers charged with leading the abuse.
But we begin tonight with a black eye at CBS News. Today four long-time CBS News employees lost their jobs because of Dan Rather's "60 Minutes Wednesday" story last September about President Bush's National Guard service. That story was built around documents that no one has been able to authenticate. An independent report today released examines how a respected news organization allowed the meltdown in the middle of a presidential race on a story that could have influenced the election. Here is Chris Huntington.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CHRIS HUNTINGTON, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): In early September, veteran CBS News producer Mary Mapes thought she had the story of the presidential election, that George W. Bush had shirked his duties in the Texas National Guard, and that four letters, purportedly written by Bush's commanding officer at the time, proved it.
DAN RATHER, CBS NEWS: Tonight we have new documents and new information on the president's military service.
HUNTINGTON: In fact, all that Mapes had were four ragged photocopies that neither she nor her colleagues at "60 Minutes Wednesday" nor several document specialists could authenticate at the time.
Now, a 224-page report prepared by former U.S. Attorney General Richard Thornburgh and Louis Boccardi, the former CEO of the Associated Press, finds, quote, "considerable and fundamental deficiencies related to the reporting and production of the September 8th segment." That, quote, "myopic zeal to break the story ahead of other news organizations resulted in a rush to air that overwhelmed the proper application of proper CBS News standards." UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't think there's any more destructive element in television news now than the competition to be first. This is a story about news people who fell in love with a story, and falling in love is a kind of madness, and it afflicts people in the news business just like as it afflicts all of us sometimes.
HUNTINGTON: Thornburgh and Boccardi present a revealing look at the chaotic pressure cooker at "60 Minutes Wednesday" trying to push through a controversial story in just a few days, including Mapes and an associate producer scrambling over Labor Day weekend to find document experts just days before the report would go to air.
Mapes is described in the report as dismissing objections raised by those experts and then convincing CBS News executives that the documents had been validated. Dan Rather is described as out of the loop, covering Hurricane Frances in Florida, but Rather did tell CBS News President Andrew Heyward that, quote, "the story could be radioactive," and that Heyward should "have it checked out thoroughly." Heyward then e-mailed Betsy West, the executive overseeing "60 Minutes": "We're going to have to defend every syllable on this one."
Betsy West, as well as two other executives at "60 Minutes Wednesday," have lost their jobs, all because a veteran producer thought she had a scoop.
LES MOONVES, CBS PRESIDENT: The vetting process didn't work, that people trusted the word of one person without checking the documents or the experts that produced them.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ZAHN: And that was Chris Huntington, reporting for us tonight. Dan Rather just back from covering the tsunami did not anchor the "CBS Evening News" tonight.
The report did come up during today's White House briefing.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: CBS has taken steps to hold people accountable. And we appreciate those steps. We also hope that CBS will take steps to prevent something like this from happening again.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ZAHN: And you heard a little bit earlier on in Chris' report what the chief executive of CBS is having to say about that. You could hear more now as I sat down with him earlier today, with Les Moonves.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ZAHN: First of all, thanks so much for joining us. How damaging is this investigation to CBS News' credibility? MOONVES: Well, clearly, this is a bit of a black mark against CBS News. And clearly things were done in this report that were unfair and untrue, and we brought in this panel, and they gave us 225 pages, very in-depth look at what occurred there. So it's our job now in terms of what we've done with people and the way the process works at CBS News, in terms of vetting documents and sources, that we change the process, and I think, you know, as I said, it's not a great day for CBS News, but it is an opportunity to re-examine ourselves, and hopefully move on and do better in the future.
ZAHN: How much blame to you put on Dan Rather for this story getting on the air in the form it did?
MOONVES: Right. Well, once again, judging from the panel report, and taking the panel's report at face value, and every decision we've made is based on a very, very thorough investigation by these people for three months -- their assessment was Rather was doing the Republican National Convention, he was doing the hurricane in Florida. He clearly was preoccupied with a lot of things going on at that time, and his biggest sin was to trust a producer who he had worked very successfully with in the past.
ZAHN: The report was critical of Dan Rather, though, for not being more involved, despite all those demands on his schedule. Dan Rather is a reporter's reporter.
MOONVES: Yes.
ZAHN: Why don't you think he was more personally involved in a story that was unfolding in the middle, an explosive story, the middle of an ugly election?
MOONVES: You know, unfortunately, you know, with every reporter, you get involved with certain things, and certain things you're able to check out and certain things you're not. As I said, Dan Rather and Mary Mapes had arguably a couple of months earlier broken the Abu Ghraib story, arguably, maybe one of the biggest stories of the year. They had done it successfully. They both got lauded for that. Dan Rather walks into this story from, you know, working with Mary Mapes, and she presents him with these sources and these documents. And Dan Rather at face value says, yes, they're accurate. Mary tells me they're accurate. And he reports accordingly.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RATHER: Tonight, we have new documents and new information on the president's military service.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MOONVES: You know, I don't know how a reporter or sometimes how a reporter does not get more involved. And it's a difficult question.
ZAHN: Dan Rather, in the middle of this controversy, announced that he'll be stepping down from his anchor chair...
MOONVES: Correct.
ZAHN: ... of 24 years in March. Can you honestly tell me today that his stepping down has nothing to do with this controversy?
MOONVES: We did begin discussing Dan's leaving this past summer, long before there was any mention of this story coming out, or any of the controversy doing that. We talked about Dan leaving some time in the first half of this year, of '05.
Come November, you know, once again, whether it had anything to do with this story or how Dan felt about this story, or the fact that it was an independent panel, I really can't tell you, Paula. He came in. We discussed it further. It was a continuation of what went on in the summer. I don't know what went on in his head. He came to see Andrew Heyward and me, and said March 9th will be my 24th anniversary, I feel it's fitting that that would be my last day in the chair. We agreed.
ZAHN: So you're telling me you're not forcing him to step down in March? This was Dan's decision?
MOONVES: This was Dan's decision in November, and we're supporting it.
ZAHN: The report also seems to indicate, though, that perhaps the most egregious sin was committed after the report aired, where people continued to defend the authenticity of the report. In your judgment, was that worse than the original airing that was made?
MOONVES: I think they were both terrible. I think the original story was not validated, and I think the idea of circling the wagons, as opposed to really getting down and dirty -- I mean, one of the mistakes that was made, once again, and there were numerous mistakes, which the good news can be and will be corrected for the future, was that to a certain extent, you know -- and once again, I'm referring to the panel report -- that the main producer of the report was also reporting the aftermath.
ZAHN: Sure.
MOONVES: That even at that point in time, it wasn't -- a red flag wasn't thrown up in the air saying, wait a minute, can we verify the documents? Can we verify the experts? Can we verify the sources? And are the sources unimpeachable? And the answer to most of those questions is no.
ZAHN: Has this affected morale at CBS News?
MOONVES: No question about it. No question about it. The comments from up and down the CBS News ladder have been extreme. I've been urged by senior, senior people, both on camera and off, don't put a Band-Aid on this. This is important. This is an opportunity for CBS News to look at itself carefully, and that's what we've done.
ZAHN: Do you think the punishment has gone far enough?
MOONVES: Yes, I do.
ZAHN: I guess what I still don't understand, when you take a story that potentially could have been as explosive as this story was, if it had been true, why the vetting process didn't hold?
MOONVES: I'm asking the same exact question. And that's why four people are out of work today, because the vetting process didn't work, that people trusted the word of one person without checking the documents or the experts that produced them.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ZAHN: And in a moment, I'll take up that pointed vetting question with the two men who ran the independent investigation into CBS. And in a statement tonight, it's worth noting that fired "60 Minutes Wednesday" producer Mary Mapes had this to say. Quote, "I am shocked by the vitriolic scape-goating in Les Moonves's statement. I am very concerned that his actions are motivated by corporate and political considerations -- ratings rather than journalism."
She went on to say: "It is noteworthy the panel did not conclude that these documents are false. Indeed, in the end, all that the panel did conclude was that there were many red flags that counseled against going to air quickly. I never had control of the timing of any airing of a '60 Minutes' segment."
All this leads to our "PZ Now" meter question tonight. Do you think Dan Rather should have been fired from CBS? Log on to cnn.com/paula. Let us know. We'll have the results for you at the end of the hour.
And still ahead, our CNN "Security Watch." Our CNN "Security Watch" with a revealing look at the agency in charge of keeping you safe.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: A single permanent department with an overriding and urgent mission.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ZAHN: Now three years after 9/11, a former Homeland Security official sounds the alarm.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ZAHN: What is it you saw that makes you believe we're even more vulnerable today than we were on September 11th, 2001?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ZAHN: And this Florida city was a haven for 9/11 terrorists. So why are these senior citizens now on the frontlines of the war in terror? All that and more tonight when "PAULA ZAHN NOW" continues.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ZAHN: And welcome back. Before we went to the break, we heard from CBS chief Les Moonves. And earlier today, I also sat down with the two men who conducted the investigation into the Tiffany Network, former Associated Press President Lou Boccardi and former Attorney General Dick Thornburgh.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ZAHN: Mr. Thornburgh, can you explain to me why there was so little vetting on a piece, an explosive piece in the middle of an ugly election that could have been very damaging to the president?
RICHARD THORNBURGH, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: There was one major villain for the shortcomings of this segment. It was haste. Entirely too much of a rush to get on the air. The documents were discovered and placed in the hands of CBS people. And within six days, the program was aired. And that did not allow enough time for thorough vetting of the documents, the sources, all of the things that have to be done to produce a first-class story. That just didn't happen.
ZAHN: What is your sense of what the truth is here, when it comes to allegations made about the individual producer, who people have alleged had a clear anti-Bush bias?
LOU BOCCARDI, FORMER ASSOCIATED PRESS PRESIDENT: We don't feel that we can make that accusation and prove it against anybody connected with the program. And the phrase I just uttered "and prove it" is very much part of the philosophy, if you will, of the panel's reporting. What we know is that there are some things done here that look really bad when you're looking at this question of bias. Contacts with the Lockhart campaign. Clearly in my view, absolutely out of bounds. No way that gets to be an approved deal. It's just not right.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RATHER: The military records of the...
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ZAHN: What can you tell us about your evaluation of Dan Rather's performance on this story?
THORNBURGH: Our report makes it clear that Dan Rather was only minimally involved in the preparation of this piece. On the other hand, in the aftermath, we did take note of the fact that some of his reporting on "The Evening News" was clearly erroneous. The -- I think you have to take Dan at his own word. After the apology was made by CBS, he said, "I didn't dig hard enough, long enough, didn't ask enough of the right questions." In fact, that could probably be applied to all the people involved in this.
ZAHN: Even during your investigation, you had producers fiercely defending the accuracy of this piece. THORNBURGH: To this day.
ZAHN: Do you have any doubt that this report was false? That the allegations were untrue?
THORNBURGH: I think our bottom line verdict on this program was that it was not substantiated by the facts that were developed during the course of its production, or in the aftermath of the showing on September 8th.
ZAHN: So is it fair to say, after this long, exhaustive investigation, that everybody agreed that the vetting process was flawed, but you can't tell America tonight that the story was absolutely false.
THORNBURGH: We'd be telling them more than we knew. I think our charge from CBS was to investigate the process by which this was produced, and the process by which this segment was defended, and determine whether it was flawed or not. We determined that it was flawed, and we set forth chapter and verse as to why we came to that conclusion. We can't make the same mistake that was made in the initial broadcast by coming to conclusions for which we have no definitive proof.
BOCCARDI: We can tell America, though, that this story should not have been put on the air.
THORNBURGH: Yes.
ZAHN: If CBS had owned up to the mistakes, during the beginning stages or the aftermath, would this furor have died down?
THORNBURGH: We wouldn't be sitting here today.
ZAHN: And on that note, I will end this interview.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ZAHN: And coming up next, an update on the aftermath of the tsunami. John King's portrait of one rescuer and his very solemn task.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ZAHN: More than 140,000 people lost their lives in the Asian earthquake and tsunami that followed. We have cleared up some duplicate and conflicting information which is why that number is 10,000 to 15,000 lower than what we were reporting last week. John King is in Banda Aceh, Indonesia with a remarkable story about the people who are helping with the recovery by doing the worst possible job.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JOHN KING, CNN SR. WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It is the walk of a tired man. Taqua (ph) is tired of searching, more tired of what he finds. A mother and her baby, breast-feeding when the wave hit. This roadside wrap, both a rescue from the rubble and a ticket to a mass grave.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I have to detach my feelings from all of this. I cannot dwell on it. If I stop and dwell on it, I will not be able to help people.
KING: Help the living, Taqua says, because the now badly decomposed corpses spread disease and help the dead, in his view, like the woman buried in the debris by at least getting them a burial.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is very difficult, but we try to rescue.
KING: Taqua is a 19-year search and rescue veteran. He and his team from the Indonesian province of (UNINTELLIGIBLE). In Banda Aceh ten days now and planning to stay another month. Four bodies in this alley, three women and a child. The smiles might seem odd, but part of his job is keeping his young team going. His matter of fact nature, part of a calculated effort to keep his distance.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is a natural phenomenon. It cannot be avoided. The sun was shining and the weather was nice. Then an earthquake struck. The tsunami followed. I just don't think about it too much. This is just another disaster.
KING: Of course, it is anything but just another disaster. Taqua says he initially expected 20,000, maybe 30,000 deaths. The toll in Indonesia is 100,000. He has lost count of how many he has found. In a filthy canal, the stench as numbing as the view. Gloves and masks, part of the job, but Taqua rarely wears his. Loading the cart means a busy stretch ahead. But a pause for a quick prayer here. Just a job he says, but this is a young boy. Taqua has two at home.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They know when they see the victims on TV. They're proud their father is in Aceh.
KING: More bodies across the field, this soldier says. Two weeks later the urgent challenge is to find them, rescue them in Taqua's words before they get tossed away again.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We are humans, corpses are human. They have to be treated like humans.
KING: Piles of debris everywhere. Approaching one, his request is a give away. A garbage bag, not a big plastic sheath. Yet another child who died alone. Around the corner, another soldier and another excavation. This, an upscale home that faces the water and faced death first. Two more here and then two at the mayor's house, the soldier says. In, carrying plastic. Bodies, not the only burden they carry out. Only midafternoon, but a draining day. All are tired, but they agree to press on. If they wash away the germs, Taqua says he'll wait. More searches and what he calls rescues, before the day is done.
(END VIDEOTAPE) ZAHN: So, John, you just showcased a remarkably strong man, and it was interesting to have you describe this calculated effort he makes to distance himself from what he's seeing, what he's smelling, what he's hearing. How do you think he and the men who work for him are able to do that?
KING: Well, in part, Paula, they are devout Muslims, and they pray as a group before they come out to do this search. He says that helps them. That way they don't stop at each and every victim. He did pause with the young child. When he became most emotional and he was trying to keep from being emotional was when he was talking about the children. You see the devastation. If I can indulge you for a second, this is where we are. And you see how much they've cleaned up the town center here. This is why thousands died.
Traditionally, a gathering place in town anyway, they were here because there was a race that day featuring students. They were here because the mayor has the morning exercise program here. All gathered by the thousands here. And they've done a fairly good job cleaning this up over the past few days but if you turn quickly to my left, this is the path to the water. You can't see it from here, but just behind those mosques over the horizon is where the wave came from. This is the priciest part of the city. The devastation you see here, imagine it, multiply it by 1,000 in your mind as we turn and turn and turn, you see more and more and more of it. Still stacks of debris, and unfortunately under the debris, still hundreds if not thousands of bodies. We'll never know their names maybe never find those bodies.
ZAHN: And poor Taqua has that task that seems to be neverending. John King, thank you very much for your report. Joining us from Banda Aceh Indonesia tonight.
Just ahead we change our focus again and move on to the abuse scandal at Abu Ghraib. The army reservist charged as the ringleader is put on trial but there is much more to the story than his guilt or innocence. That's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ZAHN: Few of us can forget the shocking images of abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison. And today in Texas, a court martial began of the alleged ring leader, Specialist Charles Graner. His defense: He was following orders.
This week's trial, as well as new allegations of abuse, could be a turning point in an already explosive story.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ZAHN (voice-over): Grotesque, repulsive images of hooded Iraqi prisoners, naked, posed in sexually suggestive positions. Some photos included U.S. service personnel smiling nearby.
The pictures were taken here at Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison. Notorious under Saddam Hussein, it fell to U.S. forces in the 2003 invasion only to become a detention center for suspected insurgents. This was going on by November or December of 2003. It came to light last January when a soldier saw the pictures on a CD that was being passed around and reported to his superiors.
Some 30 investigations since then have roughed out the story of what happened at Abu Ghraib. The soldiers claim they were ordered to soften up suspected insurgents for interrogation by U.S. intelligence or their civilian subcontractors.
Seven soldiers from the 372nd Military Police Company were charged with crimes, including assault, conspiracy, dereliction of duty, cruelty and maltreatment. Some pleaded guilty.
In the trials that remain, a key question will be: Were the soldiers acting on their own or under orders from above? there are other questions as well.
How widespread is the mistreatment of prisoners in U.S. military custody? An army investigation points to abuses by military intelligence and MPs going back to the 2001 war in Afghanistan.
There also are questions about the treatment of detainees at the U.S. military base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The military has announced a new investigation sparked by documents showing FBI agents at Guantanamo alleged abuse of prisoners by interrogators.
And finally, there are questions about the Bush administration's regard for international treaties on the treatment of prisoners.
SEN. ARLEN SPECTER (R-PA), JUDICIARY COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: Do you approve of torture?
ALBERTO GONZALES, ATTORNEY GENERAL NOMINEE: Absolutely not, Senator.
ZAHN: Last week, Attorney General nominee Alberto Gonzales was criticized for approving a 2002 Justice Department memo that defined torture so narrowly, critics say it could have opened the door for what eventually took place at Abu Ghraib. That definition was only recently withdrawn.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ZAHN: Charles Graner's trial is expected to last all week. His fate will be determined by a jury of four officers and six senior enlisted men, al of whom have served in Iraq and/or Afghanistan.
And Susan Candiotti is watching the case unfold from Fort Hood, Texas.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SUSAN CANDIOTTI, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): As Specialist Charles Graner, upbeat and jaunty, walked into his court martial, he stopped to say... SPEC. CHARLES GRANER, CHARGED WITH PRISONER ABUSE: You're going to find out how much of a monster I am today, and we're going to go fight the alligators.
CANDIOTTI: A man with a sunny smile, but dark moments in his past, Graner, a Reservist, was sent to Iraq and put in charge of the toughest cell block at Abu Ghraib because he had been a prison guard in Pennsylvania. What the Army didn't know: Graner had been sued by a Pennsylvania prisoner who said Graner put a razor blade in his food. That suit was dropped.
But back at Graner's home, Uniontown, Pennsylvania, with its proud military history, court records describe a husband with a violent temper in a bitter divorce, ordered to stay away from his ex- wife after she said he grabbed her by the hair and banged her head against the floor a year after their divorce.
As the trial began, Private Jeremy Sivitz, the first Abu Ghraib guard to plead guilty, described two dozen of the now notorious photos for the military jury. Just after this picture was taken, Sivitz said, Graner punched another detainee in the head.
Then the seven naked Iraqis suspected of leading a prison riot were stacked in a human pyramid. That's Graner signalling thumbs up. Sivitz said Graner did not arrange this scene of sexual humiliation. Another guard did. But he said the other MPs were "pretty much laughing like they were enjoying it, having a good time."
The defense blames military intelligence for the atmosphere of abuse. Three intelligence operatives can be seen at the right of this photo taken on another night. Graner's lawyer claimed that some of the Abu Ghraib prisoners were terrorists and admitted it in videotaped testimony.
GUY WOMACK, CHARLES GRANER'S ATTORNEY: We had three high-valued detainees admitting that they were insurgents from other countries, that they came into Iraq to fight a battle that was not theirs, to kill Americans and to kill coalition forces and create instability in Iraq.
CANDIOTTI: The ranking sergeant in the cell block area, Ivan Fredericks, who is serving eight years, testified military intelligence did give orders to soften up detainees, but not what the photos show.
(on camera): Fredericks may have helped the defense when he acknowledged asking intelligence agents how far the guards could go with prisoners and got the answer "Just don't kill them."
(voice-over): Graner was pleased.
GRANER: I think things went a lot better than expected.
CANDIOTTI (on camera): Why do you think so?
GRANER: Just in my heart. CANDIOTTI (voice-over): He said he will testify in his own defense.
(on camera): Are you expected to take the stand?
GRANER: Me?
CANDIOTTI: Yes.
GRANER: Yes, ma'am.
CANDIOTTI (voice-over): He is likely to be the final witness probably toward the end of this week.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ZAHN: And that was Susan Candiotti reporting for us tonight.
Joining me now from Texas is Charles Graner's attorney, Guy Womack, who we saw in Susan's report.
Welcome back, Mr. Womack.
I wanted to start tonight with this picture. It is the picture that you no doubt know quite well of the naked detainees piled on a pyramid with your client smiling and giving the thumbs up sign.
And you said, "Don't cheerleaders all over America form pyramids six to eight times a year? Is that torture?"
How do you compare this to cheerleading?
WOMACK: Well, what we're comparing is not whether they're naked, whether they're wearing sand bags on their heads. I'm sure the cheerleaders don't do that. But, rather, the physical act of being piled up in a pyramid. It's a gymnastic formation. Only the body weight of the individual persons are on any other person. It doesn't hurt them.
The testimony of the witness that testified about that today was that there was no crying. They were merely piled up. And we're having an expert witness testify that that is a valid control measure. It's a tactic that you would use when you were outnumbered by possible assailants.
These were violent individuals who had just led a riot in the prison yard. They were piled up in a pyramid so that, if one tried to move, the others would fall down, and it would give the MPs at least a few seconds to react to the movement.
ZAHN: So you didn't have any problems with someone ordering the prisoners to do just that?
WOMACK: To pile up in a pyramid? Of course not.
ZAHN: Let's... WOMACK: It was much better than strapping them by the neck or other techniques that could have been used. They were merely piled up in a pyramid.
Now what is offensive to all of us is that they were naked. But they were naked because they were just being processed. They had just come from a riot outside the prison wall. They were being in process. They had to be stripped.
They were wearing sand bags on their heads because that's what you do with enemy prisoners so that they cannot see that they outnumber you, that they cannot see exactly where friendly forces are standing, they can't see what avenues of egress they could use for escape. It's very important that you isolate them visually so that they can't escape or fight.
ZAHN: The accusation is that the soldiers should have been aware of the fact that nudity is extremely an humiliating thing to Muslim men.
But I want to move on to another photo today that you also have described, and this is the one of Private Lynndie England leading a prison on a leash, and you have said, "A tether is a valid tool. You're probably been at a mall or airport and seen children on tethers. They're not being abused."
These detainees were in a prison. Why did you need a tether for them?
WOMACK: Well, again, we're going to have more testimony on that. We had testimony today about that. A tether is a device that you use when you need to extract a prisoner from a cell.
If you heard the testimony in court today, you would have learned that that particular prisoner was not dragged out of the cell. He crawled out of the cell while a female was holding the tether. It's believed that the fact that a female was holding the tether averted the violence. The fact that the man was humiliated to be naked in front of an American woman perhaps kept him from fighting.
It's well known psychologically that, in this country, prisoners who are stripped of their clothing become more complacent, they're less likely to fight or try to run because they have no clothes.
ZAHN: I need a brief answer to my final question. How damaging was it to your client today that you had two soldiers accusing your client of beating up prisoners, in one case knocking a man out cold?
WOMACK: Wasn't damaging. That private who testified to that, Frederick, told the court that he'd hit a man in the chest so hard that he said he caused cardiac arrest.
That same witness said that he set up all of the sex scenes, masturbations, the simulated fellatio. That same witness did all of those things himself. He is the one who said that he had received orders from military intelligence and civilian contract intelligence, had passed the orders to Specialist Graner and others. He had also passed along the praise for the good job they were doing and the effect it was having in helping in these interrogations.
ZAHN: So you don't think it hurts your client at all? Well, it will be interesting to...
WOMACK: No.
ZAHN: ... watch you go through this process. Guy Womack, thanks for your time tonight.
WOMACK: You're welcome. Thank you.
ZAHN: A pleasure. And tomorrow night, my exclusive interview with Brigadier General Janis Karpinski, who was in charge of military police at Abu Ghraib.
Onto tonight's "CNN Security Watch" and a report card of sorts for the Department of Homeland Security.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CLARK KENT ERVIN, FORMER INSPECTOR GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY: I think the department as a whole, the whole leadership of the department, starting with the secretary, I think that the department did not live up to its promise.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ZAHN: A former homeland security official gives his colleagues low grades. Now he's out of a job. That's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ZAHN: Our "CNN Security Watch" now, an update on the train wreck that killed nine people and injured hundreds more in South Carolina just last Thursday.
Crews there are still trying to neutralize toxic chlorine gas leaking from one derailed car. It could be until Wednesday before it's safe for any of the 5,000 residents of Graniteville, South Carolina, to go back home.
The train struck another one that was parked on a siding, and investigators are trying to find out why a track switch sent the train on to that siding.
The accident has raised fears about the vulnerability of the nation's railing system, something that's also been a concern for those charged with fighting terrorism.
As we continue our series -- "Security Watch," that is, we have an inside look at the Department of Homeland Security. It comes from the man who, until just a few weeks ago, was the agency's top watchdog.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Tonight I ask the Congress to join me in creating a single permanent department with an overriding and urgent mission, securing the homeland of America and protecting the American people.
ZAHN (voice-over): With that announcement, 22 different agencies came together under the Department of Homeland Security with one mission, to fight terrorism in the United States.
Secretary Tom Ridge's new homeland security team included Clark Kent Ervin as inspector general.
ERVIN: Inspector general is the only person whose job, whose statutory obligation, whose moral responsibility is to call them as he or she sees them. And I did that.
ZAHN: And that outspokenness may have gotten Ervin into trouble. During his two-year tenure, Ervin released more than 200 reports, many of which were highly critical of the new department.
(on camera) How unpopular, Clark, did you become with the Bush administration after you unleashed a number of stinging reports about the operation of the homeland security?
ERVIN: Well, I guess the short answer and the honest answer is I really don't know. No one told me that I was unpopular. No one told me that I wasn't well liked. But I'm a big boy, and I understand certainly that there were people in the department who took offense at the reports that I issued.
ZAHN (voice-over): He alleged department mismanagement, mishandling of millions of dollars and out and out failure of security programs.
(on camera) What is it you saw that makes you believe we're more vulnerable today than we were on September 11, 2001, for another attack?
ERVIN: For example, in 2003, two years after 9/11, my auditors went on an undercover basis to 15 airports around the country of varying sizes to see whether guns, knives and explosive devices could still be sneaked past baggage and passenger screeners after DHS assumed responsibility for the screener force.
ZAHN: What did you find?
ERVIN: Unfortunately, we found that two years after 9/1, it was still far easier than it should have been to get these deadly weapons past the screener work force.
ZAHN (voice-over): Besides aviation security, another investigation revealed huge gaps in screening for nuclear materials at U.S. ports. And then there was the money. One of Ervin's investigations concluded there was $49 million in excessive profit paid to the Boeing company by the Transportation Security Administration for the installation and maintenance of equipment that detects explosives.
And his investigation into immigration and customs enforcement concluded the agency couldn't keep track of its money, spending at least $150 million more than it had, which he says didn't leave the agency with enough money to perform its counterterrorism role.
ERVIN: To be fair, there was outrage on the part of the relevant congressional committees that, even after pointing out weaknesses and problems and shortcomings like this, we continued to find a pattern of spending abuses and a pattern of inattention on the department's part to correcting these kinds of problems.
ZAHN (on camera): Whose fault is that?
ERVIN: Well, it's a combination of things. First of all, and most importantly, I think it's a failure of leadership in management attention.
ZAHN: Are you saying that Tom Ridge was a failure when he ran the Homeland Security Department?
ERVIN: Failure is a very, very incendiary term, of course. And...
ZAHN: What would be a more accurate word to describe how you felt about his performance?
ERVIN: Well, I think the department as a whole, the whole leadership of the department, starting with the secretary, I think that the department did not live up to its promise.
And I think we have a ways to go, a considerable distance to go before we're as safe as we need to be in this post-9/11 environment with a determined enemy like the one that we have.
ZAHN: At any point during your two years of service as inspector general, did anybody try to silence you or mute your criticism?
ERVIN: Happened all the time, and I resisted it very, very fiercely.
ZAHN: Clark, can you explain to me how pressure was put on you to mute your criticism along the way?
ERVIN: There were times I was urged not to release reports.
ZAHN: By whom? Would these be members of Congress?
ERVIN: Not by members of Congress but by senior members of the department. It happened on a number of occasions. And I resisted each time. The good news is that the law gave me the authority to do just that. ZAHN: So you say you felt pressure from high-ranking members of the Department of Homeland Security?
ERVIN: Yes.
ZAHN: Did Tom Ridge ever come to you personally and say, "You can't do this, Clark. This is making us look bad"?
ERVIN: To his credit, the secretary never did that. He did not. There's no question that on a number of occasions, there were hard- hitting reports about very, very sensitive topics that the senior leadership in the department -- I don't want to personalize this or name names -- would just as soon had not been released publicly or to the Congress.
ZAHN (voice-over): The White House decided in December not to reappoint Ervin as inspector general.
ERVIN: I'm not bitter. I'm disappointed. It was an -- it, being able to continue this job, was an opportunity for me to continue to shine the spotlight of not just public attention. This is public attention. But public official attention to the shortcomings of the department and the recommendations that we made for improvement.
ZAHN: What is your chief concern about our continuing vulnerability here in America as a terrorist target?
ERVIN: Well, my chief concern is that security gaps remain in every sector, in terms of aviation security, in port security, in terms of mass transit security.
The good news is we know what the answer is to these problems. We can solve these problems. We can make America safer. And I'm confident, with the kind of attention that my office and others were able to bring to bear with appropriate congressional oversight and media scrutiny and the participation and activism of the American people, which we saw, for example, on the 9/11 Commission, that we can, indeed, collectively together make America safer.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ZAHN: And we asked the Homeland Security Department for a response. The department gave us this statement. "The department's leadership fully recognizes the value and importance of the office of the inspector general. The department has always supported the full release of unclassified information to the public and any assertions to the contrary are not consistent with our current or past practices. DHS will continue to coordinate and cooperate with the office of inspector general on these important matters."
And in case you're wondering -- of course, we did -- here's how Clark Kent Ervin got Superman's name. He told us when he was born, his parents let his 11-year-old brother name him.
Remember, here at CNN we're always on the lookout for stories about your family's safety. Coming up next, one town with active patrols against terrorists, and if experience counts, you want these people on your side. Coming up, drafting senior citizens in the war on terror.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ZAHN: More now on tonight's "CNN's Security Watch."
You might remember the connection between the city of Delray Beach, Florida, and the 9/11 attacks. Almost half the hijackers had lived there at one point.
Well, now more than three years later, some Delray Beach citizens are taking matters into their own hands.
Here's John Zarrella.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JOHN ZARRELLA, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): For Charlie Goldberg and Dale McDairos this is about doing what's right, about being what so many of us are not: involved.
DALE MCDAIROS, HOMEFRONT SECURITY VOLUNTEER: They cleaned up a lot of the paint.
CHARLIE GOLDBERG, HOMEFRONT SECURITY VOLUNTEER: Thank goodness for that. That paint can cause a lot of problems.
ZARRELLA: Charlie and Dale are members of Delray Beach, Florida's homefront security unit, a unique counter terrorism team started by the police in the wake of 9/11. It's made up entirely of volunteer senior citizens.
GOLDBERG: It's all locked up, right, Dale?
ZARRELLA: In all, there are 14 of them on patrol five days a week. Charlie and Dale are working the 9 to noon shift today.
At city hall...
GOLDBERG: Hey, good morning.
ZARRELLA: ... they check every room, every cubicle. Their job: simply to keep an eye out. If anything or anyone looks suspicious, report it.
At the city tennis center, they inspect under the bleachers.
GOLDBERG: Yes, we are doing a great service for everybody, being the eyes and ears of the police department.
ZARRELLA: This is one of four stops they'll make this morning.
MCDAIROS: I get to see people, talk to people. And they're so appreciative of us being out here, especially at our age. ZARRELLA: What do you mean at your age? You guys are young!
GOLDBERG: I don't know why you mentioned that.
ZARRELLA: Charlie is 82. Dale will turn 78 in March. Each took a bioterrorism course before going on patrol.
There's nothing frivolous about what they do or that they are constant reminders.
For reasons that have never been fully explained, perhaps believing they could keep a low profile here, nine of the September 11 hijackers lived in Delray Beach. Ask Officer Skip Brown about the value of the patrols.
OFFICER SKIP BROWN, DELRAY, FLORIDA, POLICE: Every time I call, every time I ask, they're there. Extra eyes and ears, that's what we're looking for. Do they make a difference? I feel that they do. I don't think that they will ever know what they deterred out there or what could have been. Do we have any more in this city? I don't know.
ZARRELLA: Both Charlie Goldberg and Dale McDairos plan to be on the beat for a long time.
MCDAIROS: As long as I can walk, talk and tell the truth.
ZARRELLA: After all, it's all about doing what's right.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ZAHN: That was John Zarrella reporting for us tonight.
Please stay with us, because we've got some stunning new footage of nature's fury. An entire hillside on the move in Southern California. Deadly weather. Believe me, you will see the picture when we come back. Caught on camera. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ZAHN: We have some remarkable pictures to close our show with tonight, the truly frightening power of a mudslide in California. Look at this, from La Conchita, northwest of Los Angeles.
After a week of heavy rain -- there she goes -- a bluff above the town gave way, crushing homes and cars with tons of mud. One person died. At least nine people injured. Crews are searching for at least a dozen people.
These picks provided from our affiliate, KCAL, K-C-A-L.
And here are tonight's "PZN Meter" results: 50 percent of you said, yes, Dan Rather should be fired. Half of you said no. Dan, not a scientific poll, just a sampling from our web site.
Thanks so much for joining us tonight. Appreciate your dropping by. "LARRY KING LIVE" is next.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
