http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/ ... 7607.shtml




(CBS) Veteran Washington reporter Bob Woodward tells Mike Wallace that the Bush administration has not told the truth regarding the level of violence, especially against U.S. troops, in Iraq. He also reveals key intelligence that predicts the insurgency will grow worse next year.

In Wallace’s interview with Woodward, to be broadcast on 60 Minutes this Sunday, Oct. 1, at 7 p.m. ET/PT, the reporter also claims that Henry Kissenger is among those advising Mr. Bush.

According to Woodward, insurgent attacks against coalition troops occur, on average, every 15 minutes, a shocking fact the administration has kept secret. "It’s getting to the point now where there are eight-, nine-hundred attacks a week. That's more than 100 a day. That is four an hour attacking our forces," says Woodward.

The situation is getting much worse, says Woodward, despite what the White House and the Pentagon are saying in public. "The truth is that the assessment by intelligence experts is that next year, 2007, is going to get worse and, in public, you have the president and you have the Pentagon [saying], 'Oh, no, things are going to get better,'" he tells Wallace. "Now there’s public, and then there’s private. But what did they do with the private? They stamp it secret. No one is supposed to know," says Woodward.

"The insurgents know what they are doing. They know the level of violence and how effective they are. Who doesn't know? The American public," Woodward tells Wallace.

Woodward also reports that the president and vice president often meet with Henry Kissinger, who was President Richard Nixon’s secretary of state, as an adviser. Says Woodward, "Now what’s Kissinger’s advice? In Iraq, he declared very simply, ‘Victory is the only meaningful exit strategy.'" Woodward adds. "This is so fascinating. Kissinger’s fighting the Vietnam War again because, in his view, the problem in Vietnam was we lost our will."

President Bush is absolutely certain that he has the U.S. and Iraq on the right course, says Woodward. So certain is the president on this matter, Woodward says, that when Mr. Bush had key Republicans to the White House to discuss Iraq, he told them, "I will not withdraw, even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me."

Woodward reported for two years and interviewed more than 200 people, including top officials in the Bush administration, to learn these and other revelations that he makes in his latest book, State of Denial, published by Simon & Schuster, part of the CBS Corp.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/10/0 ... of-denial/

(video and review - Mike L. Transcript - Jamie H.)

Full transcript below the fold.

>> Wallace: President Bush's former chief of staff, Andy Card, said the Bush presidency will be judged by three things: Iraq, Iraq, Iraq. Bob Woodward, of Watergate fame, reports that. He's just completed his third book on the Bush presidency, "state of denial." Woodward spent more than two years, interviewed more than 200 people– including most of the top officials in the administration– and he came to a damning conclusion: That for the last three years, the white house has not been honest with the American public.

>> Bob Woodward: It is the oldest story in the coverage of government: The failure to tell the truth.

>> Wallace: When you say the Bush administration has not told the truth about iraq, what do you mean?

>> Woodward: I think probably the prominent… most prominent example is the level of violence.

>> Reporter: Not just the Sunnis against Shi'as, that gets reported every day, but attacks on U.S. And allied forces. Woodward says that's the most important measure of violence in iraq, and he unearthed this graph– classified secret– that shows those attacks have increased dramatically over the last three years.

>> Woodward: Getting to the point now where there are 800, 900 attacks a week. That's more than 100 a day. Four attacks an hour, attacking our forces.

>> Wallace: Woodward says the government had kept this trend secret for years before finally declassifying the graph just three weeks ago. And Woodward accuses president Bush and the pentagon of making false claims of progress in Iraq, claims contradicted by facts that are being kept secret. For example, Woodward says an intelligence report classified secret from the joint chiefs of staff concluded– in large print– that the Sunni Arab insurgency is gaining strength and increasing capacity despite political progress. And insurgents retain the capabilities to increase the level of violence through next year. But just two days later, a public defense department report said just the opposite: "Violent action will begin to wane in early 2007." What are we supposed to make of that?

>> Woodward: The truth is that the assessment by the intelligence experts is that next year– now, next year's 2007– is going to get worse, and in public you have the president and you have the pentagon saying, "oh, no, things are going to get better." Now there's public and then there's private. But what did they do with the private? They stamp it secret. No one's supposed to know. Why is that secret? The insurgents know what they're doing. They know the level of violence and how effective they are. Who doesn't know? The American public.

>> Wallace: President Bush says over and over, as Iraqi forces stand up, U.S. Forces will stand down. The number of Iraqis in uniform today, I understand, is up to 300,000?

>> Woodward: They've stood up from essentially zero to 300,000. This is the military and the police.

>> Wallace: But U.S. Forces are not standing down. The attacks keep coming.

>> Woodward: They've stood up and up and up, and we haven't stood down. And it's worse.

>> Wallace: John Negroponte knows it's worse. He's the U.S. Director of national intelligence. And according to Woodward, Negroponte thinks the U.S. Policy in iraq is in trouble, that violence is now so widespread that the U.S. Doesn't even know about much of it, and that the killings will continue to escalate.

>> Woodward: He was the ambassador there in iraq, and now he sees all the intelligence. He believes that we're always going almost back to the beginning, miscalculated and underestimated the nature of the insurgency.

>> Wallace: Why?

>> Woodward: Why? There's this feeling, "how can a bunch of guys running around putting improvised explosive devices in dead animals and by the side of the road in cars cause all this trouble?"

>> Wallace: Woodward reports that a top general says defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld has so emasculated the joint chiefs that the chairman of the chiefs has become "the parrot on Rumsfeld's shoulder." And according to Woodward, another key general, john abizaid, who's in charge of the whole gulf region, told friends that, on Iraq, Rumsfeld has lost all credibility. What does that mean, he doesn't have any credibility anymore?

>> Woodward: That means that he cannot go public and articulate what the strategy is. Now, this is so important. They decide that the secretary of state rice will announce what the strategy is. This is October of last year.

>> Our political military strategy has to be to clear, hold and build. Clear areas from insurgent control, to hold them securely and to build durable, national Iraqi– thank you– iraqi institutions.

>> Woodward: Rumsfeld sees this and goes ballistic and says, "now wait a minute, that's not our strategy. We want to get the Iraqis to do these things." Well, it turns out George Bush and the white house liked this definition of the strategy, so it's in a presidential speech he's going to give the next month. Rumsfeld sees it. He calls Andy Card, the white house chief of staff, and says, "take it out. Take it out. That's not our strategy. We can't do that." Card says, "it's the core of what we're doing." That's two and a half years after the invasion of Iraq. They cannot agree on the definition of the strategy. They cannot agree on the bumper sticker.

>> Wallace: General john Abizaid , commander of all U.S. Forces in the middle east, you quote him as saying privately a year ago that the U.S. Should start cutting its troops in Iraq. You report that he told some close army friends, "we've got to get the 'f' out." And then this past march, general abizaid visited congressman john Murtha on capitol hill.

>> Woodward: John Murtha is, in many ways, the soul and the conscience of the military. And he came out and said, "we need to get out of Iraq as soon as it's practical." And that sent a 10,000-volt jolt through the white house.

>> Wallace: Yeah.

>> Woodward: And here's mr. Military saying, "we need to get out." And john Abizaid went to see him privately. This is Bush's and Rumsfeld's commander in iraq.

>> Wallace: Right.

>> Woodward: And john Abizaid held up his fingers, according to Murtha, and said, "we're about a quarter of an inch apart," he said. "We're that far apart."

>> Wallace: Abizaid and Murtha?

>> Woodward: That far apart.

>> Wallace: You report that after George W. Bush was reelected, his then-chief of staff, Andy Card, tried for months to convince the president to fire don rumsfeld. Why?

>> Woodward: To replace him. Because it wasn't working. Card felt very strongly that the president needed a whole new national security team.

>> Wallace: You write Laura Bush was worried that Rumsfeld was hurting her husband. Andy Card told her the president seemed happy with Rumsfeld. And the first lady replied, "he's happy with this, but I'm not." And later she said, "I don't know why he's not upset."

>> Woodward: What's interesting, Andy Card, as white house chief of staff, every six weeks set up a one-on-one meeting with laura Bush, set aside an hour and a half to talk about what's going on, what are the president's anxieties? Smart meeting.

>> Wallace: Uh-huh.

>> Woodward: And in the course of these sessions, the problem with rumsfeld came up and she voiced her concern about the situation.

>> Wallace: But Dick Cheney wanted Rumsfeld to stay. Why?

>> Woodward: Well, Rumsfeld's his guy and Cheney confided to an aide that if Rumsfeld goes, next they'll be after Cheney.

>> Wallace: Cheney stunned Woodward by revealing that a frequent advisor to the Bush white house is former secretary of state Henry Kissinger, who served presidents nixon and ford during the vietnam war.

>> Woodward: He's back. In fact, Henry Kissinger is almost like a member of the family. If he's in town, he can call up, and if the president's free, he'll see him.

>> Wallace: Woodward recorded his on-the-record interview with Cheney, and here's what the vice president said about Henry Kissinger's clout.

>> Dick Cheney: Of the outside people that I talk to in this job, I probably talk to Henry Kissinger more than just about anybody else. He just comes by, and I guess at least once a month I sit down with him.

>> Wallace: And the same with the president?

>> Woodward: Yes. Absolutely.

>> Wallace: President Bush is, i understand…

>> Woodward: A big fan of his. Now, what's Kissinger's advice? In iraq, he declared very simply: Victory is the only meaningful exit strategy. This is so fascinating. Kissinger's fighting the vietnam war again, because in his view, the problem in Vietnam was we lost our will. That we didn't stick to it.

>> Wallace: So Henry Kissinger is telling George W. Bush, "stick to it. Stay the course."

>> Woodward: That's right. It's right out of the Kissinger playbook.

>> Wallace: In his book, published by cbs sister company Simon and Shuster, Woodward reports that the first president Bush confided to one of his closest friends how upset he is that his son invaded iraq. The former president Bush is said to be in agony, anguished, tormented by the war in Iraq and its aftermath.

>> Woodward: Yes.

>> Wallace: And does he tell that to his boy?

>> Woodward: I don't know the answer to that. He tells it to brent scowcroft, his former national security advisor.

>> Wallace: You paint a picture, bob, of the president as the "cheerleader-in-chief," current reality be damned. He's convinced that he's going to succeed in iraq, yes?

>> Woodward: Yes, that's correct. Now…

>> Wallace: You believe that he believes?

>> Woodward: I do.

>> Wallace: How well do you know him?

>> Woodward: Interviewed him for the first two books for hours.

>> Wallace: And do you know what? There are people who are going to say, "loo woodward is savaging president Bush because he wouldn't see him for this book."

>> Woodward: That's not true.

>> Wallace: Well, he… he didn'T.

>> Woodward: He did not, and i asked. And I made it very clear to the white house what my questions were, what my information was. What could he say, that the secret chart is not right? That these things that happened in these meetings didn't occur? They're documented. I talked to the people who were there. Your producer, bob anderson, has listened to the tapes my interviews with people to make sure that it's not just "kind of" right, but literally right. This is what occurred.

>> Wallace: And Woodward says that no matter what's occurred in iraq, mr. Bush does not welcome any pessimistic assessments from his aides because he's sure that his war has iraq and america on the right path.

>> Woodward: Late last year, he had key republicans up to the white house to talk about the war and said, "I will not withdraw even if laura and barney are the only ones supporting me." Barney is his dog. My work on this leads to lots of people who spend hours, days with the president.

>> Wallace: Uh-huh.

>> Woodward: And in most cases, they are my best sources. And there is a concern that we need to face realism, not being the voice that says, "oh, no, everything's fine," when it's not. <

Freedom isn't free
It costs folks like you and me
And if we don't all chip in
We'll never pay that bill
Freedom isn't free
No, there's a hefty fuckin' fee.
And if you don't throw in your buck 'o five
Who will?

Myth/Fact: Five Key Myths in Bob Woodward's Book


MYTH #1: Woodward Says The Facts Of A May 24 Intelligence Assessment Refuted The President's Forecasts In A Chicago Speech Two Days Earlier. (Bob Woodward, State Of Denial, 2006)

FACT: President Bush Knows We Are In A Tough, Critical Struggle And Consistently Reminds The American People Of This, Including In His Chicago Remarks. In Chicago, the President said: "Our nation has been through three difficult years in Iraq. And the way forward will bring more days of challenge and loss." (President Bush, Remarks, Chicago, IL, 5/22/06)

President Bush: "The Path To Freedom Is Always One Of Struggle And Sacrifice. And In Iraq, Our Brave Men And Women In Uniform Have Accepted The Struggle And Have Made The Sacrifice." (President Bush, Remarks, Chicago, IL, 5/22/06)

President Bush: "The [Iraqi] Government Is Still A Work In Progress, And Overcoming Longstanding Divisions Will Take Time. Iraq's New Leaders Know They Have A Great Deal Of Work Ahead To Broaden The Base Of Their Government And To Unite The People." (President Bush, Remarks, Chicago, IL, 5/22/06)

President Bush: "And I Can Understand Why People Are Concerned About Whether Or Not Our Strategy Can Succeed, Because Our Progress Is Incremental. Freedom Is Moving, But It's In Incremental Steps." (President Bush, Remarks, Chicago, IL, 5/22/06)

President Bush's December 2005 Address To The Nation: "Yet Our Work Is Not Done. There Is More Testing And Sacrifice Before Us." "Since the removal of Saddam, this war, like other wars in our history, has been difficult. The mission of American troops in urban raids and desert patrols, fighting Saddam loyalists and foreign terrorists, has brought danger and suffering and loss. ... The work in Iraq has been especially difficult - more difficult than we expected. Reconstruction efforts and the training of Iraqi security forces started more slowly than we hoped. We continue to see violence and suffering, caused by an enemy that is determined and brutal, unconstrained by conscience or the rules of war. ... The terrorists will continue to have the coward's power to plant roadside bombs and recruit suicide bombers. And you will continue to see the grim results on the evening news." (President Bush, Address To The Nation, Washington, DC, 12/18/05)

MYTH #2: Woodward Claims The Administration Ignored Paul Bremer's Requests For More Troops. (Bob Woodward, State Of Denial, 2006)

FACT: Bremer Has Said His Request Was Considered. BREMER: "[Rumsfeld] said he'd received it and would consider it and he did he consider it." (NBC's "Meet The Press," 1/15/06)

FACT: Sec. Rumsfeld Has Said Bremer's Request Was Considered.

RUMSFELD: "Just before he left he sent a memorandum to me indicating that he thought there should be more troops, and it was within a matter of weeks before he departed. And I took that and sat down with General Myers, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and said, this is a reasonable proposal from a reasonable person; let's look at it. And he took it down into the Joint Staff and the tank and had the chiefs - and they spent several weeks in making evaluations with respect to it, and at some moment came back to me - I acknowledged receiving the memo from Jerry Bremer when I received it, told him what I was going to do with it, giving it to General Myers." (Sec. Donald Rumsfeld, Press Briefing, 1/12/06)

FACT: Gen. Pace Has Said Bremer's Request Was Considered. PACE: "Sir, we did a very thorough analysis of that recommendation and when we got done, all the chiefs agreed with the commanders in the field that the numbers of troops in the field then, as now, was appropriate to what we were fighting." (Gen. Peter Pace, Press Briefing, 1/12/06)
Tony Snow: "The Idea That Somehow The President Rejects Or Ignores Advice Is Simply Wrong." "There is a chain of command, and the chain of command involves a lot of people, and the President will give differing advice. But the idea that somehow the President rejects or ignores advice is simply wrong. And the President - and so what you have here are people making serious determinations. Donald Rumsfeld is the Secretary of Defense, and in the chain of command, he is the person who will make the recommendations. What you have not heard, I don't think, are the Generals involved in the theaters saying, I asked for something and I didn't get it. Tommy Franks' book is replete with discussions of that. And you can ask the Generals in the field, because the President has said it over and over again, if they ask for it, they'll get it." (Tony Snow, Press Briefing, 9/29/06)

MYTH #3: Woodward Claims Condoleezza Rice Brushed Off George Tenet And Cofer Black's July 2001 Warning About Al Qaeda. (Bob Woodward, State Of Denial, 2006)

FACT: According To State Department Spokesman Sean McCormack, The Recollections Portrayed By Woodward Do Not Reflect Tenet And Black's 9/11 Commission Testimony. "But Rice and other State Department officials denied [Woodward's claim], noting that the report of the Sept. 11 commission, which had sworn testimony from Tenet and others at the meeting, made no mention of the July 10 encounter. 'The recollections as portrayed in the Woodward book in no way reflect the public and private testimony under oath of those individuals to the 9/11 commission,' said Sean McCormack, the State Department spokesman." (David E. Sanger, "White House Disputes Book's Account Of Rifts On Iraq," The New York Times, 9/30/06)

MYTH #4: Woodward Claims Gen. Abazaid Alleged Sec. Rumsfeld "Doesn't Have Any Credibility Anymore." (Bob Woodward, State Of Denial, 2006)

FACT: Gen. Abizaid's Spokesman Says Gen. Abizaid Denies Saying This, And In Fact "General Abizaid Has Nothing But The Greatest Respect For Mr. Rumsfeld." (David E. Sanger, "White House Disputes Book's Account Of Rifts On Iraq," The New York Times, 9/30/06)

MYTH #5: Woodward Claims Then-Chief Of Staff Andy Card Tried To Remove Sec. Rumsfeld, And Mrs. Bush Also Wanted Him Removed. (Bob Woodward, State Of Denial, 2006)

FACT: Card Has Made Clear That Woodward Ignored The Situation's Context. "'Right after the election, I went to Camp David and talked to the president, and we talked about a lot of changes, starting with the chief of staff,' Mr. Card said, recounting how he used to tote around what he called his 'hit by a bus book,' a notebook of lists of potential replacements for senior White House staff members and top cabinet officials. 'It's not inaccurate to say that we talked about Rumsfeld,' he said. 'I can understand why Bob would try to create a climate around these conversations.' But he added: 'There was no campaign, and I didn't go out and solicit others to back any view about getting rid of anyone. I could talk about these things with the president, and plant seeds, because there is a cadence to life in Washington and you raise these issues periodically.' Mr. Card acknowledged that he renewed the question of replacing Mr. Rumsfeld this year, but again insisted that it was not part of a specific effort to single out the defense secretary for removal." (David E. Sanger, "White House Disputes Book's Account Of Rifts On Iraq," The New York Times, 9/30/06)

FACT: "Mrs. Bush's Office Has Said, Not True ... Flatly Not True." (Tony Snow, Press Briefing, Washington, DC, 9/29/06)

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases ... 930-5.html

Phew. I was wondering how I could possibly sleep again at night.

Wow, you read Woodward's book already?

No, I haven't. This was a formal response issued by the White House. Note the link at the bottom. I'm merely trying to keep things fair and balanced....who people believe is up to the individual.
Have you read Woodward's book already?

It was a decent interview; nothing really being said in the whole thing that we haven't all heard before. Apparently the war in Iraq is going badly, and there is a certain amount of uncertainty in our govt's long term plans for an exit strategy. Who knew?

Call me cynical, but the publishing house that prints Woodward's book is owned by CBS; the whole thing probably has more to do with pimping the book than anything else.

So Woodward says Condi wanted Rummy out, too.

I wonder how many people within the administration actually want to keep him there.

I'm certain al-Qaeda love the man.

I'm sorry, but I have a real hard time swallowing this...

I have never talked to anyone who was under attack every single day in Iraq. And that is exactly what this is suggesting. Particularly those in Anbar Province.

I don't think it says that every individual soldier is attacked every 15 minutes. It says that an attack happens to some soldier, somewhere in Iraq, on average, every 15 minutes.

Woodward's explanations on 60 Minutes sound plausible to me.

The only thing I might add to it is the reason why Bush may be trying to paint a pretty picture over an ugly scene. A couple thoughts, which are typical of politicians: a) he wants to hide any Iraq problems till at least November, to try to prevent GOP losses in Congress, and; b) He may just be trying to keep the genie in the bottle until he's out of office, so when all hell breaks loose after he leaves, the public and history will blame the next President instead.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out now that Bush and Clinton have dismantled the policy of Presidents not blaming other Presidents this past couple of weeks.

Hasn't Jimmy Carter been bashing Bush much earlier?

Maybe. The recent finger pointing seems to be at the next level.

"I did everything to prevent 9/11. It's HIS fault that we got hit by the terrorists."

"No. I did all kinds of shit, but it was to no avail because HE fucked up when it was HIS job."

It's beyond criticizing their policy.

i will be buying this

I'm fairly certain that whatever the outcome, Iraq's ultimate fate will be tied fast to George W. This war is his legacy, for good or ill.

Agreed.