Skip to main content


Return to Transcripts main page


Condoleezza Rice Fires Back at Bill Clinton; Sections of National Intelligence Estimate Declassified; War in Iraq Making America Less Safe?

Aired September 26, 2006 - 22:00   ET


ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening again, everyone.
The White House firing back -- Condoleezza Rice takes on Bill Clinton over who is to blame for not finding bin Laden.


ANNOUNCER: He says; she says. President Bush answers President Clinton with a Condi punch.

Presidential rebuttal -- leaked intelligence says the war in Iraq is making global terror worse. Tonight: What does the declassified intelligence say?

And a marketplace for heartbreak: bargaining over babies, buying and selling, no laws, no limits, where the customer, saint or sicko, is always right, for the right price.


ANNOUNCER: Across the country and around the world, this is ANDERSON COOPER 360.

Reporting from the CNN studios in New York, here's Anderson Cooper.

COOPER: Thanks for joining us -- a lot to get to tonight.

We begin with a very rare and very public sparring match between the Bush White House and the man who last occupied it. Today, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice responded to Bill Clinton's claim that he did more to find Osama bin Laden than anyone else since. He blames right-wingers for trying to scapegoat him for the current administration's mistake.

We will have all the angles tonight. Did President Clinton really do more than the current president to try and capture or kill bin Laden, at least in the first eight months of the Bush administration? Also, was Clinton's response a calculated move to inspire Democrats?

And separating the facts from the rhetoric -- we will talk to an expert who has a timeline of what happened and when.

We begin with the coverage and CNN's Brian Todd. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BRIAN TODD, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): An extraordinary brushback from a sitting secretary of state to a former president, prompted by Bill Clinton's combative exchange with FOX News on whether he did enough to pursue al Qaeda.


WILLIAM J. CLINTON, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I tried. So, I tried and failed. When I failed, I left a comprehensive anti-terror strategy and the best guy in the country, Dick Clarke, who got demoted.


TODD: Condoleezza Rice fires back, telling the editorial board of "The New York Post," "We were not left with a comprehensive strategy to fight al Qaeda."

But she stopped short of calling President Clinton a liar.

And, from the other side:

SEN. HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON (D), NEW YORK: And I'm certain that, if my husband and his national security team had been shown a classified report entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States," he would have taken it more seriously than history suggests it was taken by our current president and his national security team.

TODD: So, what does the record show? The 9/11 Commission report does mention a plan to roll back al Qaeda launched after the 1998 embassy attacks in Africa.

P.J. CROWLEY, DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL DEFENSE AND HOMELAND SECURITY, CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS: There as extensive planning, you know, through the Clinton administration. And Richard Clarke presented that Delenda Plan to Condi Rice in February 2001.

TODD: Delenda, then counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke's initiative to go after al Qaeda's financial network, train and arm its enemies, take out its leaders. Clarke did not return our calls and e- mail. The 9/11 report says, after Clarke presented the plan to Rice -- quote -- "Rice and her then aide Stephen Hadley began to address the issues."

SEAN MCCORMACK, STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN: They took a look at this plan, decided that they needed -- there were missing components to it.

TODD: Like a detailed plan for dealing with Pakistan.

A Clinton administration official concedes it was difficult to engage with Pakistan then, because it had recently tested nuclear weapons, and Pervez Musharraf had taken over in a military coup. As for the classified report entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.," that was shown to President Bush just one month before the September 11 attacks.

One spectator to this blame game, New York's former mayor.

RUDY GIULIANI (R), FORMER NEW YORK MAYOR: The people to blame for September 11 are the terrorists who did it, who are our enemies, who are at war with us, not President Bush, not President Clinton.

TODD (on camera): The 9/11 Commission report is fairly evenhanded on all of this, saying that, while the Bush administration was initially lukewarm to Richard Clarke's Delenda Plan, it did, in the months before 9/11, start to implement parts of it, by exploring ways to work with al Qaeda's enemies, and by starting to pressure Pakistan to crack down on the Taliban.

Brian Todd, CNN, Washington.


COOPER: Well, while there may be plenty of game over bin Laden to go around, it seems that the Clinton administration did alert the Bush White House about al Qaeda. The question is, was it enough?

For more, I spoke to CNN senior political correspondent Candy Crowley and CNN senior national correspondent John Roberts. They joined me earlier.


COOPER: So, John, now you have Condi Rice asserting that the Bush administration did just as much to kill bin Laden as the Clinton administration did in the preceding years, which is, of course, one of Bush's strengths, terrorism.

How worried do you think the Bush administration is that Clinton's accusations are going to stick?

JOHN ROBERTS, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Oh, they're -- they are very worried, which is why Condoleezza Rice came out so quickly to say, hey, listen, we were after bin Laden true.

And the 9/11 Commission does a little bit back her -- back her up on that a little bit, reporting that they had a few meetings on it. They were working on a presidential directive, wanting to -- quote -- "break the back of al Qaeda."

But it really -- there wasn't a lot of follow-through on that until after September the 11th, when everything changed. For her to say that they were doing as much as the Clinton administration, and the 9/11 Commission recognized that, perhaps might be not exactly true to what the 9/11 Commission said.

But you got to take a look at what President Clinton is right now. Remember, in the 2004 campaign, the 2002 campaign, he wasn't -- wasn't really that visible. The 2000 campaign, Al Gore didn't want anything to do with him.

But now he's out. He's out there all the time. He's credible. Many former Republicans -- many Republicans who I have talked to say that, you know, they couldn't stand him when he was in office, but he looks like a statesman now. So, people are listening to what he's saying, Anderson.

And when he says something critical about this administration, when he stands up and fights, the administration has to take notice.

COOPER: Candy, I mean, a sign of his power that, two days after that interview on -- on -- on -- with Chris Wallace, people are still talking about it.

Do you think there was a political angle to his outburst? I mean, was it planned?

CANDY CROWLEY, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: You know, certainly, the president has some -- the former president has some deep feelings about this. And nobody wants having ignored a threat to be part of their legacy.

Having said that, look, it's a political season. And what have the Democrats wanted to put out there? They have wanted to put out there that they are just as aggressive and that they can make America safer than Republicans.

They have had a hard time getting that out sort of on a national platform. Along comes their best spokesman, their most popular politician, and, by the way, their most -- their best political strategist.

So, Clinton has been telling Democrats across the board: Listen, you have got to speak up on national security. You have got to be tough and show that you are tough on national security. That he did this on national television I don't think is a coincidence.

COOPER: John, do you think it was a calculated move on Clinton's part?

ROBERTS: Well, I -- I covered him for a year-and-a-half, Anderson.

And -- and this guy doesn't get surprised by very much. He usually goes into everything he does very much prepared. You know, I -- I -- I do not really want to given an opinion here, but, from observing him, it might be safe to say that he had some things to say. He was waiting for the opportune moment.

And while Chris Wallace, it would appear, from a journalistic standpoint, was asking a legitimate question, the way that President Clinton picked up on it might be an indication that he was prepared for just such an event.

COOPER: You know, Hillary Clinton said her husband "did a great job" -- and I'm quoting -- "did a great job in demonstrating that Democrats are not going to take these attacks."

I mean, Candy, do the Democrats gain from all this?

CROWLEY: I think the net gain is for -- for the Democrats, if you are sort of parsing this along political lines, because, again, it just gave visibility to what they have been trying to say in an election that all of them believe will turn on national security and, in particular, on the Democrats' ability to at least tamp down some of what has been the Republican advantage.

COOPER: John, Candy, thanks.


COOPER: Well, the war of words over bin Laden is one thing, but the facts are another.

Helping us with the fact is Lawrence Wright of "The New Yorker" magazine. He's also the author of the bestselling new book "The Looming Tower: Al Qaeda and the Road to 9/11," which is, in my opinion, the best book that has been written about al Qaeda thus far. And if you have not read it, you really should.

We spoke earlier.


COOPER: So, Condoleezza Rice says that the notion that, for eight months, the Bush administration didn't do anything, she says that's -- is just downright false. And she thinks the 9/11 Commission understood that.

Is she right?

LAWRENCE WRIGHT, AUTHOR, "THE LOOMING TOWER: AL QAEDA AND THE ROAD TO 9/11": Well, they didn't do nothing. Even President Bush said, though, that he didn't feel a sense of urgency.

And his administration, when he came into office, was very divided about al Qaeda. For instance, the State Department accepted the fact that al Qaeda posed a real threat. But the Justice Department, one of the first things that John Ashcroft did was to cut the FBI request for analysts and translators, that they desperately needed.

And -- and the Defense Department was fixated on Iraq. So, it was an administration that had not formed a coherent policy. And they -- I have to say that they did begin, soon on, to try to develop a comprehensive plan, an systemic approach to al Qaeda. And -- but it was slow in being produced. And not until mid-summer did they get a draft.

And not until the Tuesday before 9/11 did the president's principal advisers meet to consider it.

COOPER: So, do you think he -- President Bush was ill-served by his advisers?

WRIGHT: I think that President Bush and his predecessor, President Clinton, were both ill-served by the intelligence community, that was supposed to be providing information that they could operate on.


COOPER: And an intelligence community which, I mean, as your book so clearly reveals, was just completely not working together.


COOPER: I mean, the CIA was hiding information from the FBI, and had been for years.


It is interesting to look at. You know, when the -- when we're talking about, you know, the -- like, the -- the 2000 election was going on, neither candidate Bush, nor candidate Gore spoke very much about terrorism, even though the Cole bombing took place 25 days before the election.

The intelligence community found out that two al Qaeda members had come to America in January of 2000, just before Bush took office, and didn't tell the FBI. So, this was, you know, 20 months before 9/11.

COOPER: And the claim by -- well, by -- by many conservatives that Clinton didn't go far enough to try to kill Osama bin Laden, what do you think of that?

WRIGHT: Well, he didn't.

You know, he approved the idea of having -- having bin Laden killed, but he never approved any particular plan. And I think that's because, when he told the CIA to get bin Laden, they didn't have anybody that could get bin Laden. The intelligence community has been downgrading human intelligence since the Carter administration.

And by the time Clinton said, "I want him," they had so few people in the field. They had nobody that could speak those languages, that were from those communities. There simply was no one that could pass through the membrane that al Qaeda had erected.

So, he says, "Get them." They can't. And, so, he was ill-served by a community that could not respond to his direct order.

COOPER: Lawrence Wright, thank you for being on the program.

WRIGHT: Thank you, Anderson. It was a pleasure.


COOPER: Well, the debate is not going away any time soon. It is a subject that people cannot seem to stop writing or reading about. Here's the "Raw Data."

Five years after 9/11, you can buy more than 3,000 nonfiction books and articles about al Qaeda on -- also available, nearly 3,500 books about Osama bin Laden, and more than 4,300 on the war on terror.

Straight ahead: Is the war in Iraq making us less safe? Now, the president has been saying for months it is helping to keep us safe, but is that really what a newly declassified report says? You are going to hear for yourself.

And then this -- take a look.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We would be prepared to pay 10,000 U.S. dollars for one child.


COOPER: They are bargaining over a baby. Inside -- we are going to take you inside a market where tiny lives are bought and sold. And it is hiding in the heart of Europe. You are not going to believe this report.

Stay tuned on 360.


COOPER: All-too-common scenes, fighting in Iraq -- more than 2,700 American troops have now died there, three-and-a-half years into the war, six weeks away from midterm elections. And, yes, it is very political now -- the latest, a partisan battle over a key question: Is the war in Iraq making global terror worse?

Today, President Bush took the extraordinary step of declassifying portions of a national intelligence estimate, four pages out of some 30 pages. He did it to rebut some earlier leaks from the same report. The question is: Has it worked? Or did it maybe backfire?

In a moment, you can judge for yourself.

First, though, Elaine Quijano on the politics.


ELAINE QUIJANO, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): President Bush launched a full-throated political defense, attacking what he called the politically motivated leaking of a classified national intelligence estimate dealing partly with Iraq.

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It will stop all the speculation, all the politics about somebody saying something about Iraq. John Negroponte, the DNI, is going to declassify the document as quickly as possible. He declassified the key judgments. QUIJANO: The president suggested, his critics do not understand the war against terrorists.

BUSH: Well, they don't see what I see. They're out there. They're mean. And they need to be brought to justice.

QUIJANO: President Bush noted, the NIE was completed in April and leaked just weeks before congressional midterm elections. The president came prepared with talking points on the subject.

BUSH: We weren't in Iraq when they first attacked the World Trade Center in 1993.

QUIJANO: But he insisted he was not declassifying it for political purposes.

BUSH: Because I want you to read the document so you don't speculate about what it says.

QUIJANO: Democrats say it is perfectly clear what the documents say: The Iraq war has made the U.S. less safe.

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA), MINORITY LEADER: It is long overdue for this administration, the Bush administration, to speak truth to the American people on what's happening in Iraq and how it affects our safety.

QUIJANO: The president was asked about comments by former President Clinton critical of his pre-9/11 efforts to find Osama bin Laden. Mr. Bush said he didn't want to comment, but he did say that he didn't have time for what he called finger-pointing. And, then, he did take the time to define his opponent's views.

BUSH: And -- but there's a difference of opinion. It will become clear during this campaign, where people will say: Get out, leave, before the job is done.

And those are good, decent, patriotic people who believe that way. I just happen to believe they're absolutely wrong.

QUIJANO: Afghan President Hamid Karzai, a crucial U.S. ally in the war on terror, stood shoulder-to-shoulder with President Bush.

HAMID KARZAI, PRESIDENT, AFGHANISTAN: Terrorism was hurting us way before Iraq or September 11. And how do we fight them? How do we get rid of them, other than going after them? Should we wait for them to come and kill us again?


COOPER: Elaine, how is the White House explaining what this NIE report says, which is that there has been an increase in the number of jihadists?

QUIJANO: Yes, it's interesting. The president's homeland security adviser late tonight held a briefing by phone with reporters. And she was asked about that very point. She said that it is very difficult to count the number of jihadists, but she did concede that there certainly has been an increase in the jihadist rhetoric -- Anderson.

COOPER: Well, we're -- we are going to put that question to Republican Senator Saxby Chambliss a little bit later on.

Elaine, thanks joining us.

QUIJANO: Mmm-hmm.

COOPER: Now those four declassified pages and exactly what they say.

CNN's Tom Foreman investigates.


TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): For days Iraq's effect on worldwide terrorism has been debated -- the White House, effectively, saying, the war is beating terrorists down -- critics saying, it is enraging them and building the terrorist threat up.

Now a summary of the report that started the scuffle is out. And, as it is with the war itself, neither side seems to have won.

Cal Temple is a former Department of Defense counterterrorism official.

CAL TEMPLE, TERRORISM RESEARCH CENTER: It is not a dismal bad- news story, and it is not a front-line or headline newspaper saying that we're winning or we have won.

FOREMAN: Key judgments include plenty for America to worry about.

"Jihadists are increasing in both number and geographic dispersion," the report says. "If this trend continues, threats to U.S. interests at home and abroad will become more diverse, leading to increasing attacks worldwide. The Iraq conflict has become the cause celebre for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of U.S. involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement."

It says attacks in Europe demonstrate how radicals are hiding in Muslim communities there and seeking a gateway to America.

TEMPLE: Europe is six hours away from Manhattan, Washington, D.C., and nine hours away from L.A. And, so, it is the air bridge, if you will, to the United States.

FOREMAN: But other judgments show the administration's Iraq goals are on target.

"If democratic reform efforts in Muslim-majority nations progress over the next five years, political participation probably would drive a wedge between intransigent extremists and groups willing to use the political process."

It notes some moderate Muslim clerics are condemning terrorist violence, and most Muslims don't want an ultraconservative religious state.

The report says, if key leaders keep being killed or arrested, the entire terrorist movement will splinter and weaken, and, "Should jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves, and be perceived, to have failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight."

(on camera): In many ways, no matter how you read this, it seems like it really does come down to Iraq.

TEMPLE: We have got a lot more hard work to do in Iraq. But, sure, if -- if democracy succeeds there, we win; they lose. And, if it doesn't, they have won the battle.

FOREMAN (voice-over): Whether the White House won or lost politically by releasing the report is a whole different fight.

Tom Foreman, CNN, Washington.


COOPER: Well, in a moment, a reality check -- no need for classified intelligence. We will ask CNN's Michael Ware and Peter Bergen for their take on the controversy and the war from the front lines.

And later: babies for sale to anyone, no background checks. Just come up with the cash. The problem is hiding in plain sight. And we will reveal it tonight -- when 360 continues.


COOPER: Is a Iraq a breeding ground for global terror? Forget about the politics. We will get the facts on the ground -- 360 next.



WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Do you stand by what you wrote in the book, as far as the war in Iraq and its effect on the global war on terrorism?

PERVEZ MUSHARRAF, PAKISTANI PRESIDENT: Well, I stand by it, absolutely.

BLITZER: So, you disagree with the president of the United States?

MUSHARRAF: Well, I have stated whatever I had to, that this has -- it has made the world a more dangerous place.


COOPER: That was Pakistan's president in "THE SITUATION ROOM" today.

He doesn't need an intelligence estimate by the U.S. to tell him about global terror. He's nearly been the victim of it twice. He's living it.

So is CNN's Michael Ware on the ground in Iraq and CNN terrorism Peter Bergen, perhaps the foremost authority on Osama bin Laden.

Guys, thanks for being with us.

Peter, this NIE report says that the global jihadist movement at this point lacks a coherent strategy and is decentralized, yet the numbers of jihadists are increasing, and it is spreading out.

How much cooperation is there within the jihadist world?

PETER BERGEN, CNN TERRORISM ANALYST: Well, you know, you have al got Qaeda. You have got affiliated groups. You have got like-minded. You have got sort of people who are wannabes.

I think they are united in a desire to attack, you know, the United States, Jews and Westerners. So, there is some kind of unity. And I think bin Laden supplies a lot of overall strategic direction, as -- along with Ayman al-Zawahri. And it is not an accident, for instance, that al Qaeda in Iraq has repeatedly kind of sworn allegiance to al Qaeda central.

So, I would take some kind of issue with a notion that there is no overall direction, at least in the sort of big picture.

COOPER: Michael Ware, you know, some Republicans are saying, well, look, if it wasn't Iraq, it would be Afghanistan; it would be somewhere else.

Is there something about Iraq, however, that has allowed all these groups, has allowed the numbers of jihadists to -- to grow so -- so -- so quickly?


I mean, this is the melting pot. I mean, after Afghanistan, you know, the argument might be that it would have been somewhere else. Well, there was no somewhere else at that point. I mean, we see the jihad movement have it -- have its own fashions and trends, like a free market, that recruits and money to go -- go to the places and the causes that are -- they're the hottest or that attract the most attention.

People want to see literally more bang for their buck. Now, after Afghanistan, there was no such place. It was only with the invasion of Iraq that jihadists, particularly Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, saw the great opportunity they were looking for to create and cement this whole new generation of jihad -- Anderson. COOPER: You know, Peter, as you pointed out, it's kind of a misnomer to say, well, if it wasn't Iraq, it would be Afghanistan. It is still Afghanistan, as we just saw when we were there. They are still fighting there. Al Qaeda is still active there. The Taliban is still active there.

But -- but is there an argument to be made that it is better to be fighting them in Baghdad now than, you know, in Boston or somewhere else; it's better to have them centralized in one place than it is to have them spread out?

BERGEN: I think that argument works, if you assume there is a finite group of people you can attract to one place and kill.

But we seem to have expanded that group of people. The national intelligence estimate says we have expanded that group of people. This is not a -- a group of left, you know, sort of flaming liberals who are saying this. This is the considered collective opinion of 16 separate U.S. intelligence agencies, saying that there are more jihadis as a result of the Iraq war.

And, then, it would be far -- if the Iraq war went on for infinity, that would be fine, too. But it is not. You know, eventually, it will end. And not all these people will be killed there. And they are going to go on and be the shock troops of the new inter jihad -- we -- international jihad. We have run the videotape once before in Afghanistan during the '80s. We know what that outcome was.

And I think a separate -- another separate point is, yes, it is true we were attacked before the Iraq war, in the first Trade Center attack in '93 and other attacks. But that doesn't take away the fact that terrorism figures have basically gone exponential since 2003. When the 2006 figures come out, I think it is going to be a pretty sobering set of figures -- Anderson.

COOPER: Michael, when -- when Peter and I and Nic Robertson were in Afghanistan just a couple weeks ago, U.S. soldiers on the ground who had served in Iraq were -- were telling us they were seeing people, trainers, coming from Iraq, training Taliban, training fighters there in Afghanistan in IEDs and suicide attacks.

Do you see evidence on the ground in Iraq that there are extremists who have trained in Iraq, who are then moving out into the rest of the world?

WARE: Well, we -- we are starting to see hints of that.

And we have been over some time. We have seen the detention of -- of jihadis, veterans of Iraq, in a number of surrounding countries, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, to a lesser extent, even in -- in Lebanon.

One of the great things about al Qaeda -- I mean, the strength of al Qaeda is that it is an idea. It is more of an inspiration. I mean, al Qaeda itself has always been a very small nexus, a hub. And the spokes of the wheel that emanate around that are the various multitude of organizations that al Qaeda sponsors, supports, trains, finances, advises.

So, this is really about inspiration. And that's we see is most potent here. Iraq gives them an even greater platform for that inspiration and this sharing of lessons learned, what works best and what doesn't. As we see happens over the -- over the Internet, it doesn't even require the physical transportation of an individual anymore -- Anderson.

COOPER: Michael, just briefly, do the -- the intelligence sources and the military sources that you talk to on the ground in Iraq, do they feel like their reports are taken seriously once they are sent back home?

WARE: This is really is an ongoing issue here, Anderson. Within the country itself, example, in one of the hot spots, the al Qaeda front line of Ramadi, for a year intelligence officers there say that they write their reports and send them even back to Baghdad and they're not understood.

And I've spoken to someone who was in Baghdad, or we'd get these reports, and they'd diminish them. That couldn't possibly have been true, he said. However, having spent time in Ramadi now, he understands this disconnect.

Also, we see reports emanating from the embassy here that wind up back in Washington. They then return in sanitized documents so the people who put them together simply cannot believe. Yes, there seems to be a great disconnect between those on the ground and sometimes what's being told even to the president, Anderson.

COOPER: That's probably the most troubling thing I've heard from both of you guys tonight. Michael Ware, appreciate it. Peter Bergen, as well. Thanks, guys.

Straight ahead, two views of the same intelligence. A Republican senator and a Democrat. They've seen the same document that we've seen and more and guess what? They see it completely differently. We're going to have both of their sides coming up.

Later, he was accused, arrested, and then taken away to Syria. He was accused of being a member of al Qaeda. He was sent to Syria and tortured. Just one problem. There was no real evidence, and it could happen to you. 360 investigates next.


COOPER: Well, politics, a famous senator once said, stops at the river's edge. Not anymore. So two views now, Democrat and Republican, of the war on terror, the intelligence and what we learned today from this newly declassified NIE, or at least parts of it.

First, Senator Saxby Chambliss, Republican of Georgia. I spoke to him earlier.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) COOPER: Senator, the declassified report says that Jihadists are increasing in both number and geographic dispersion and, quote, "if this trend continues, threats to U.S. interests at home and abroad will become more diverse, leading to increasing attacks worldwide."

Doesn't that directly contradict what President Bush has been saying, that we're safer since we went to war in Iraq?

SEN. SAXBY CHAMBLISS (R), GEORGIA: No, I don't think so. I think it kind of confirms what he said. Because what this report says is that with the takedown of the number of Jihadists and al Qaeda members that we have taken down in Iraq, that there is a likelihood that there's going to be dispersal. So that's kind of a natural consequence of our successes of taking down their leadership.

COOPER: The report is -- it talks about a geographic dispersion. It is saying that the Jihadists are increasing in number. Isn't that a worrying sign?

CHAMBLISS: Listen, let's don't be surprised about the fact that if you have terrorist tendencies and you've been sitting in some part of France or Germany or wherever you've been and you have these tendencies, you want to go where the action is. And the action is in Iraq.

And what the president has been saying and what any number of us have been saying is that's where we want the focus of the war on terrorism to be. That is where it is.

COOPER: Wouldn't it have been easier, though, to sort of fight them where they were and keep them geographically dispersed, keep them isolated one from the other, rather than allowing them to coalesce in a country like Iraq?

CHAMBLISS: You know, it's -- if you've got them congregated, frankly, it's a lot easier to take them down.

If they were dispersed around the world -- and let's make no mistake about it, Anderson. We know that there are an awful lot of terrorists scattered around the world today who are not in Iraq. So I'm not naive enough to think that that's not the case. But the fact is that the worst of the worst are inside of Iraq.

COOPER: It seems like this report is still going to be used by either side of the aisle and sort of people picking and choosing paragraphs to suit their arguments. Some are calling now for the entire report to be declassified. Do you think it should be?

CHAMBLISS: I think it should be, because there has been an indication in the press that this is a report just on the war on Iraq and that's not the case. I mean, it is a report on the global war on terrorism. We do these periodically.

And since this one, for reasons known only to the "Times" and "The Post", they seek to once again give away a lot of our secrets. And I think the American people ought to see the entire report. COOPER: Senator Chambliss, appreciate your time. Thank you.



COOPER: That was Saxby Chambliss, Republican of Georgia. Richard Durbin of Illinois, the Senate Democratic whip. He also joined me earlier.


COOPER: Senator Durbin, even though this report says that the number of Jihadists are increasing and spreading, Senator Chambliss says that the report supports Bush's argument about the war in Iraq, basically keeping the Jihadists in Iraq concentrated makes fighting them easier. Does that make sense to you?

SEN. RICHARD DURBIN (D), ILLINOIS: No, it doesn't. It doesn't follow at all. The report is very clear.

The president has argued, and I suppose his followers argue, that we're going to fight them over there so we don't have to fight them over here. Well, our intelligence agencies say that, in the course of fighting them over there, their numbers are increasing and spreading across the world.

So that particular argument does not sound and doesn't follow what the intelligence estimate tells us.

COOPER: The estimate does say, though, that if you beat Jihadists in Iraq, you demoralize them, and if you allow them to win and they go elsewhere, they're going to continue Jihad elsewhere and spread -- spread this further.

Republicans are now pointing to that and saying you can't pull out. You can't withdraw. You can't redeploy as Democrats want and that the NIE proves that.

DURBIN: Look, you have to ask yourself what is the next step? Does that mean we stay indefinitely? We had a Marine colonel yesterday, a retired colonel who said we're going to be there another 10 years plus.

I think the question we were asking is what does it take to get Iraqis to stand up and fight and defend their own country? We've had very, very poor luck so far in training police and army to replace American soldiers.

COOPER: The White House is also saying, look, terrorists have hated us for years. If it wasn't in Iraq, it would be somewhere else.

DURBIN: Well, I guess you can make that argument, but the intelligence estimates told us that, as of 9/11, there were 20,000 members of al Qaeda worldwide. Now there are 50,000. The trend line is going in the wrong direction. We have to be tough. I agree. This is a dangerous world, and there are people who want to kill us. But we have to be smart in our policies, and we have to have a strategy that really starts winning this worldwide struggle. So that America is a leader and accepted around the world.

COOPER: Is it -- is it appropriate to you that this administration has had this NIE now since back in April, and for the last several months they have been going out touting a message that we are making progress in Iraq in the war in terror, and to your point, that doesn't seem to be proven by this NIE.

DURBIN: This National Intelligence Estimate that administration has had for so long doesn't square with the message that's been given to us by the president and Vice President Cheney over the last several weeks.

I think this estimate has to be taken at face value. It tells us our challenge in Iraq is much more complicated than the president led to us to believe, and that we need to step back and talk about a new direction that has us end up in Iraq with a stable country that is able to fight off Iran or any terrorists who try to invade.

COOPER: Senator Durbin, we appreciate your time. Thank you.

DURBIN: Thank you.


COOPER: Well, the other big story that we are following tonight, human trafficking. It is a big problem in many parts of the world. Rarely seen, however.

Tonight we're going to show you an undercover investigation, and you'll see for yourself why even a crackdown will not stop the sale of babies in one very sad marketplace not so far away, when 360 continues.


COOPER: Today Romania and Bulgaria were cleared to join the European Union in January. That's expected to be formally approved next month.

Though the E.U. says that both countries have come up short in their race to catch up with Western Europe in several key areas and they have to file a report every six months to prove that they're on track.

For Romania, a big issue has been human trafficking, especially the trafficking of children. The government says it is cracking down on the practice, but ITN's Chris Rogers tells us there are still plenty of babies available for a price. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) CHRIS ROGERS, ITN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): International adoption was banned here to stop pedophiles and sex traffickers from preying on what were effectively child supermarkets. It hasn't worked.

Cameraman Tony Hemmings (ph) and I, posing as married men, looking for a child each, took his hidden camera to film our undercover shopping trip.

With shocking ease and speed, we meet our first child for sale.

(on camera) A message for my wife.

(voice-over) We pretend to film a home video to make a record of our prize finds. She's taught to smile for the camera. How many times has she been paraded as an object to buy?

(on camera) This is Andrea. She's 3 years old. And her mother has said that she would like it if we took her away to give her a better life, an education.

Hello. I'm Chris.

(voice-over) And another message for my fictional life. We can buy an unborn baby.

(on camera) Seven months pregnant.

OK. So we've just been brought here and -- by another mother in the village, who has introduced us to Adine (ph). She's 18. Her family decided they don't want to have another baby, and they're willing to sell the baby to us if we come back in a few months' time to make sure the baby is healthy.

How much money would she want for baby? How much does she think it's worth?

(voice-over) "If God blesses my daughter with good health," she says, "then we can receive your money. When it's born we'll talk money."

Of course, we had no intention of coming back.

If Adina (ph) doesn't sell her baby and can't afford to keep it, it's likely she'll leave her child in the hospital. The authorities are supposed to send unwanted babies to local foster families. But that is not happening here. The authorities claim that only three babies are being held in this hospital. The footage, filmed recently by a charity to prove there are, in fact, 18.

A nurse who works here believes babies are held back from the foster system by parents and social workers to be sold on.

To find out if they really are for sale, we tracked down the mother of one of the abandoned babies. Eva has five children, but only one is for sale, the 3-month-old in the hospital. He should be under the care of her legal authority.

"You can take her," she says. "I haven't signed papers for fostering. She's the most beautiful of my children. You will like her. She has blue eyes like you."

(on camera) What would she expect for her child? I need to know.

(voice-over) Eva says the money she received from Americans for another daughter bought her house. "I was paid in cash," she says.

(on camera) She is telling us to name the price. She's telling us to name the price.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, certainly there's been talk of $20,000 U.S. exchanging hands, but maybe we should say $10,000 U.S. for a child.

ROGERS: We would be prepared to pay $10,000 U.S. dollars for one child. $10,000.

(voice-over) Sold. A 3-month old baby for the price of a new car.

We never returned to give Eva her money. If we had been genuine buyers, it would have been easy to take the children across the border. As we entered Hungary, our cars and passports were not checked.

And this even before Romania joins the borderless E.U. Like thousands of mothers, Eva will now be waiting for the next buyer, whoever they are, whatever their motives.

Chris Rogers, ITV News, Romania.


COOPER: It is an unbelievable report. It does not stop there. We just saw how easy it is to buy babies in Romania. But what does the future hold for those not sold? Some shocking video from some of the other institutions where they are forced to live. That's next on 360.


COOPER: As we saw before the break, the ban on international adoptions has not stopped the sale of babies in Romania. But there are other children left behind, and they are at the mercy of overwhelmed hospitals and other institutions.

ITN's Chris Rogers takes us inside.


ROGERS (voice-over): Dumped in a Romanian hospital, she's one of thousands abandoned each year. The lucky ones are saved, fostered. Many are condemned to virtual prisons, driven mad in appalling conditions, confined to miserable institutions until they die.

We are armed with fake aide worker I.D., but there are too few nurses on these eerily quiet wards to notice us. They are understaffed, under resourced, yet teaming with Romania's abandoned.

Some are starving, left somehow to feed themselves. They are simply unwanted, but others are dumped because of birth defects. Inus (ph) has been here seven years and treated for cerebral palsy.

As a condition of Romania's forthcoming E.U. membership, orphanages for young children were closed and replaced with a local fostering program, but children's charities claim the system is overwhelmed. And according to one nurse, many hospitals have instead become orphanages with horrific consequences.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (through translator): I think the hospital is like a zoo. They live like animals all day in their cots. And that makes the children become physically and mentally damaged. To stop this institutionalization, we need more help so we can offer love to the abandoned children and stop them from becoming disabled.

ROGERS: An aide worker showed us children crippled from lying on their backs for months on end.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: She can't sit up.

ROGERS: This loveless wards also create mental scars, the rocking motion a common side effect. I was witnessing the creation of mentally ill and physically disabled children, destined for the country's most horrific homes.

This is an institute for disabled children, typical of several we saw, but here a nurse let us film. She's tired of hiding her country's failure. Some have been born mentally ill, but many had arrived in need of little more than love and attention.

(on camera) We are surrounded by victims of institutionalization here, and this is the treatment they receive. You're looking right at it. They sit on the benches all day or just lie here on the rug, some of them with their hands tied behind their backs to protect themselves but also the other children.

(voice-over) Here, our bogus charity work got us inside this adult institute, the final resting place for Romania's unwanted. Two 18-year-olds are confined to a bed together. After a life in orphanages, we're told they've lost the will to live.

Romania promised to tackle its child welfare problems. So why does this abandoned baby still face a life of neglect and cruelty?

Chris Rogers, ITV News, Romania.


COOPER: If would you like more information on how you can help thousands of Romanian children in need, you can go to the web site,

Coming up, the "Shot of the Day". But first, Erica Hill from Headline News has a 360 bulletin -- Erica.

ERICA HILL, HEADLINE NEWS ANCHOR: Anderson, we begin in Gaza where Palestinian hospital sources say a 13-year-old girl was killed and three other people wounded in an Israeli air strike. Israeli officials say the building was used as a cover for a weapons smuggling tunnel.

Federal health officials have found more bagged spinach tainted with the deadly E. Coli bacteria. The bags were found in Pennsylvania, Illinois and Ohio. At least one death is blamed on the outbreak. Two possible deaths are being investigated. And so far there have been 183 infections in 26 states confirmed.

The jury in the accused mob boss John Gotti racketeering trial has now been ordered to keep deliberating. The jury said today they were deadlocked after meeting for six days. This is Gotti's third racketeering trial. Two earlier ones ended in mistrials, and if convicted Gotti faces up to 30 years in prison.

And a teddy bear may be responsible for killing more than 2,000 fish at a state hatchery in New Hampshire. Wildlife officials say the bear somehow fell into a pool at the hatchery earlier this month and clogged a drain, which cut off the oxygen supply and suffocated 2,500 trout, Anderson. I don't think the teddy bear meant to do it, though.

COOPER: That's a bizarre story. Not as great as this one. Check out the "Shot of the Day". Take a look. Where is it? There it is. It's not a houseboat. It's a house on a boat.

A 220-ton, three-story Victorian mansion was floated across Tampa Bay in Florida up the Little Manatee River to its new waterfront location. The home had to leave its old place to make room for a complex of condos, offices and a bunch of shops. A couple bought this house in 1910 -- is when it was built -- bought it for a buck from the developers who were going knock it down.

HILL: That's the kind of house I need. A dollar?

COOPER: I would love that. And that's an amazing house.

HILL: It is.

COOPER: And it's so cool that they preserved it. It's a 1910 historical house. They paid a buck for it. They floated it on the barge and...

HILL: It looks beautiful. Now I have to say, I was trying to find out earlier what it cost to float it down, to augment the cost of the house.

COOPER: Right.

HILL: One of our writers found this. They're not disclosing the cost of the move, but the mover apparently cut them a deal, because of all of the publicity he's getting from the project. Smart businessman.

COOPER: Yes, there you go. I like it when they preserve old houses.

HILL: Me, too.

COOPER: God knows we don't need another condo.

HILL: No, I don't think we do. Not in Atlanta.

COOPER: Especially not in Florida. Erica, thanks.

HILL: Thanks.

COOPER: A lot more to come tonight, including the partisan brawl over the hunt for Osama bin Laden. In one corner the secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice. In the other, well, Bill and Hillary Clinton. Who scored the knockout? We'll take a look at that.

And he's a hawk in the war on Iraq, so what's his take on today's declassified intelligent report and whether Iraq is making the terror problem worse.

And he fell into a twilight zone of torture. Arrested, sent to Syria, now free to tell his terrifying story when 360 continues.


COOPER: We'll take you on the campaign trail, following the money trail. Keeping them honest when 360 continues.


COOPER: The war over Iraq and global terror is now a war over intelligence. Today, President Bush dropped an intelligence bombshell.

ANNOUNCER: Secrets revealed.


ANNOUNCER: Is the war in Iraq creating more terrorists? Today, the president takes action to try and answer the question, did it backfire?


© 2007 Cable News Network.
A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved.
Terms under which this service is provided to you.
Read our privacy guidelines. Contact us. Site Map.
Offsite Icon External sites open in new window; not endorsed by
Pipeline Icon Pay service with live and archived video. Learn more
Radio News Icon Download audio news  |  RSS Feed Add RSS headlines