Return to Transcripts main page
The Situation Room
President Bush Will Discuss Ways To Resolve Iraq While In Jordan; Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Pens Letter To Americans; "Happy Feet" Infuriating Some Conservatives; David Satterfield Interview; Charles Rangel Interview
Aired November 29, 2006 - 17:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: And to our viewers, you're in THE SITUATION ROOM, where new pictures and information are arriving all the time. Standing by, CNN reporters across the United States and around the world to bring you today's top stories.
Happening now, discord, diplomacy and disclosures -- all of it on display regarding the crisis in Iraq. It's midnight in Jordan, where President Bush will discuss ways to resolve Iraq. But a former member of his cabinet says it's time to face facts, that what's really happening in Iraq right now is, in fact, a civil war.
Also, a letter to you from the president of Iran. It's 1:30 a.m. in Tehran, where Mahmoud Ahmadinejad pens a letter praising you as a truth-loving, noble American, but slams the U.S. government as engaging in illegally and immoral behavior.
And why would a movie called "Happy Feet" be infuriating some conservatives and be described by one critic as a "view of hell?"
I'm Wolf Blitzer.
You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.
Right now, furious political protests -- an embarrassing public disclosure, a surprising assessment. An all important meeting put off for a day. We're following several major developments in Iraq right now. A source tells CNN the Iraq Study Group will issue its report on Iraq next Wednesday. It's expected to advise President Bush on how to try to fix the situation over there.
And that's also the focus of crisis talks in Jordan. But President Bush's all important meeting with the Iraqi prime minister has now been put off until tomorrow. Nouri Al-Maliki skipped a dinner with President Bush and Jordan's King Abdullah. White House officials say it was not related to an embarrassing new memo questioning Al- Maliki's ability to run-Iraq. That memo, first revealed by the "New York Times," questions if Al-Maliki is ignorant of what's happening in his own country, is misrepresenting his intentions or if his capabilities are simply compromised.
Meanwhile, the man who was secretary of state when the war began says Iraq's raging violence now meets the standard of a civil war. And Colin Powell says he might advise the administration to use that term if he were still over at the State Department. Some people partly responsible for Nouri Al-Maliki's rise are now protesting the Iraqi government. A key political bloc loyal to the radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr have now made a move that further fractures an already delicate coalition.
CNN's Arwa Damon has details from Baghdad.
ARWA DAMON, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, the Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki's ability to hold his government together is in question.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DAMON (voice-over): An army of followers -- radical Shia cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's public speeches rally the masses.
(VIDEOTAPE OF MUQTADA AL-SADR SPEECH)
DAMON: The anti-American's political bloc threw its clout behind Nouri Al-Maliki, giving him the prime ministership by a single vote. But Prime Minister Maliki's base is crumbling because he has not canceled plans to meet with President Bush in Jordan.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (THROUGH TRANSLATOR): The Sadr bloc in the House of Representatives and the Sadr movement and ministers are suspending their membership of parliament and the government.
DAMON: The Sadr bloc holds at least 30 seats in parliament, controls six ministries and if their demands, number one being a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops, are not met, they threaten to fully withdraw from the government.
In the struggle to control power, this is al-Sadr's biggest political move, a reminder to Nouri Al-Maliki and the United States of the power he wields, power that is bolstered by the Mahdi Militia -- thousands of well armed fighters believed to be behind much of the sectarian violence here.
As the strength of the government is publicly being tested, not much is changing in the streets of Iraq. In Baghdad, at least three car bombs exploded in a single afternoon. Iraqi police found 52 bodies in 24 hours. And many Iraqis question why they ever went to the polls to vote for this.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
DAMON: Few Iraqis think he is the man for the prime minister's job. Now, Nouri Al-Maliki has to prove to the United States that he can hold it together, another ally whose confidence in him is shaky -- Wolf.
BLITZER: Arwa, thanks very much.
Arwa Damon in Baghdad.
This political protest comes amid a very embarrassing new revelation -- a White House memo questioning the Iraqi prime minister's capabilities and intentions in leading Iraq.
Let's get some more details from CNN's Brian Todd -- Brian.
BRIAN TODD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, we're getting a very surprising inside look tonight at the concerns by some top White House officials about the Iraqi prime minister. They come out in a classified memo from National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, written after his meeting in Iraq with Nouri Al-Maliki a few weeks ago.
Addressing whether Al-Maliki has the ability to bring sectarian violence under control, Hadley writes: "Maliki is either ignorant of what is going on, misrepresenting his intentions or that his capabilities are not yet sufficient to turn his good intentions into action."
Was the release of this document a signal to Nouri Al-Maliki ahead of his meeting with President Bush a few hours from now in Jordan?
Senior White House officials deny leaking Hadley's Maliki, which was first obtained by the "New York Times." One official says this release is "not helpful."
A prominent columnist here in Washington agrees with that.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DAVID IGNATIUS, "THE WASHINGTON POST": It's hard to imagine something that would be more disruptive to a presidential summit meeting than a document like this. But it does state clearly this strategy premised on Prime Minister Maliki isn't working.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TODD: CNN's efforts to reach Al-Maliki's office and members of Iraq's parliament for reaction were unsuccessful today. The memo does not leave Al-Maliki hanging. It suggests ways he can turn the security situation around in Iraq and ways the U.S. can help him, including possibly moving additional forces into Baghdad.
Also important to note, just this morning, top White House officials told us President Bush does have full confidence in the Iraqi prime minister -- Wolf.
BLITZER: All right, Brian, thank you.
Brian Todd reporting.
Let's get some more now on the all important meeting scheduled for President Bush and the Iraqi prime minister, a meeting that has now been postponed until tomorrow.
CNN's Ben Wedeman is in Amman, Jordan and he's got, I guess, the latest information, whatever it is, Ben, on why this happened. Nouri Al-Maliki warned by Muqtada al-Sadr and his political allies -- don't meet with the president. He's supposed to meet with him and King Abdullah tonight and guess what?
He doesn't meet tonight with the president of the United States, who's flown all the way over to Jordan to meet with him.
BEN WEDEMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Wolf, well, White House officials insist it was not a stub -- a snub. They say that basically what happened was the Jordanians and the Iraqis met earlier in the day. They felt there was no need to have Prime Minister Maliki part of this meeting this evening.
So that is the case, as far as the White House officials go. I spoke to a senior Jordanian official who told me his non-presence at the palace, at King Abdullah's palace, is "no big deal."
They will be meeting tomorrow as scheduled, first over breakfast and then a meeting and then there will be a joint press conference between the prime minister and the president. So even though the signals coming out -- or, rather, the messages -- are dubious, certainly when you take into account this leaked White House memo, but officials, Jordanian and American, are insisting it's still full speed ahead -- Wolf.
BLITZER: All right, we'll check back with you, Ben.
Thanks very much.
And later this hour, we're going to speak to Congressman Charlie Rangel of New York. He has some very strong views on what the president is up to right now in Iraq. Charlie Rangel standing by to join us live.
In the meantime, let's check in with Jack.
He's got "The Cafferty File" -- Jack.
JACK CAFFERTY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Amazing how they can look you right in the eye and say this stuff with a straight face. This was not a snub, according to the White House, and the president has confidence in Nouri Al-Maliki. And they expect us to just go oh, OK, I guess we got it wrong.
Things got real nasty at a recent White House reception for freshmen Congress members. Newly elected Senator James Webb of Virginia sat out the presidential receiving line. You're supposed to go in those and shake his hand. He also refused to have his picture taken with the president.
Webb is a former secretary of the Navy under President Reagan and his son is in the Marine Corps. He's serving in Iraq. The "Washington Post" reported what happened this way: "President Bush approached Webb and said, 'How's your boy?' Webb answered, 'I'd like to get him out of Iraq, Mr. President.' President Bush responded, 'That's not what I asked you. How's your boy?' And Webb then said, 'That's between me and my boy, Mr. President.' And that brought an immediate and chilly end to the conversation." 2007 ought to be great fun-to watch. It's just getting started.
The question is this -- will the division over the war in Iraq prevent any kind of bipartisanship when the new Congress convenes in January?
E-mail your thoughts to CaffertyFile@CNN.com or go to CNN.com/CaffertyFile -- Wolf.
BLITZER: All right, Jack, thank you.
Jack Cafferty will be back shortly.
Up ahead, the former Secretary of State, Colin Powell, now weighing in on a growing debate -- is Iraq now caught up in a full- scale civil war?
We're going to have details of what Colin Powell has said today, plus what he's recommending to his old boss. That would be the president of the United States.
Also, Iran's president makes his case directly to the American people in an open letter. He's slamming President Bush, praising Americans and, surprisingly, making a prediction about the 2008 election here in the United States.
Plus, politically correct penguins?
We're going to show you why some people are very unhappy with the number one film at the box office.
Stay with us. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is making his case directly to the American people. He has now written an open letter calling on Americans to help change what he characterized as the mistakes of the Bush administration.
Our State Department correspondent, Zain Verjee, joining us now from the State Department with details -- quite an extraordinary development, Zane.
ZAIN VERJEE, CNN STATE DEPARTMENT CORRESPONDENT: Absolutely, Wolf.
President Bush has addressed the Iranian people directly before. Today, Iran's president decided it was his turn.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
VERJEE (voice-over): A letter delivered straight from Iran's hard line president to the American people. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad slams the U.S.-led war in Iraq, which he says has left the country in ruins and fueled terrorism. The cost, he says, has been high to Iraqis, but for Americans, too, in blood and money. "I consider it extremely unlikely that you, the American people, consent to the billions of dollars of annual expenditure from your treasury for this military misadventure."
He adds: "America could spend its own dollars on its own people, like victims of Hurricane Katrina and Americans living in poverty."
Ahmadinejad once again condemns U.S. support for Israel and says U.S. treatment of detainees at Guantanamo Bay and the prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib has added to America's poor image around the world.
He appears to capitalize on the dramatically different political landscape in the U.S. saying: "I hope that in the wake of the mid- term elections, the administration of President Bush will have heard and will heed the message of the American people."
He warns Democrats if they don't change the U.S. approach, they, too, will lose power.
KARIM SADJADPOUR, INTERNATIONAL CRISIS GROUP: And I think it is coming at a time when there has been a general consensus reached in Washington that the U.S. has to talk to Iran about Iraq's future.
VERJEE: Most U.S. officials were dismissive of the letter, a similar response to a previous letter Ahmadinejad wrote to President Bush earlier this year.
JOHN BOLTON, U.S. AMBASSADOR TO U.N.: Although I understand it's only five pages and not 18 pages, like the last one. So that's a step ahead.
TOM CASEY, STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN: There's really not a lot new here and certainly it is something of a public affairs or public relations effort.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
VERJEE: And we asked the State Department, Wolf, if they had a problem at all with President Ahmadinejad writing a letter directly to the American people. They said no, not at all. He's free to talk to whoever he wants -- Wolf.
BLITZER: All right, Zane, thank you.
This note to our viewers. Zane is going to have a lot more on this story coming up later tonight, 8:00 p.m. Eastern on "PAULA ZAHN NOW."
Zain Verjee, our new State Department correspondent.
And for more now, let's go to our chief international correspondent, Christiane Amanpour.
She is joining us in London -- Christiane, what do you make of this development, the president of Iran writing this open letter to the American people?
CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, a couple of things.
I'm told that, you know, when he came to the United States for the U.N. General Assembly in September, he held a press conference. He did several television interviews. He talked to members of the Council on Foreign Relations. And we're told that at those -- at some of those occasions, he was -- it was suggested to him that he talk directly to the American people.
Now, perhaps people envisioned it somewhat differently, maybe an interview, maybe a speech or something. But he has chosen to do it in lesser form. As Zane mentioned, he's done that before, to President Bush. He's also done it to the German chancellor, Angela Merkel.
In terms of what's on the cards there, so to speak, nothing hugely new in terms of any policy or proposals, very similar things that he's said before on the key issues. For instance, on Palestine, he called for a Palestinian state and a referendum in all of Israel and the Palestinian Territories, which, as you know, is a non-starter. But it's something that's very, very much on the minds of everybody in the Muslim world.
On Iraq, he called for the U.S. to pull its troops out, which he's said before and which is Iran's position. No hint of any movement on negotiation or talks with the U.S. about how to resolve that situation there.
But, clearly, Iran feeling itself a regional power, the rise of Shiaism, and he going directly to the American people over the head of the American administration.
BLITZER: The speculation, Christiane, that if the United States starts talking directly, not only with Iran, but Syria, that that potentially could improve the situation in Iraq.
Is that wishful thinking or is there something there?
AMANPOUR: Well, you know that James Baker, who is being deputed by the president to try to figure things out in that region, has said the same thing. He's had talks already with, certainly, Iranian officials and potentially, perhaps, Syrian officials. But it's unclear as to where that's going because the talks, from what I'm told, with Iran center only on Iraq and with Syria, of course, with this latest issue of the assassination in Lebanon, with the U.S. being very, very angry about that and again talking to Syria about its responsibilities in that region, it's a little difficult to see where that's going right now.
But Iran, from what I've been told, has concluded, pretty much, that there is no more business to be done with the Bush administration, that they are going to have wait it out and see what happens under a new administration.
BLITZER: Christiane Amanpour is our chief international conference.
Christiane, thank you for that.
Coming up, Colin Powell on the war in Iraq and what he'd recommend right now to the White House. Surprising remarks by the former top general and former secretary of state. We're going to have details.
Plus, thousands of airline passengers possibly exposed to radiation. It's the latest fallout from a spy mystery full of international intrigue.
Stay with us. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: This just coming into CNN. Word of important developments regarding the planned report from the bipartisan group studying ways to try to fix the situation in Iraq.
Our White House correspondent, Ed Henry, is standing by.
He's got some new details -- Ed, what are you picking up?
ED HENRY, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, we do know that the Iraq Study Group will be releasing their report next Wednesday, December 6th.
CNN has now learned that the co-chairs of that group, James Baker and Lee Hamilton, are planning to pay a courtesy call to President Bush Wednesday morning before they publicly release this report.
Two officials saying that what they'll do is basically go brief the president on their findings in this final report, then go and brief bipartisan Congressional leaders on Capitol Hill then have a press conference somewhere late morning, early afternoon on Wednesday, to release all of this.
The White House, though, being very careful in how they're responding to the upcoming release of this report. We're now getting the first response from the White House spokeswoman, Dana Perino, saying: "As the president often has said, he looks forward to receiving the Iraq Study Group's recommendations and is appreciative of their hard work."
The White House treading carefully there because, as you know, the president has ordered up his own review of Iraq policy, being coordinated by the National Security Council.
So the big question is really whether or not the White House, what they'll do with these recommendations.
Will they implement any of the recommendations that come in next week?
But I'm being told by one person who was recently interviewed by the Iraq Study Group that in private, contrary to some of the published reports, there's been a lot of consensus emerging and that the Democrats and the Republicans seem to be having a real bipartisan spirit behind closed doors.
If there is some sort of a consensus that emerges, that is going to give this commission a lot more credibility if there is a lot of bipartisanship. It will make it harder for the White House to ignore their recommendations -- Wolf.
BLITZER: I think that's a good point, because if you get all 10 members of this commission -- five Democrats, five Republicans, all of them highly respected in their own right -- and if they come together and issue a unanimous set of recommendations, it's going to be very powerful. It's going to be hard for the president and his team, the vice president, the secretary of state, the incoming secretary of defense, to simply dismiss it. They're going to be under enormous political pressure to respond, I suspect.
HENRY: You're absolutely right. And James Baker, obviously, as a former secretary of state, as a lot of clout in the Republican Party and on the international stage. And I'm also told by various officials who have been in the room with Mr. Baker and Mr. Hamilton, James Baker in particular has been very active in these negotiations, in these talks, asking witnesses a lot of questions.
This is someone who's very, very engaged; and once this report is released, is going to go very public with his views on this, as will Lee Hamilton. So there will be even more pressure on the White House once this report comes out -- Wolf.
BLITZER: Next Wednesday, December 6th.
That's right, right?
HENRY: That's right.
BLITZER: All right, we'll be all over that report next Wednesday right here in THE SITUATION ROOM.
Ed, thanks very much.
Coming up, civil war and his own regrets -- former Secretary of State Colin Powell weighing in today on the deteriorating situation in Iraq. We're going to have details of what he's saying. You're going to want to hear this.
And more on that leaked memo raising serious questions about U.S. confidence in Iraq's prime minister. We'll talk about that and more with the State Department coordinator for Iraq, David Satterfield. He's standing by live.
Stay with us. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: You're in THE SITUATION ROOM, where new pictures and information are arriving all the time.
Happening now, meeting postponed and scant explanation. President Bush's high profile huddle with Iraq's prime minister is put off until tomorrow.
And back in Baghdad, power broker and anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr temporarily pulling his supporters from parliament in protest of that meeting.
Meanwhile, the violence is spiraling out of control. Fifty-two murdered people were found in the streets of Baghdad today alone. The Pentagon now planning to move thousands of U.S. troops from other parts of Iraq into the capital to try to control the chaos.
And in Britain, disturbing new developments in the case of that former Russian spy killed with radioactive poison. British Airways now says traces of that radiation have been found on at least two of its planes. The airline is working to contact some 33,000 passengers who may have been exposed over the past few weeks.
I'm Wolf Blitzer and you're in THE SITUATION ROOM.
As President Bush plans talks on the crisis in Iraq, one person who supported the Iraq invasion is now out with a sobering and surprising assessment of what's happening on the ground right now.
Let's turn to our Carol Costello.
She's joining us with more, with this latest twist in a story that has so many of them -- Carol.
CAROL COSTELLO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Oh, you're not kidding, Wolf.
It is time for the name game again. But this time, the label civil war is coming from none other than Colin Powell and he said it to an audience in the Middle East, contradicting his old boss at the very same time President Bush is set to convene a summit in Jordan.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
COSTELLO (voice-over): Crank up the heat and get ready for a possible Republican civil war, courtesy of one of the most popular statesmen today, Colin Powell.
At a Leadership Conference held in Dubai chock full of influential Arabs, Powell told the crowd Iraq is in a "civil war."
There were no TV cameras inside the conference, but CNN's Hala Gorani was there and says Powell added...
HALA GORANI, CNN CORRESPONDENT: -- He would probably recommend to the Bush administration that those terms should be used.
COSTELLO: This is the same man who led the march to war in Iraq at the United Nations in 2003. CLINTON POWELL, SECRETARY OF STATE: The facts and Iraq's behavior show that Saddam Hussein and his regime are concealing their efforts to produce more weapons of mass destruction.
COSTELLO: But what a difference a few years make. What Powell said today is politically important because its a snowball among Republicans, starting a different kind of civil war on Capitol Hill.
MARCUS MABRY, SENIOR EDITOR, NEWSWEEK: Many Republicans who will now see that Colin Powell has declared this a civil war and they will feel that now gives them the political cover to speak of it in the same terms.
COSTELLO: After all, General Powell has credibility, he led the first gulf war and he served as secretary of state until he left partly over disagreements over how the war was being waged. As for what his replacement says about Powell's definition of the war now. It isn't likely Condoleezza Rice will recommend her boss call the violence in Iraq a civil war.
TOM CASEY, STATE DEPT. SPOKESMAN: It's not what our commanders on the ground say it is. And we, frankly, are relying on the assessment of those experts that are sitting there in Baghdad.
COSTELLO: But if more Republicans start uttering the term "civil war" political watchers say things might become so hot for President Bush, he may be forced to stray the course.
(END OF VIDEOTAPE)
COSTELLO: Something else he told our Hala Gorani. Mr. Powell continues to regret his statements to the United Nations in 2003, and unless you think his public definition of the war is now setting up a possible presidential run, Colin Powell says no, he has no interest in that. Wolf.
BLITZER: Carol thanks very much for that story.
Let's get some more now on our top story. New concerns about the Iraqi government, its ability and willingness to stop the spiraling violence and serious questions about its stability. Joining us now to talk about all of that, ambassador David Satterfield. He's a senior adviser to the secretary of state Condoleezza Rice. The coordinator for Iraq spent a lot of time in Baghdad before coming back here to Washington.
Ambassador, thanks very much for joining us. It feels, given all of these developments, like the bottom could be falling out right now, why did Nuri al-Maliki refuse to meet with the president of the United States and the king of Jordan tonight as previously scheduled?
DAVID SATTERFIELD, SR. ADVISER TO SECRETARY OF STATE: Well this meeting tonight was originally set to be a courtesy call between the three leaders. The prime minister had had a good session earlier in the day with King Abdullah of Jordan. He's looking forward to a good meeting, a long meeting tomorrow morning with the president. They all decided it was not necessary to have the call tonight. I wouldn't read anything more into it than that.
BLITZER: Because as you know, ambassador, a lot of people are hearing the threats coming from Muqtada al-Sadr and his bloc in parliament saying he shouldn't even be going to Amman, he shouldn't be meeting with the president. And you know what, I was stunned when I heard that he boycotted this photo opportunity. The three of them supposedly showing that there was some solidarity there and all of a sudden, Nuri al-Maliki boycotting this meeting.
SATTERFIELD: He's not boycotting the meeting. It was agreed that the meeting would not take place, the meeting wasn't necessary. And with respect to Muqtada al-Sadr, its threats or the action taken by his parliamentarians, they haven't had any impact on the prime minister's willingness to come to Jordan in the first instance, or to meet with the president in the second. It's going ahead regardless.
BLITZER: It looks like, and you have spent a lot of time in Baghdad, risking your life there, it looks like this guy, Muqtada al- Sadr who hates the United States, who has American blood on his hands, according to Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez, the first U.S. military commander there, it looks like he's calling the shots of Nuri al-Maliki's government.
SATTERFIELD: But he's not. If he were calling the shots, the prime minister wouldn't be in Jordan, he wouldn't be seeing the president. He's there, he's had a good meeting with the King and he's going to have a good meeting with the president in the morning.
BLITZER: All right, we'll see if he shows up for that meeting in the morning. Here's what Stephen Hadley, the president's national security adviser, wrote in this November 8th memo to the president about Nuri al-Maliki. "The reality on the streets of Baghdad suggests Maliki is either ignorant of what is going on, misrepresenting his intentions or that his capabilities are not yet sufficient to turn his good intentions into action." Those are strong words about a guy who apparently doesn't have a whole lot of power in Iraq right now.
SATTERFIELD: The president supports the prime minister, the president has affirmed that in many meetings, in many conferences that they've had. He's going to do it tomorrow. The president knows the prime minister wants greater control over the Iraqi security forces. He wants to see a transition to an Iraqi lead on the political as well as on the military front.
And that's something we've been discussing and we'll continue to discuss. The president wants to hear from the prime minister. Where's the prime minister going on national reconciliation? On government issues, on the political track? This is going to be a very thorough review but it's done in the capacity of a sovereign leader who we respect, whom we want to help succeed.
BLITZER: It sounds thought that Stephen Hadley, and I carefully read that memo, not once, not twice, but three times. It sounds like he's not so sure that Nuri al-Maliki really wants a democracy embracing the Shia, the Sunni, the Kurds, all of the groups of Iraq or he's simply is trying to stack the deck and create a Shiite-led theocracy aligned with Iran.
SATTERFIELD: If we had concluded that prime minister Maliki was following a sectarian agenda, the president would not have traveled to Amman, he would not be meeting with him. We see him as a national leader. But we see him as a national leader who has capacity issues. That's what we are trying to help on. That's what we're discussing.
BLITZER: What does that mean "capacity issues"?
SATTERFIELD: On the security side and on the political side, the prime minister needs help. General Casey, Ambassador Khalilzaid, their senior leaders, senior leaders on the Iraqi side have been talking about how to help build capable effective Iraqi forces, how to do it quickly, how to get them into the fight. On the political side, the prime minister needs help and support. We're trying to work with him, we're trying to work with other Iraqi leaders to provide the kind of help he needs, the kind of capability he needs.
BLITZER: We saw the Iraqi President Jalal Talabani show up in Tehran for meetings with the Supreme Ayatollah as well as with President Ahmadinejad. He himself wrote a letter to the American people today, basically denouncing the U.S. government. What's your message to the Iranian people in response?
SATTERFIELD: The message to the Iranian government, to the Iranian people is this, Iraq needs good neighbors and that includes Iran. Iraq and we both understand the important role that Iran has historically had with respect to Iraq. But it's a role that needs to be respectful of Iraqi sovereignty and independence, it needs to refrain from meddling in Iraqi internal affairs. And above all, it needs to stop, Iran needs to stop the provision of lethal training and assistance to elements engaged in violence in Iraq.
BLITZER: We have to leave it there, unfortunately. Ambassador David Satterfield has got one of the toughest jobs in the U.S. government. Appreciate your coming on the program sir.
SATTERFIELD: Thank you.
BLITZER: Still to come, Iran's president saying the money the United States is spending on the Iraq war would be better off spent at home. I'll talk about that with Congressman Charlie Rangel. He'll soon have a very powerful say on spending when he takes over as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee.
Plus, most audiences love it, but some critics say the new hit animated movie "Happy Feet" is liberal propaganda. CNN's Jeanne Moos is standing by to show us why. Stay with us, you're in THE SITUATION ROOM.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: Welcome back. Talks delayed, troops redeployed. The government in crisis and violence seemingly without end in Iraq. The crisis in Iraq appearing to reach a new level today. Joining us now to talk about that Democratic Congressman Charlie Rangel of New York. He's in line to become the chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, when the next Congress convenes in January. Congressman, thanks very much for coming in.
I'm not going to call you Mr. Chairman yet, but pretty soon, that will be the way we will refer to you. Jimmy Carter was here in THE SITUATION ROOM yesterday. The former president of the United States and I asked him about how big a blunder the president made in going into Iraq. Listen to this exchange.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JIMMY CARTER: It's going to prove, I believe, to be one of the greatest blunders that American presidents have ever made.
BLITZER: Bigger than Vietnam?
CARTER: I think it's going to be a close call but perhaps much more vividly known by the rest of the world than Vietnam was.
(END OF VIDEO CLIP)
BLITZER: What do you think? Do you agree with the former president?
REP. CHARLES RANGEL (D), NEW YORK: I could not agree with him more. As a matter of fact, I was hoping that in the interview with Colin Powell, he might share with us, what information did they give to him, to allow him with all of the credibility that he used to have, to go into Iraq? Every reason that the president gave the congress and the American people have fallen through. And the suspicion is that he and others may have known that the facts were not true.
BLITZER: Well, wait a minute, wait a minute. You're not accusing Colin Powell of deliberately lying to the American public. I assume knowing him as I do for so many years, that he honestly believed when he was told at the CIA that there were weapons of mass destruction stockpiled, and he said that before the UN Security Council, I have to assume he honestly believed it.
RANGEL: I'm not going to argue with that. But his chief of staff said publicly and it's written in a book that that was his worst day sitting with his boss at the U.N.
BLITZER: That's true. But don't you believe that Colin Powell is a man of integrity that believed what he said?
RANGEL: Yes, of course, I do. But if somebody did that to me, with whatever little integrity I had, and my chief of staff was there, obviously, telling me that that was not factual, I would be outraged. So I'm not challenging the honesty of Colin Powell. But I question why there hasn't been more outrage, especially that now he's describing it as a civil war. The question to this, as former President Carter said, how could one man and his cabinet bring this great country into this disaster, this cesspool? You can call it a civil war, but it certainly is not a liberation force. BLITZER: You're going to be in the majority now in the United States House of Representatives. If this situation continues to deteriorate and emerges of Vietnam where helicopters will be going into the U.S. embassy to try to whisk remaining American troops out, what are you going to do about that as the majority in the U.S. Congress?
RANGEL: Let me make it clear, Democrats may be in the majority in the Congress but we are not a part of the executive branch. The president has heard the American people loud and clear. They're against the war. I hope this Iraqi study group reflects that type of feeling. I'm certain it will.
But I'm optimistic that, you know, I'm a little skeptical that the president is over there talking with Maliki and going to Jordan. He ought to stay at the White House and let the diplomats try to work this out. We have a heck of a wonderful opportunity with peace being negotiated between the Palestinians and Israel to get the Jordanians, the Saudi Arabians and the Egyptians --
BLITZER: Congressman, you know a lot of Americans are going to say, look, we elected these Democrats to be the majority in the House and the Senate. In large part, I think you'll agree, because of the war in Iraq, the unhappiness, the anger here in the United States, and they're going to rely on you to try to do something if the policies don't change. Here's one option that's on the table, the power of the purse, something that you can control as the majority in the House of Representatives. Is that something that you're going to tamper with?
RANGEL: Of course not. We would never do anything that would jeopardize the safety of our brave young men and women over there. The biggest tool that we have at this point in time is not the power of the purse, but the power of the subpoena. We have never had oversight of any of these things that has been said and done to get us into this dilemma that we find ourselves in. So when people come down under oath, you won't have to worry about where we got this bad information.
BLITZER: Who do you want to subpoena?
RANGEL: Anybody that's telling us things that just doesn't make any truth. But I don't think we have to go there. They're falling apart. The president is falling apart. He's calling upon his father's friends. And we may get some sanity out of this if the president stays at home and lets Condoleezza Rice and maybe bring back Colin Powell and use Jim Baker, you know. It's time that we bring in these moderate Arab country leaders and at least we're talking to them. This is their struggle, too. It's not just the United States and Israel.
BLITZER: Let me pick your brain on this extraordinary letter that the president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has now written to the American people that would be you and me among them. He writes this among other things, "Now that Iraq has a constitution and an independent assembly and government, would it not be more beneficial to bring the U.S. officers and soldiers home, and to spend the astronomical U.S. military expenditures in Iraq for the welfare and prosperity of the American people? It's interesting that he's now weighing in on this debate here in the United States.
RANGEL: Well he couldn't be more right, you know. We've lost 3,000 men over there, 20,000 wounded American men and women. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. I'm not saying just close it down and come home. But it's really time to bring in those people, from the region, who understands the culture and the difference that these people have.
And to let them stop holding our coats, but to get involved in trying to find some peace there. I'm anxiously waiting for this Iraqi study report. Because I know it's not saying what the president is saying. We cannot stay there until victory is won and we have no clue as to what the victory is. And we cannot afford to stay the course.
BLITZER: Next Wednesday, it's coming out. Lee Hamilton, a man you know well. You served in the House with him for a long time and James baker. Five Democrats, five Republicans. We're told they're getting close to a unanimous set of recommendations. But we'll find out next Wednesday. Charlie Rangel, always good of you to come into THE SITUATION ROOM.
RANGEL: Thank you, Wolf.
BLITZER: See you soon.
And just ahead, it's made for kids but some parents simply don't like what they're seeing. Our Jeanne Moos shows us why they're so unhappy with the hit movie "Happy Feet." And Jack Cafferty is wondering, will the division over the war prevent any sort of bipartisanship with the new Congress? Jack's standing by with "The Cafferty File." We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: Check back with Jack Cafferty for "The Cafferty File." Jack?
CAFFERTY: Democratic senator-elect Jim Webb from Virginia and President Bush had a tense exchange during a recent White House reception. It was not pretty. Webb's son is a marine serving in Iraq. The question this hour is, will the division in this country over the war prevent any sort of bipartisanship with the new Congress.
George in New Hampshire writes, "I don't want bipartisanship. I like many other people who voted want Bush's head on a platter. The GOP proved that you can impeach a president for stepping on a crack in a sidewalk on a Tuesday in a snowstorm in July in Florida, as long as you have the majority. My Republican friends laughed then. They're not laughing now. This is the most criminal president in history. Investigate, prove and off to Guantanamo Bay for all the Bushies."
Sally in Virginia, "Thank you Senator Webb for not legitimizing this illegitimate president. I'm glad you got my vote. I don't hope for bipartisanship in the next Congress. I hope for progress in getting the Republicans under control so something good can come out of our government for a change. What better way to start than to take away the respect Bush does not deserve. More Congress members should do likewise."
Amy writes from Virginia, "The new voice in Congress isn't left or right, it's military. Jim Webb is just one example and I'm proud to have him as my senator. Both parties have people in Congress with actual experience in the military and personal connections to the human beings that the Bush administration is treating as canon fodder."
N.A. writes, "People want civility in government. While Webb has every right to oppose the president on any issue, how hard is it to be civil? If he doesn't want his son in Iraq, why did he volunteer? What's the point in such a political dialogue? Who does it help? It only confirms how ugly and petty politics can be at the highest levels."
Vicki in Illinois, "I don't know about bipartisanship, but I hope whatever Jim Webb has is contagious." Gary in New York, "Bipartisanship? Cooperation? I'm sure you're kidding. It's going to be a bloodbath and not since the reign of Louis XVI has any group in power deserved it more."
If you didn't see your e-mail here, you can go to CNN.com/CaffertyFile and read some more of them there -- Wolf.
BLITZER: A lot of our viewers do exactly that, Jack. See you back here in an hour.
Honey bees trained to sniff out suicide bombers. It sounds like the stuff of sci-fi, but scientists may be closer than you think. Our internet reporter Jacki Schechner standing by with details. Jacki?
JACKI SCHECHNER, CNN INTERNET REPORTER: Well if honey bees have an extraordinary sense of smell and there's a small British company called Incentinal that is training honey bees to sniff out explosives. Here's how their prototype works. The trained bees are tucked safely into this cartridge here, there's three of them. And this cartridge is put right here into the box. On the left-hand side there is a vacuum and this is where the scent comes in.
Now the honey bees that are trained to smell explosives, if they sniff out something, will basically extend what's like their tongues. And that's what you see here. The box is hooked up to a computer and that records all of the information.
The Department of Defense here in the U.S. is putting money into this project and the Los Alamos National Laboratory is doing all of the research. They say that these bees are very reliable, this works very well and they're actually very resilient. It only takes a couple of hours to train them and they can go on working for a couple of days.
Now the British company Incentinal says if the military signs on for this project it will be commercially available in about a year. And the bee biologists say that this kind of stuff could be used in Iraq to sniff out suicide bombers, car bombs. It can even be used in airports here in the United States -- Wolf.
BLITZER: Thanks very much Jacki for that.
Up next, penguins and politics colliding in a hip animated movie. CNN's Jeanne Moos shows us why "Happy Feet" has some people very unhappy. Stay with us, you're in THE SITUATION ROOM.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BLITZER: Controversy is growing over the number one movie in the country. CNN's Jeanne Moos explains why some people are so unhappy with "Happy Feet."
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JEANNE MOOS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): You know things are going downhill, dancing penguin causes a political flak.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They're hoisting this on my kids.
GLENN BECK, TALK SHOW HOST: Tell me about it first, ok, so I know I'm walking into propaganda.
MOOS: Not everyone is happy with blockbuster "Happy Feet." Crappy feet one critic called it. Some conservatives say it's dark, disturbing environmental propaganda, pitting cute penguins against big bad humans in the fishing industry.
BECK: An animated version of an inconvenient truth.
MOOS: But can you really compare Al Gore's global warming documentary to "Happy Feet"?
NEIL CAVUTO, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: I have expected to see an animated version of Al Gore pop up.
MOOS: In Al Gore's film, glaciers crack, but the only cracking in "Happy Feet" is caused by bad vocals. There is no global warming in "Happy Feet", but the director readily admits to amplifying environmental themes, the penguins are starving because of over- fishing. Humans are called aliens. Check out the six-pack holder around his neck.
It ends up almost choking him to death. Even "The New York Times" describes the movie as a view of hell as seen through the eyes and ears of creatures we foolishly, tragically call dumb. That's the voice of Robin Williams, portraying one of the lead penguins. The movie has gotten rave reviews.
ERIC BOEHLERT, MEDIA MATTERS: I just think conservatives are still cranky from the election. To fight with an animated penguin, it doesn't make any sense.
MOOS: One critic even suggests that there's a gay sub-text. Mumbles is an outcast because he dances, but can't sing. But don't expect Mumbles to join the ranks of actual gay penguin couples. "Happy Feet" defenders say he's no different than Rudolph the red- nosed reindeer.
ROBERT THOMPSON, SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY: Of the 50,000 things affecting America's youth in negative ways today, I don't think the penguin movie is probably on that 50,000.
MOOS: As for kids who have seen the movie. What's the movie about?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Happy Feet.
MOOS: Those happy feet are stepping on conservative toes. Jeanne Moos, CNN, New York.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BLITZER: Thank you Jeanne Moos for that. Remember, we're here in THE SITUATION ROOM weekdays from 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. eastern, back in one hour at 7:00 p.m. eastern. Until then, thanks very much for joining us. I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington, Lou Dobbs getting ready to start his program. Lou?
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.voxant.com
