News Home Page
 National Security
 Search the States
 Special Reports
    America Attacked
 Photo Galleries
 Live Online
 Nation Index
 Home & Garden
 Weekly Sections
 News Digest
 Print Edition
 Site Index

Text: 'Face the Nation'

Sunday, Sept. 16, 2001

Following are transcripts of interviews conducted by Bob Schieffer on CBS' 'Face the Nation.' The guests are:

Gloria Borger, U.S. News and World Report Correspondent; Colin Powell, Secretary of State; William Cohen, former Secretary of Defense; Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY); Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY); Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL); Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE); Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) Edward Yardeni, chief investment strategist, Deutsche Banc Alex. Brown.

SCHIEFFER: And as we begin this expanded broadcast this morning, we want to bring you up to date on the latest developments. President Bush has told the military, ``Get ready for war.'' The vice president says, ``If you provide sanctuary to terrorists, you face full wrath of the United States of America.'' And Pakistan has told the Taliban to hand over Osama bin Laden. Secretary of State Powell is here.

Mr. Secretary, thank you so much for coming.

POWELL: Good morning, Bob.

SCHIEFFER: Let me start with this report from Pakistan this morning where the Pakistan government, I understand it, has told the Taliban that they're going to send a delegation to Afghanistan and they have told them to hand over Osama bin Laden. What can you tell us about that?

POWELL: Well, I've seen that report. I can confirm it through our embassy in Islamabad. But, if it is an accurate report, then I'm encouraged that the Pakistanis continue to play such a positive role in moving this campaign forward against those who might have been responsible for the tragedies of the 11th of September.

SCHIEFFER: Well, isn't that a little odd that if in fact this report is true, that the U.S. government doesn't have any information about it yet?

POWELL: I can assure you, we're working hard to confirm it, but it is a press report at the moment. And we'll be confirming it throughout the course of the day with the Pakistani government.

SCHIEFFER: Let me ask you, this, obviously, is what we want the Pakistanis to do. But by announcing this as they have is there another side to this that perhaps they're telling Osama bin Laden, ``You'd better get out of town''?

POWELL: Well, I can't speculate on that. All I can say is that for the last several days, the Pakistani government has been very supportive and forthcoming. I spoke to President Musharraf several days ago, and he indicated full support. We provided them a list of things that we might be needing in the days ahead, and they said they would provide that support.

We'll have to get into the details of it over time. And yesterday, President Bush spoke to President Musharraf and got the same kind of assurances. So, we're very pleased with the role that the Pakistani government is playing.

SCHIEFFER: Was this in fact one of the things we asked them to do?

POWELL: We asked them for a variety of things. And I think it's best we keep those between the two governments at this time until we have an opportunity to see their reaction and then it'll all become public.

BORGER: Let me just add one more question to this. If the Pakistanis did get Osama bin Laden what we would want them to do with him?

POWELL: I can think of many things, but I think let's wait and see if they do get him.

I hope if they do get him, and he is available in a way that would allow justice to be served, then I would want to see justice served. There are all sorts of UN resolutions and other statements out there, other requirements out there to bring this kind of terrorist to justice, to get terrorism stopped and bring these sorts of people to justice.

BORGER: A war tribunal?

POWELL: Well, we'll see. It remains to be seen what charges could be placed against him and what Pakistani law might be. And what Pakistan would do if they get this individual into custody. But let's not over-speculate before anything has really happened.

BORGER: Mr. Secretary, you have told Americans to be prepared for war, the president has. What will this war look like?

POWELL: It will be a campaign. It'll be an integrated, comprehensive campaign. We're not fighting an enemy that is located on a battlefield where we all can see the enemy and just go after him.

This is an enemy that intends to remain hidden. It's a very resourceful enemy. And so we have to attack on all fronts, and we have to do it with a broad coalition because this enemy is spread out across the world. And it will take the international community.

It will require intelligence actions, legal actions, financial actions, military actions, diplomatic and political actions, all part of a comprehensive campaign not to go after just one person, but to go after a network, the Al Qaeda network and to go after other terrorist organizations that are practicing this kind of evil upon the civilized world.

SCHIEFFER: Explain what the Al Qaeda network is.

POWELL: Consider Al Qaeda as something of a large holding company. And the head of the holding company is Osama bin Laden. And within that holding company, you have got groups of terrorist organizations that are located in countries throughout the world that are loosely and sometimes tightly nit into Osama bin Laden.

But there's no doubt that there's support for all of them and the central nervous system for al of them flows up what is called Al Qaeda, and at the top of Al Qaeda is Osama bin Laden.

BORGER: Should Americans be prepared to send ground troops?

POWELL: We should be prepared to do whatever is necessary to deal with this threat. We are at war, the president said. But let's not speculate on what particular type of military response might be required.

BORGER: Well, should we be prepared it kill civilians in this process?

POWELL: You don't want to kill innocent civilians, but if civilians are terrorists, then they have made themselves the object of our wrath, as the president and vice president have said.

SCHIEFFER: You've already said that--or we already know--that the reserves are being called up. Do you think that under any conceivable circumstance there would be a reinstitution of the draft?

POWELL: I don't see any need for that right now. The armed forces are strong, and with our very, very capable, loyal, and so patriotic reserve forces, I think we probably have enough without considering reinstitution of the draft.

SCHIEFFER: You have been focused in recent days in putting together this coalition. How is that going? Who's in it? And who's not in it yet?

POWELL: It's going very well. I'm just deeply grateful for the responses we have received, whether it was NATO invoking Article V, the mutual defense article of the NATO Treaty, the Washington Treaty or the United Nations passing a very strong resolution both in the Security Council, the General Assembly, the Organization of Islamic Conferences' making positive statements, the Organization of American States making a statement and now getting ready to have a meeting in Washington to take further action, I've been very pleased on a bilateral basis.

So many of our friends and allies have come forward whether it's Israel, whether it's Saudi Arabia, whether it's Japan, Australia. I don't want to offend anybody by leaving them out. But just about every country has come forward with a few exceptions. One, of course, is Iraq. But, we wouldn't expect them to come forward. It is that kind of regime that causes so much trouble in the world. And there are one or two others that have not yet been heard from.

But we've heard from such nations as Syria, for example, which we have always said is a state that sponsors terrorism. But they provided a rather forthcoming statement. And perhaps there are new opportunities with respect to Syria, not just going after the Taliban and Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden. But perhaps, also dealing with other terrorist organizations that have been supporting in the past. Let's see if they recognize that terrorism does not belong in a civilized place.

SCHIEFFER: Is it because they now see the Taliban as a threat to their regime?

POWELL: I hope they see terrorism as a threat to the entire world. But I'm not under any illusions about the nature of the Syrian government. But let's see if there is an opportunity here to work together on the elimination of terrorism as a cause of violence in the Middle East and everywhere else around the world.

SCHIEFFER: Is it in fact true that we have made approaches to the government of Iran for help on this?

POWELL: Iran made a rather positive statement for Iran. We have serious differences with the government Iran because of their support of terrorism, but they have made a statement. And it seems to be a statement that is worth exploring to see whether or not they now recognize this is a curse on the face of the earth. And of course, Iran has always had difficulty with the Taliban regime and Afghanistan.

BORGER: On the other hand, Saddam Hussein of Iraq, did not make a positive response to this. In fact, he said, ``The American cowboy is reaping the fruits of its crime against humanity.''

POWELL: This is an irrelevant individual sitting there with a broken regime. He pursues weapons of mass destruction. He is the greatest threat in that region because he refuses to abide by the simplest standards of civilized behavior. So we'll continue to contain Saddam Hussein. We'll keep his regime under sanctions. And we will what is necessary when it becomes necessary, when we choose to.

BORGER: Any Saddam Hussein fingerprints of this particular attack?

POWELL: At the moment we see no fingerprints between Iraq and what happened last Tuesday. But we are looking. We will pull it up by its roots. We will find out who is responsible, and we will determine what connections exist between various regimes around the world who participate in this kind of thing.

SCHIEFFER: There are reports this morning that some of these people who were on these air planes, in fact, may have gotten training from the U.S. military. Now, we know that people don't just wander in off the street and get enrolled in the U.S. military programs.

Those are government-to-government exchanges.

First, I would ask you, is that true? And the second thing I would say, does this increase the possibility that perhaps this is some sort of state-sponsored terrorism?

POWELL: I'm familiar with the report, and I'd rather let the FBI and the Justice Department answer it precisely.

But keep in mind that as a result of our relations with a number of the countries, friendly countries, over many years, we have trained pilots for other countries in our training facilities. So that is possible. But it doesn't necessarily reflect state-sponsored terrorism. It just means that we trained somebody who subsequently moved in that direction, unfortunately. But he did get training in the United States, just as we know that the others were trained to--for the most part here in the United States in aviation schools.

BORGER: When you consider some kind of a first strike in this war, what do you worry about in terms of retaliation against this country? That's got to be part of your calculations.

POWELL: I assume that there are those out there who are still planning activities against the United States whether we retaliate or not. We should not see this just in terms of retaliation for the sake of retaliation, just to strike for the sake of striking. We should see it in terms of a campaign that goes after, not just retaliatory satisfaction, but goes after eliminating this threat by ripping it up, by going after its finances, by going after its infrastructure, by making sure we are applying all the intelligence assets we can to finding out what they may be up to.

The measure of success at the end of the day will be no more attacks like this or of any other nature against the United States and our interests around the world.

SCHIEFFER: We had never had anything like this, so perhaps that's one of the reasons for it. But clearly, it seems that the United States was unprepared for an attack on the homeland. We're told now that even after people at the Pentagon--Defense Secretary Rumsfeld--even after it was known that there were aircraft heading toward the Pentagon, that the Secretary of Defense didn't know about it. The jets were scrambled, but everything happened too late. How prepared were they?

POWELL: I think we all understand that homeland defense is an important mission, one that'll be getting a lot of attention. The vice president is personally directing our efforts with respect to homeland defense. I think it is a little unfair to say that the Pentagon was unprepared when suddenly a plane--an American commercial airliner--shows up in air space just a few minutes away from impact from the Pentagon and say, ``Well, why weren't F-16's up there ready--or F-15's up there ready to shoot it down.''

Nobody would have anticipated that kind of threat without some sort of cuing or warning that such an attack was on the way or we had some kind of intelligence that such attack was coming. So I think it's a little unreasonable and frankly unfair, to suggest that the Pentagon was at fault and our military was at fault because we weren't prepared to shoot down an American airliner full of Americans just because it happened to be in the wrong air corridor.

SCHIEFFER: Just speaking of increasing security, I'm told, just while you were talking, that David Martin (ph), our correspondent at the Pentagon, reports that we have begun to increase security around America's nuclear stockpile.

POWELL: I yield to David Martin (ph) who is an excellent reporter.

BORGER: Are you worried about biological and chemical retaliation?

POWELL: I think we have to be worried about any of these threats, chemical, biological, radiological. I think this is going to require a full court response on the part of the American government, the American people, state and local governments to prepare ourselves for whatever eventuality might be out there. You can't dismiss that possibility.

But at the same time, remember this was a fairly unsophisticated weapon when you think of it. The planning that went into it was very, very sophisticated. But they found a way to create a bomb using an airplane loaded with fuel.

SCHIEFFER: Let me go back, and I want to talk a little bit about Pakistan here, because that thought occurs to me that we have asked the Pakistani government to do certain things. There's no question that they have these Islamic fundamentalists in Pakistan and that that government could well topple as a result of nothing more than the United States asking them to help on this. Joe Biden, the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, says that that is simply a risk that we have to take.

But the other part that I think about and, I must say, worry about is that Pakistan has nuclear weapons. Are we running the risk here of having a government takeover in Pakistan that would be able to, as it were, have its finger on a nuclear button?

POWELL: We are very sensitive to that, and I know that President Musharraf is very sensitive to that. So in our conversations with the Pakistani government in the days and weeks ahead, we will be mindful that they have internal problems that they're dealing with.

But that was part of his calculation as he and his senior advisers and military leaders sat down and examined this earlier in the week. And they came to the judgment that even with the difficulty it might cause them internally, this was such a problem, such a crisis, and the need to show solidarity with America and to help America and to help the rest of the civilized world, that was so important that they were willing to take risks. And I complement them for that.

BORGER: Do you trust the Pakistanis?

POWELL: I don't see any reason not to trust the Pakistanis. So far they have been forthcoming. They have given assurances to me. They have given assurances to the president. And we will see now what they are actually are going to do when specific requests are put before them.

We have had a strong relationship with Pakistan for many, many years. We have been friends of Pakistan and the Pakistani people for many, many years. And I hope that friendship will continue and the relationship will grow.

SCHIEFFER: Mr. Secretary, the last time you were on this broadcast, the Chinese were holding American airmen captives after the forcing down of the reconnaissance plane. And the first question I asked you that morning was, ``What is your message to the Chinese?''

I ask you the same question this morning because, if I remember, that message, what you said, was later put on Chinese television. And after that, the crisis broke and the men were eventually released. I would ask you this morning, what is your message to the terrorists? What is your message to the American people?

POWELL: My message to the terrorists is that you don't know what you have gotten yourselves into. You have pulled America together in a time of tragedy. You will now see what we're made of. You'll see the steel that holds up this country. You'll see our determination. You'll see our firmness. And you will realize you are at war with a powerful adversary who will defeat you. And we will do what is necessary.

We will use all of the instruments of power available to us, domestic power with the strength of our society in protecting ourselves domestically, internationally with our diplomatic efforts, our military efforts, intelligence, law enforcement. You're going to see the full weight of the American government, the American people brought to bear against this kind of activity.

To the American people, I would say, we have a tragedy that we will get through. It is so reassuring to see the American flags out again, to see the pride that exists within our country, to see our country coming together. It shows who we are and what we are. And I would say to the American people, we will prevail.

SCHIEFFER: Secretary of State Colin Powell, thank you so much.

When we come back in a moment, we'll talk with New York Senators Hillary Clinton and Charles Schumer, in a minute.



PRESIDENT BUSH: I can hear you, the rest of the world hears you, and the people (cheers and applause) ... And the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon!

(END VIDEO CLIP) I can hear you, the rest of the world hears you, and the people.


And the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon.


SCHIEFFER: The president on Friday at the site of the World Trade Center crash.

SCHIEFFER: With us now from our studios in New York, Senator Chuck Schumer and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Senator Schumer, how long do you think it's going take to get this repaired? It's just astonishing. I mean, people are talking about a new Marshall Plan to rebuild lower Manhattan, but as I just watched Byron this morning you realize what an enormous task this is.

SCHUMER: It is a huge, huge task. There's so much. Just yesterday I heard that many of our subway lines can't run because they're either cracked or flooded or suffered structural damage. Our electricity grid system, which is so interconnected in New York, has trouble, the telephone system and then the rebuilding is just enormous. We have lost, Bob, 30 million square feet of office space. That's the equivalent of 150,000 job places for people to work. It's a huge, huge task.

One good thing I would say New Yorkers are amazingly resilient. The scenes that we have seen, Hillary and I have seen as we go throughout the city, are just amazing, both the grief that is shared by everybody. I just went back to my local neighborhood yesterday. I spent some time, I found that the local school, four kids have parents missing. The local firehouse, 11 missing. Every street has somebody missing.

But at the same time, we are so dedicated to building our city back, the city we love, the world city the international city, and we will, but it's going to take a while and a it's going to take a lot of money.

We're so grateful that President Bush and the Senate and House both parties united and really are helping us 100 percent. There's been no stinting.

SCHIEFFER: And I know both of you, Senator Clinton, had your own turmoil and anxiety because, as I understand it, Senator Clinton, you did not know for several hours where Chelsea was, Senator Schumer didn't know where his children were.

CLINTON: Well, that's right, Bob. You know, from the moment we heard about it, the first plane going into the tower, I called Chuck, he was trying to find out where his daughters and his wife were. Of course, his wife has responsibility for transportation in the city. I knew that my daughter was staying with good friends in the city, and I was desperately trying to find her, and it took some time to track her down. She was quite actually quite close to where this disaster occurred.

I don't think you'll find anybody who doesn't have a personal story. And I have been so struck by how everyone is doing their best to help each other cope with what the after-effects of this disaster are here in the city. And it goes far beyond the city. We have, you know, many people who came into work from the suburbs from New Jersey, from Connecticut.

We now know--and I was at the armory yesterday visiting with the families who are still desperately looking for their lost loved ones--that this effected every single kind of person you can imagine, American citizens, citizens from all over the world. And you know, I just can't thank America enough.

Chuck and I came down with the governor and the mayor and saw the disaster firsthand on Wednesday afternoon and went to a briefing where the mayor and the governor told us exactly what was happening, and we could hear with our own ears that the immensity of this requires a national response.

And I'm so grateful that the president, the administration and our colleagues in Congress have responded. It's going to take a long time, just as our war against terrorism is a long-term effort. What we need to do to help rebuild lives and rebuild our city is also a long-term commitment. And we're grateful for the help.

SCHUMER: I heard today that, in Virginia, all the newspapers had full page ads saying, ``We love New York.'' That means so much to New Yorkers, and all of America has been wonderful to us.

BORGER: Senator Schumer, as New York looks toward the future and toward rebuilding, should New York rebuild the World Trade Center?

SCHUMER: Well, that's a debate that is going on right now. I think we should. I think that it doesn't have to be exactly the same way, but, you know, Gloria, I look out at the skyline from my window of my house in Brooklyn, and I feel violated looking and seeing how it has been changed by a madman on the other side of the globe and his henchmen.

And to have nothing there, I think, would not be a good idea. So to rebuild in a way and to do it along with a memorial for those who were lost, I think that those who were lost would not want us to see that space lay vacant. And so there'll be a lot of discussion. Again, I think New Yorkers, who are known for having many opinions, but will come together on what will be the best thing to do. But my judgment would be, we must build something grand there.

SCHIEFFER: You know, both of you, I know, went to see the president after this happened. There has been $20 billion that people were talking about to rebuild and track down the terrorists. It's my understanding that the two of you talked to the president and almost immediately he said, ``We'll double it.'' Senator Clinton, tell us about that.

CLINTON: Well, Bob, when Chuck and I went to the briefing and realized that we needed to get relief immediately, we spoke with the governor and the mayor. They gave us a very rough estimate of about $20 billion that was really needed as a first installment to keep the rescue and rebuilding work and the human consequences of this. We have to rebuild lives. We have people without jobs as well as those who are now orphans and widows. And so the work before us is enormous.

And we immediately called our colleagues, spoke with Senator Daschle, spoke with Senator Byrd and others. We know that we got great support from the mayor and the governor who let the White House know that this was going to be a united front. And we're very grateful that we received the kind of bipartisan support.

And when we went to see the president, we were sitting in the Oval Office, Chuck and I, the two senators from Virginia and the president gave us a briefing about where we were in terms of our security issues. And then we asked him for the additional $20 billion over and above what he needed to conduct the kind of security, military defense issues.

SCHIEFFER: Senator, hold that thought for just a moment. I have to break in and say some of our viewers are going to be leaving us now, but for many of you around the country, we'll continue with our expanded coverage of this story on ``Face the Nation''. We'll be back with Senator Clinton and Senator Schumer after this short break.


SCHIEFFER: And welcome back now to our expanded coverage on ``Face the Nation'' this morning.

We're going to be on the air for the next hour, as we continue to talk about this story from every angle.

I want to bring you up to date on the very latest developments. Just a while ago, Secretary of State Powell said of terrorism: ``We will pull it out by its roots. We will find who is responsible.''

President Bush has told the military to get ready for war. The vice president said, ``Osama bin Laden is the target of the moment.''

I want to go back now to Senator Hillary Clinton and Senator Chuck Schumer who are in New York.

Senator Clinton, before we took that break, you were telling us about going back to the White House and talking to the president about the extra aid that was needed for New York. Tell us about what happened.

CLINTON: Well, Bob, as soon as we asked the president for the additional money, he said, ``You've got it.'' No hesitation. It was a wonderful affirmation of our commitment to doing whatever is necessary to rebuild lives as well as structures from this terrible, evil attack.

And then we worked very hard with our colleagues. And we were overwhelmingly grateful for the vote that we received in the Senate and the House. This is the kind of commitment that New York needs, and which we're receiving from literally, not just the president, colleagues in Congress, but people on the streets all over America. We're getting all kinds of messages.

My office is flooded with calls and e-mails from people who say, ``I've never been to New York, but I want to help, I want to know what I can do to help you.'' And we are just extraordinarily grateful, and it's going to be a long-term commitment, but we know we're going to have the hearts and hands of America behind us.

SCHIEFFER: Senator Schumer?

SCHUMER: I just wanted to just say another word about the president, because he really helped this dramatically. You know, we made the pitch to him, and I said, ``Mr. President, we just need this $20 billion.'' And I thought he'd say, ``Well, let's start off with $5 billion, it's a huge sum of money. Let me--give me a list.''

And instead, he just uttered three words. He said, ``You've got it.''

And I stood up, I was ready to hug him, I couldn't, because he was president.


SCHUMER: But, you know, just speaking, we're part of the..

CLINTON: I was rendered speechless.


SCHUMER: I was speechless.

And he said, ``You're speechless?'' And I said, ``For $20 billion, I can be speechless again.''


SCHUMER: But he didn't have to do this. We're part of the blue states, you know. We're not part of his political sort of coalition.

And the fact that he was so generous, and then, late that night, when some in the Senate didn't want to do it, he stood them down, and said, ``We have to do this.'' It speaks for his ability to unify the nation, and Hillary and I are both just really grateful to him for his leadership and his help for New York, as we are to all of America.

SCHIEFFER: All right. Senators, thank you so much.

And I would say, Senator Schumer, there were a lot of people who were ready to hug a lot of people last week.

At one point, at the U.S. Capitol, I saw Trent Lott with his arm around Tom Daschle.


SCHIEFFER: You don't see that very often.

Thank you both.

CLINTON: Thank you.

SCHUMER: Thank you.

SCHIEFFER: Thank you so much.

We want to now check in with our correspondents at the key beats around town.


SCHIEFFER: All right, we're going to turn now to some people who have some other perspectives on all of this. In Philadelphia this morning, Senator Joe Biden.

Senator Biden, of course, is chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, in our studio here in Washington, Senator Richard Shelby. Senator Shelby is the ranking Republican on the Intelligence Committee, and Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska is one of the key Republicans on the Foreign Relations Committee.

Chairman Biden, let's begin with you. You heard Colin Powell this morning who said, ``We're going to find these terrorists. We're going to root them out.'' Both he and the vice president have said this morning, I believe that it was the vice president's words, ``Osama bin Laden is the target of the moment.''

But the secretary of State made clear this morning that the government now looks on this as something much more than just the work of one terrorist. They're looking at a whole network. Can they take out a network like this? How would they go about doing it, and what's your evaluation?

BIDEN: Absolutely they can. The way to go about doing it is what they're doing. They're building a coalition. Remember, you and I, Bob, talked two days ago, after I met with the intelligence head of the Pakistani intelligence service, and the question was, would they cooperate?

They're going to cooperate. Not only are they going to cooperate, the Russians are going to cooperate. Everyone's going to cooperate for one reason, Bob: They've all figured out that national sovereignty is in jeopardy as a consequence of allowing these networks to expand, and they can only expand if they breathe the oxygen in the air that comes from the ability to hide or be involved with certain countries and so, it can be done.

And the second point is--from my perspective is--we should not elevate this SOB to a level that exceeds what the American people are prepared to deal with. We have as many Americans prepared to give their lives as they have to give lives to do damage to us, number one.

Number two, the idea that we are so vulnerable in the future that we can't handle it as Americans, I think, is bizarre. We were prepared and we have thought about and we prepared for the possibility of an all-out war with a major nuclear power before. The American people can handle this. The administration's going about it the right way. It's going to take some time and people are going to have to choose sides, just like the Pakistanis had to.

BORGER: Senator Hagel, do you worry about destabilizing Pakistan, destabilizing moderate Arab nations and creating more terrorists?

HAGEL: Gloria, that is a very legitimate consideration. We are not at war with the Muslim world. Islam is not about this outrageous terrorism. We need to seek their support. We are getting their support, but this has to be handled carefully because we could unintentionally destabilize much of the Muslim world in the Middle East.

I think we'll work our way long through this, but we have to be cautious, direct, clear and understand something that Secretary Powell said this morning: This is an effort that's going to require all of the dynamics of our strength--economic, intelligence, military, everything--and an international coalition, as Senator Biden said. And bringing those forces together, harnessing those forces, we can do this. And we will win. There will be no mistake about that. We will win this.

But your question, Gloria, is one of those dynamics that must be fed into the equation as to the delicateness of what we're doing here.

SCHIEFFER: Senator Shelby, you and I talked Friday night about whether this was an intelligence failure, whether the hands of the intelligence community have been tied, because of the restrictions we now have on recruiting agents.

People have compared it to, they say, ``Well the FBI can go in and buy informants in the Mafia, but the Central Intelligence Agency can't do that.'' What's going to happen here? What are we going to do?

SHELBY: I believe that's just one aspect of what we need to do in the intelligence community, and that is, take the wraps off of the intelligence agents that are working around the world to try to get information to prevent these kind of terrorist attacks.

Starting, I believe, in 1995, the CIA starting wrapping the hands and tying the hands, by directives, of what their agents could do and who they could deal with. We have to be honest with ourselves, we have to get down to where the people are. Are they unsavory, are they down in the real dirt with people? Absolutely. Are they people you wouldn't want invite to your home? Absolutely. But we have to deal with these people to get at the bottom of a lot of information we want like terrorist cells.

SCHIEFFER: Do you think that the head of Central Intelligence, Mr. Tenet, has done a good job? I asked you about this on Friday night and you said, ``Well that's up to the president.'' I ask you, do you think he ought to resign? Do you think he ought to resign?

SHELBY: Well, that's up to him and the president.

But I can tell you, this was a massive intelligence failure. It happened on his watch. There have been a number of successes. A lot of them have been in the public domain. But there have been a lot of failures that in the public domain, and I believe this was the biggest.

If we didn't have a clue, Bob, that this was going to go on, something's wrong. If we had a clue and overlooked it some way, than something's worse. I believe myself that we need someone head of the intelligence agencies, director of CIA--that's one agency--that has the stature of Donald Rumsfeld and the stature of Colin Powell because intelligence is at the front line. Without it, we're just waiting around for the next attack.

BORGER: Senator Biden, when Congress talks about appropriating money on military matters it always talks about defining the mission. We need to know what the mission is. How do you see this mission and when will you consider the mission accomplished?

BIDEN: I see this mission as dealing with first things first, the priorities first. I disagree with the thrust of what Senator Shelby--the specifics of what Senator Shelby said, but not the thrust of what he said.

We have tied the hands of the intelligence community by denying them tens of millions of dollars that they should have had over the last five, six years, actually, I think up to $200 million.

We have also not done, and this is not recrimination, this is what we're going to have to do in the future. We're going to have to make sure that we do the things we know how to do relative to what the real threats are. The real threats are these kinds of threats, bio-terror threats, chemical weapons threats, and we have to focus our money and our attention on those areas. We have to change some laws as well, Gloria.

We had a terrorism bill that we introduced four years ago that allowed, for example, roving wiretaps. It allowed for taggants in certain materials. It wouldn't have effected or stopped any of this. but the point is we have to think more broadly about how we can infiltrate and deal well these organizations.

And the third thing I think we have to do is we have to try to change our mindset here. Our mindset is not that we have to give up our civil liberties, our mind set is we have to focus on allocating resources in the areas that we know.

For example, senators now, our ambassador to Japan, Senator Baker and Mr. Cutler came after and gave us a very thorough report on the amount of not loose nukes but loose chemical weapons all over the Soviet Union--the former Soviet Union and Russia and they want help and they need help in corralling them. They said the price tag and that was $30 billion. That's an urgent priority. They have chemical weapons locked up in sheds with padlocks on them, with not enough guards on them that have capability to do a lot more harm than was done here. And the harm here has been devastating.

So I think this is going to refocus our attention on dealing with first things first. But the most important thing the president is doing in my view is forming this international coalition not unlike what his father did in the Gulf. It's a more complicated, it's more difficult, but it was required in order for us to be able to get at these organizations and it's going to take some time.

SCHIEFFER: Senator Shelby?

SHELBY: I agree with Senator Biden on some of this. That is, I believe we have to restructure our whole intelligence system but money alone will not do it. But money will be a factor in restructuring our intelligence agency. NSA is going deaf, that's one.

SCHIEFFER: NSA is the one...

SHELBY: Electronic.

SCHIEFFER: Electronic eavesdropping.

SHELBY: Absolutely and we're talking about a lot of money. I think we need to accelerate the modernization of NSA, that's one. But we've got to recruit some of the best and brightest of people to go into the CIA to become agents.

We have a rich pool of people in this country. We are a nation of diversity. We need people with the best language skills, Arabic, Farsi, Chinese, you name it. We've got to do better than we're doing. Otherwise, we're going to have another huge intelligence failure, and we'll pay for it.

SCHIEFFER: What should we be prepared for, Senator Hagel? These airline attacks using airliners as flying bombs, certainly that was effective. Should we be prepared to expect more of that or something beyond that?

HAGEL: Bob, this is an asymmetrical threat. Terrorism strikes where we are most vulnerable where we least suspect it. There is no isolation of threat here. It could come, as Senator Biden said--and we had hearings on this just a week ago--through biological, chemical, nuclear means just as we were stunned by the Tuesday means of delivering a terrible terrorist blow.

We must be prepared for everything. That means an alert nation, an alert intelligence community, military, laws, review of everything. I understand Attorney General Ashcroft is sending a package to the Congress next week to begin to look at this review that we must get at. Immediacy of the crisis we're dealing with and we must deal with that, but it is really the long term challenge that we have as the president has stated.

BIDEN: Bob, can I say one thing? I don't think we should frighten the American people, though, into thinking that there are a number of these incredibly wide-ranging, sophisticated cells and organizational structures like bin Laden has around the world. It's not like there are five or six or seven other bin Laden's. There are a lot of isolated terrorists operations that do not have the reach or capacity that this operation did.

So the likelihood of something like this happening quickly, I believe, is very, very remote. But the likelihood of the next phase of whenever this occurs whether it's a day, a week, a month or ten years is to deal with the places where we are not prepared.

For example, we don't even--we haven't even trained our first responders. Who were the people that went to the World Trade Towers? They were not the Army, they were not the Navy, they were not the Marines. They were the local fire department.

These folks have not been trained, nor have we spent the billions of dollars necessary to equip them to be able to identify a pathogen, to equip them to be able to identify whether or not there is a smallpox that has been released, to equip them to know what to do with a chemical weapon release.

Sam Nunn and I introduced a broad terrorism bill five years ago, and it was defeated because people were worried about posse comitatus. That's the law that says the military can't be involved in arrests. What happens if there is a nuclear scare? What happens to that?

So my point is that there's a lot we can do, but the American people shouldn't be sitting there thinking that there is another large, wide-ranging organization that has been able to plan simultaneously some major nuclear or biological or chemical attack. But it's something we have to be concerned about down the road and allocate our resources to it.

BORGER: Senator Hagel, should the American public expect all of this to take years?

HAGEL: Oh, I think we are in for a long-term commitment here. How many years? None of us can answer that. But yes, the answer to your question is yes. We need to understand this is a long-term commitment that the civilized world is going to have to make.

BORDER: Senator Shelby?

SHELBY: I agree with Senator Hagel. It has to be long term. It can't be a quick response. That won't work. It's going to take a big commitment of money and resolve--resolve is it. And we've got to do it. Otherwise, we're waiting for the next attack.

SCHIEFFER: All right, gentlemen, thank you so much for bringing this perspective to us this morning.

We'll continued with our expanded coverage on ``Face the Nation'' after this short break.


SCHIEFFER: And back with our expanded coverage of this extraordinary story. We have a new casualty figure from Mayor Rudy Giuliani in New York. Just a moment ago, he told reporters that the missing and dead, the total now is 5,097. To put that into some perspective, the largest one-day death toll in the history of the country was at the battle of Antietam, when some 4,300 people were killed.

Now, we're told that Attorney General Ashcroft is coming in to have a news conference. Let's listen in a little.


SCHIEFFER: So the attorney general is outlining for members of the media what the Justice Department intends to do. He's talking about increasing the capability to have telephone surveillance. He is also talking about such things as increasing and raising the penalties for terrorists. But I think the important thing is he is underlining this morning, this is a much broader effort than just an effort to go after Osama bin Laden.

As Secretary of State Powell said earlier today, as the vice president said just a while ago, ``Osama bin Laden is the target of the moment.'' But this is a much broader effort aimed at a much broader network of terrorists.


SCHIEFFER: Certainly this is a delicate situation.

With us now to talk a little more about it, the former secretary of defense, Bill Cohen, Middle East expert Judith Miller of the New York Times.

And just to underline the delicacy of all of this--and Colin Powell referred to this this morning--there is a large fundamentalist group in Pakistan which could well topple the government that's now in power. And what sets Pakistan apart from other countries where there are these large terrorist cells, they have nuclear weapons.

COHEN: I think what we have tried to point out is that we have to be very careful in what we ask for publicly, especially what we are demanding that we release in terms of our public statements from the Pakistanis. Whatever private assurances they have given should, I think, remain that way. Otherwise, we're going to create a real serious situation for President Musharraf which could in fact result in the toppling of his government.

So we have to be careful. I think that's why Secretary Powell was so judicious in his comments today. And it should remain that way.

SCHIEFFER: But the fact that they do have nuclear weapons. What is the security of those weapons? Could someone steal one of those weapons?

COHEN: Well, they're under military security right now. To the extent that you have any kind of a coup, toppling, essentially a military government, President Musharraf was the former general in charge, now a president. But if the military in any way is compromised, if there is an element within it radicalized, that could in fact compromise the security of those weapons.

SCHIEFFER: Well, let me just ask you while we're on this, because I've wondered. What sort of delivery systems do they have? I take it that Pakistan could not fire a missile that could get to the United States.

COHEN: That's correct.

SCHIEFFER: But they could--they could...

COHEN: They do not have long-range capability at this point. But this is going to raise another element of the debate coming up in Congress. There's already a question as to whether or not the fight against terrorism should come focus without regard to the national missile defense system. There will be elements on Capitol Hill say, ``Wait a minute, you could have another country who could emerge and then pose a threat in the future.'' So this debate is going to get fairly complicated and fairly intense.

BORGER: Judy Miller, we've talked an awful lot about--this morning, about going in and getting Osama bin Laden. The Pakistanis may deliver an ultimatum to the Taliban. We're going to get Osama bin Laden. How hard is that?

NEW YORK TIMES MIDDLE EAST EXPERT JUDITH MILLER: I think it's enormously hard. And I think that's what Secretary Powell was explaining today that this has got to be a long, sustained campaign. That Pakistani-Afghan border, 1,500 miles long. Alan Pizi (ph) discussed it.

These groups are deeply embedded in Afghan society. If you're going to quote, ``smoke them out'', as the president says, you're going to have to smoke them out of villas, compounds, caves, areas where they stage all over. And these guys are constantly on the move. This is not going to be easy.

BORGER: Let me ask former Secretary of Defense Cohen here, is this a job, then, for special forces, special operations?

COHEN: I think the whole panoply of resources that we have at our disposal--military certainly, in terms that would involve bombers, B-2s, B-1s. Would it involve missiles, cruise missiles? Would it involve special forces? The whole panoply has to be available--our covert operations, the CIA.

But financial as well. And we ought to focus on this because shutting down the financial support is going to be critical. Not only for this--for Osama bin Laden, but for other operations as well.

SCHIEFFER: You know, in line with that, what are we going to do, apparently this is not being taken lightly. Here is a quote I was just handed. When the president met with New York and Virginia senators and others last week he said, and we quote--this is the president talking, ``I'm not going fire a $2 million missile at a $10 tent and hit a camel in the butt. This is going to be decisive.'' The president means business here.

But what happens after that, Judy? Because, as you say, this is--this is...


COHEN: Well--but he may be required to fire missiles as well. As long as everyone understands it's not going to be a one-shot proposition.

And he also has another problem, it seems to me, and there is a timeframe that he has to operate, immediate, reasonably soon and then long term. If he doesn't take action reasonably soon, that will call into question on the part of some, the leadership of the country. If he takes action precipitously, our allies may call under question the leadership. So it's a very delicate situation and decision that he has to make. I'm satisfied they are approaching it in the right way to date.

SCHIEFFER: Judy, let me ask you, because you are an acknowledged expert on terrorism, you're new book is called, ``Germs'', I think, and it's about bio--but talk to me a little bit about the mindset of these people.

Some people in America say these people are crazy. Are they crazy?

MILLER: I've interviewed a lot of them, Bob, and they're not crazy. And we underestimate them when we call them crazy fanatics. They are fanatics, but they are rational fanatics. And they are educated. We've seen them now, they're pilots, they're engineers, they're taxi drivers. This group, these networks, use the range of people available to them. And they are very inventive at both recruiting new people and spotting the weaknesses in our system.

BORGER: I'm interested in their financing. Where do they get their money? Where do they put their money? And why can't we stop them from getting this kind of financing?

COHEN: Well, they raise money in a variety of ways. They raise money right here in this country through a number of so-called charitable organizations, religious organizations, some of which are legitimate, others which are not. And that money is funneled back into their coffers. It's distributed in a way that makes it almost impossible to trace. This is going to require a great deal of technical information.

BORGER: Where is it kept? In Swiss banks?

COHEN: In many banks. It's spread throughout the world. This is not simply sitting in one Swiss bank. If we knew it was sitting in one Swiss bank, we could take care of that But, this is a distributed globally.

MILLER: But, Mr. Secretary, your administration had task forces in more than 20 cities in America, and yet, we've seen almost no crackdown on the financial network and the structure. As far as I know, most of these groups are still operating. How can you explain that? Why were there no cases brought to stop this flow of money?

COHEN: For the very difficulty we have talked about. You have many of the banks overseas provide for confidentiality, which cannot be broken into. We're getting more and more cooperation from them now. I think now that they've seen the error of their ways in terms of protecting information, they are going to be much more forthcoming. It's difficult to break into the financial system that's global now and not simply confined right here in the United States.

SCHIEFFER: Let me ask both of you: We've seen these suicide attacks. Should we expect more of that or is there something else coming?

COHEN: I think we should expect more of that. This is not a one isolated attack upon the United States. This has been long in the planning and as Judy just mentioned, they're like predators. They will look for every weakness they can find. To the extent that we beef up security in the airports as we should, they will look to other modes of transportation.

MILLER: And also, we've seen in Osama bin Laden operations, there is oftentimes what we called in the paper today on one-two punch. There is one attack, and then there are plans for a second that follow fairly quickly after the first. We've seen that in a number of his operations. And I'm sure that's what are one of the factors that led the FBI to close down many of the bridges and tunnels in New York and the airports for a while, because there has to be some concern about a follow-up attack.

SCHIEFFER: I thought you made a very good point just a while ago is how extremely sophisticated these people are. I mean the planning that went into this, sleeper agents that have been in this country for years. I mean the ability to buy air plane tickets on frequent flyer miles, which we now know that some of them did. I'm not sure we've seen anything quite like this in the past.

MILLER: I never have. And I've been looking at this for 20 years. But, you know, people learn from their mistakes. And that's what this organization is really good at.

BORGER: If you were doing an FBI profile of an Osama bin Laden terrorist, what would it be?

MILLER: Well, I tell you who it wouldn't be. It wouldn't be a woman. I've never seen a woman active in their ranks. We've never seen a leading female operative, which would lead me to think that maybe that's where they'll try and go next. But you get all ages, very young people, very old people, people who are middle class, people who are desperate and unemployed. It's hard to do these kinds of profiles.

BORGER: Secretary Cohen, you heard this morning and the vice president also said that Saddam Hussein, so far as we know, was not involved in this particular terrorist attack. Would you, knowing what you know about Saddam, would you rule him out, however?

COHEN: I wouldn't rule him out. This is not necessarily a pattern that he has followed in supporting terrorist actions abroad so to speak. Is he capable of it? The answer is yes. Does he have the finances to do it? The answer is yes. It's not necessarily consistent with his past behavior, where he has launched his attacks mostly against the Kuwait people, and the Kurds within his own country. But, I wouldn't rule it out.

BORGER: But, what do you expect from Saddam now?

COHEN: Saddam is going to use this as a rallying cry against the west. He's going to try to stir the spirits of his followers to say that a major blow has been dealt to the evil Satan. And to try to shore up his own support within his country. I expect he'll try to exploit it for his own purposes.

SCHIEFFER: Judy, what do you think the real possibilities are that the Taliban might give up Osama bin Laden? And do you think that the Pakistanis will make a real effort to go in there and tell them to give him up?

MILLER: Those are both the key questions. The Pakistani government has told us before that they have asked for bin Laden. They have pressed their friends and allies and contacts in Afghanistan to please get rid of him, send him anywhere. There's never been any good results from that, but things have changed so dramatically now that I think people, surely they must understand that this is a very different situation. And I'm not certain that the Taliban, at this point, may not give him up despite what they say about hospitality.

The problem is they would have to give up more than him. He's surrounded by a group of people who are just as skilled, just as brutal as he. And that whole network, that whole group, what Secretary Powell called the holding company, has to rolled up. And the camps have to be closed. I'm not sure they would do all that.

SCHIEFFER: And what about what the secretary said this morning about overtures to Iran? I asked him I understand we're making overtures, and he said, well, we've already had some very positive statements of response for Iran.

What could Iran possibly do here? How seriously do you take that, Mr. Secretary?

COHEN: Well, it was unclear from the secretary's statement whether we initiated the call to Iran or whether they volunteered it. They have a number of things that they're concerned about, certainly. They would like, at least the moderates within Iran, would like to have a better relationship with the United States. They do not want to be tagged with the same terrorist label that we are now looking at Afghanistan.

They have, in fact, been supporting terrorist activities. They do provide support to the Hezbollah. They do support the unraveling of the Middle East peace processes, so their hand has been there. So this may be an effort on their part to say that, ``We don't want to be associated with supporting terrorism and now we'll offer whatever support we can to prevent it from coming out way.''

SCHIEFFER: And we did get some help from Syria during the Gulf War; people forget that. Do you think we can expect help from Syria, Judy?

MILLER: I think this is a new government and it hasn't been tested yet, where you won't know for a while what will happen. In terms of Iran, I think it's--it must remember that they, too, share a border with Afghanistan. And the terrorism that they do, they like to control. They don't want someone else to control it. So I think they could actually be helpful. And in fact, there's some indications that they were already working with the Russians to help the Northern Alliance, which was fighting the Taliban, so I don't think you can rule it out.

COHEN: And there was one concern, as a matter of fact, that if bin Laden were to leave Afghanistan, one of the countries he might have gone to would be Iran, and so they don't want him there either.

SCHIEFFER: All right. Thank you both very much.

We're going to turn now to another part of this very complicated and many faceted story: What's going to happen on Wall Street? To talk about that a little bit now, Economist Yardeni of Deutsche Bank, one of the leading economists on Wall Street.

Thank you for coming, sir. And I guess that's the question, what's going to happen tomorrow?

YARDENI: Well, I think it's pretty clear that the New York Stock Exchange, the major exchanges are ready to open. They're ready to do business. There's, I think, a lot of people on Wall Street that just want to get back to work, back to business to show that the markets are operational. I also sense that we may be surprised that that would be almost a patriotic mood on Monday people wanting to see the market going up. There are no guarantees, when it comes to financial markets.

But I think the important thing to realize is that we have already slipped into a recession and usually that's a negative for the stock market and stocks have been down. The likelihood is that this crisis will lead to a lot of government spending next year and markets do look forward, and it's possible the market may actually start to recognize that there are things in place here that'll give us a recovery next year, related to this unfortunate crisis, of course.

SCHIEFFER: I find it remarkable that the market is going to be able to open. When you look at what happened, when you have one bond house that, what, loss 700 people, I mean, this is a remarkable logistical feat, just to get things back up and going tomorrow.

YARDENI: Well, it's been an enormous body blow to Wall Street. It's been a--really, the message was pretty clear that this is also intended as an attack on American capitalism and American financial markets.

So as I said, there are people that have been scrambling very, very hard, very, you know, night and day to make sure that we send a message back, that we're back in business. This is not to say there might not be some disruptions. But the reality is Wall Street's been preparing for a long time with backup systems and I think you're going to see that working reasonably well on Monday.

BORGER: Mr. Yardeni, the vice president this morning said that the country, quote, ``quite possibly could be in recession.'' You just said that we are.

YARDENI: Well, actually, this past week we had some more economic indicators, like industrial production, which were down dramatically in August. I think economists have been more and more moving into the camp that this is not just an economic slump, but it is a recession. So far, it looks like it's going to be a fairly mild one.

But with this crisis, undoubtedly, you're going to see a lot of people, you know, watching the news, cutting back on spending. It's going to worsen the recession through the end of the year but, again, I think that most economists also weren't quite sure how we were going to get out of this slump. Now it's very clear how that's going to happen.

BORGER: Mr. Yardeni, how do you see the future of the airline industry right now? Will it go bankrupt?

YARDENI: I don't think so. I think they're very important to national business, and it's pretty clear to me that there's already some movements afoot in Congress to provide a subsidy to this very, very important industry. You know, clearly, we can't afford as a nation to let terrorists shut down our system like this.

BORGER: So you would support a bailout of this industry?

YARDENI: I think it's not a matter of a bailout, it's a matter of this is an emergency, a crisis, a terrorist attack on an industry that we desperately need to operate the economy.

Another reason the economy may do better is that, you know, we will get the air system back in place. We need parts for our companies. Many of these parts are delivered by air. And so, this is really part of our national defense. I can't see that we're going to let companies go bankrupt.

SCHIEFFER: Well, of course, the Federal Reserve will be monitoring all this and Chairman Greenspan. What options are open to Chairman Greenspan and what can and should the Federal Reserve do here?

YARDENI: We're very, very fortunate to have Fed Chairman Greenspan at this point. He is a man with tremendous credibility during previous crises and I think we're going to be very impressed by what the Fed will do. Already we should be impressed because the Fed has provided an enormous amount of liquidity last week, along with other central banks to the banking system.

And we've seen, for example, the treasury bill rate--the three-month treasury bill rate--is almost down to 2.5 percent. So the markets are anticipating that the Federal Reserve will, in fact, deliver at least a half-point cut in the federal funds rate very soon. They're scheduled to meet in early October. I would not be surprised and I think the markets are anticipating there might actually be a cut on Monday.

SCHIEFFER: And I want to go back to what you said at the very beginning. You think, at this point, even in hard facts where money is involved, you think that for patriotic reasons, the market may stay up?

YARDENI: I just--look, all I can tell you is I've been calling around, talking to friends, and there is sort of an attitude of, you know, ``Let's show them what we're made of.'' And I understand over the Internet, there's been some talk about, you know, buying rather than selling on this news.

There is no guarantee, as I said, but I wouldn't be surprised if the market really shows its strength.

SCHIEFFER: All right. Ed Yardeni--encouraging words, I must say.

We're going to continue with our expanded coverage on Face the Nation this morning. After a short break, I'll be back with a final word.


SCHIEFFER: Finally today, Americans came together this week as they have not come together since World War II. You could see it and feel it, and not just in the calls for retaliation. I noticed it first as I was driving to the Capitol last week. The road rage of rush hour evaporated like a morning dew. Instead, flags flew from car phone antennas and drivers waved and gave a thumbs up when you signaled to change lanes.

You could feel it at the Capitol. Congress passed a $40 billion emergency aid bill by an unprecedented unanimous vote. But that was only part of it. When Senate Republican Leader Trent Lott and his Democratic counterpart Tom Daschle approached the microphones this time, Lott had his arm around and his hand on the shoulder of his old political foe.

Someone said that America changed forever last week, but that is not quite right, because I am old enough to remember an America that used to be this way. That is the easy part for us to forget, because we got off-track in the '60s--a great cynicism gripped the country after the death of John Kennedy and as we became bogged down in Vietnam--a war we never understood. We lost faith in government, our institutions and each other.

But on Tuesday, we somehow remembered how it used to be and how we used to understand that we were all in this together; that any one of us could have been on one of those planes; that our children or brothers or sisters could have been in one of those buildings, and that it could happen again.

Many things happened on Tuesday, and I think one of them may be that we have finally gotten past Vietnam. Those who wanted to get America's attention got it, and they will rue the day they did.

I want to thank our affiliates who allowed us this extra time on their schedule to bring us this very important story today. And we want to close now with some pictures that will tell the story of last week better than any words.

© 2001 The Washington Post Company