NY B9 Farmer Misc- WH 2 of 3 Fdr- 9-5-02 Jim Lehrer-The News Hour Interview of Cheney 468

8/14/2019 NY B9 Farmer Misc- WH 2 of 3 Fdr- 9-5-02 Jim Lehrer-The News Hour Interview of Cheney 468

1/14

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

Internal Transcript September 5,2002

INTERVIEW OF THE VICE PRESIDENTBY

JIM LEHRER, THE NEWS HOUR

Dwight D. Eisenhower Executive Office Building

Q Mr. Vice President, welcome.

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Jim.

Q What has 9/11 done to us Americans?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, I think we're still sortingthat out, in a sense. Clearly, there are a lot of lessonsto be learned, if you will, out of that event, and whatwe've got to do subsequently. And I think in terms of

\l se cu ri ty po for example, it has changed a lot_,.;/ about the way we think about how we defend the country, and

about what (inaudible) are. Hark back to the 20th centuryand the Cold War, where most of us sort of grew up andthought about deterring the Soviet Union from launching anattack, solid borders meant something, you could put at risk

the forces of another country and the things they valued todeter them from attacking the United States.

September llth changed all of that, in a sense that itwas an attack launched from the soil of the United States --and designed and planned in Germany, a good NATO ally. Idon't mean to be critical of Germany. But the nature of thethreat changed so dramatically now that we have to thinkanew about how we defend ourselves.

It means that we've got to be concerned now about partsof the world we didn't used to have to worry about, from astrategic standpoint or a military standpoint. It may bethat some remote corner of country X now, which nobody evercared about before, all of a sudden is a place where a groupof terrorists come together, plan an attack, organize it,maybe using biological weapons. A relative handful ofpeople with access to the international travel system andfinances to smuggle something into the United States and use

\t in a deadly attack that would be far more devastating

000453


2/14

than what happened on September llth if they used abiological weapon or even conceivably a nuclear weapon.

So our whole approach to thinking about how we defendourselves is dramatically different than it used to be.

Q On a personal level, are we less free than we

were, just as individual Americans, going about our lives?TH E VICE PRESIDENT: I think most people are probably

taking extra precautions. If it fades over time, itprobably depends on what part of the country you live in orhow much you're concerned about this, how close we are to9/11. But clearly there are continuing pieces of evidencein our lives every day about the way in which we changed inorder to adapt to the potential threat.

The air traffic was where we had a significant impacton air travel, just in terms of how we do something wealmost took for granted in the past. So it's clearlyaffected that.

Q Are you concerned at all that the government, andits role to react to this monumental event has maybeoverreacted in terms of taking some freedoms away fromAmericans?

"^ THE VICE PRESIDENT: I don't believe that, Jim. I^/ think -- I don't think we've taken freedom away from~" Americans. We've tried to be very sensitive to that. We

have tried to alert people to the dangers here. And myconcern is that there will be another attack, and we willfind, once that attack has occurred, that there is somethingwe could have done that might have prevented it, but wedidn't do it. My concern in part is as we get farther andfarther away from September llth, that we gradually let ourguard down over time. It's hard to keep people sort of onthe cusp of being prepared (inaudible) a potential attack.

And what I think is a real danger here that we'll getcomplacent. It's part of our nature. We're optimisticpeople, we're resilient. As I said, well, yes, they hit uson 9/11, but they'll never be able to do that again. Well,I hope not. We're doing everything we can to stop it. Butof course the danger is that will be -- that as that fades

and recedes into history, that we'll let down our guard.And we can't allow that to happen.

Q How do you account for the fact that there havebeen no other attacks in this one year?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: I think a combination of things.t . You can argue it two ways. One is that we've had8

000454


3/14

considerable success in disrupting the al Qaedaorganization.^ Our actions in Afghanistan, our militaryoperations against the al Qaeda and Taliban, our worldwideefforts with the finances, with intelligence coordination,the extent to which we've wrapped up a number of individualswho were crucial in the organization, all of that I thinkhas disrupted their planning and their operations.

On the other hand, their normal pattern, if you lookback at -- at least the history was as much as two yearsbetween major attacks. We had the attack on the EastAfrican embassies in 1998; two years later we had the attackon the USS Cole, one year later we had the attack on theWorld Trade Center and the Pentagon. So a period of timehere between attacks wouldn't be that much out of the normfor them.

Q You talk about complacency. Is part of thecomplacency a result of all these alerts that we had, andthen nothing happens; and then we have another alert, and

nothing happens, another alert and nothing happens. It'sbeen a while now since we've even had an alert.

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Right. But it's one of thosedifficult dilemmas for government, in a sense. The moreoften you go on alert, and nothing happens, then peoplebecome sort of immune to the whole notion of crisis there.On the other hand, if you don't go on alert, and somethingdid happen, you have a terrible problem then, too. Soyou're trying always to seek the proper balance here.

But it's not easy. These are judgment calls that thePresident and his senior advisors have to make on whether ornot a particular threat has enough credibility so that youwant to stand up the forces of the United States, if youwill, and put the American people on guard for the next 48hours, the next two weeks, or whatever it might be.

Q But is it correct to interpret the lack of alertsthese last several weeks and months as meaning -- what itappears to mean -- that the threat has in fact lessened?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: I can't say that. I can't saythat. There is a fluctuation in the reporting. Ourintelligence probably is better and more comprehensive todaythan it's been before. We've sort of got the mechanismtuned up, focused on this particular problem, so we'reprobably picking up more than we did before. We're alsopicking up a lot of noise. We pick up false reporting.

But to say that there's no threat out there, or thatthe threat has receded, I just can't say that based on whatI've seen today. It's not as though there's a one-to-one

000455


4/14

relationship there. Sometimes some of the threat reportingwe've had is a disgruntled ex-wife. In other cases, it'sbeen a real threat, where we've been able to wrap somebodyup and prevent something from happening.

But you just -- you don't know what you don't know.That's the nature of the intelligence business. And you

have to work with what you can get your hands on. But it isinexact; it's more an art form than it is a science. You'vegot to continually work the problem, continually try, as thePresident is, building an office of homeland security, doinga better job of collecting intelligence, at getting thedomestic and the foreign agencies working together, ofreorganizing the government so we can really focus all ofour assets and our resources on this problem of defense,dealing with the fact that we've got three differentagencies dealing with the security of our borders, and allof those kinds of issues.

So we're constantly improving, we're constantly getting

better, we're constantly strengthening our defenses, if youwill. On the other hand, our adversaries are still outthere. There are thousands of them still loose within some60 countries around the world that have al Qaeda cells inthem, and we know they're planning to try and mountadditional attacks against the United States.

Q Why are they still loose? Why are they still outthere? Why can't we -- it's been a year. Why can't weround them up and put them out of business?

TH E VICE PRESIDENT: Well, most of them don't runaround with a label across their forehead that says, "alQaeda." We've found -- for example, we wrapped up a cell inSingapore. Singapore, that's around the other side of theworld, not the Middle East. But in fact there were a groupof people there, some of whom had been through the trainingcamps in Afghanistan, and then returned to Singapore,(inaudible) against the United States and launch an attack

against one of our naval vessels or (inaudible) against ourpersonnel in Singapore.

And these individuals were middle class professionals.These were not poverty stricken folks who came out of theMiddle East, who have been discriminated against or had any

sense of injustice in society. But for one reason oranother, they had signed on for the jihad, and were preparedto kill Americans. They were living and operating inSingapore.

You've got that all over the world. We found cells,evidence of al Qaeda, in the U.K., in Germany, in Spain, inItaly, in Malaysia and Indonesia, Singapore, the

000456


5/14

1

Philippines, a lot of places out there where they ve beenoperating. Some of them have gone underground and may bequiet for two or three or four years before they reactivated and launch an attack. There's evidence that theyplanned several years in advance for the attack on the WorldTrade Center.

0 You said that people are planning to killAmericans. One of the things that was discuss f* "^J*^you and I talked about it, in an interview shortly after9/11 that this came as a huge surprise to many Americansthat'there were all these people out there who hated us somuch that they would do what these folks did on 9/11. _Andthen there are thousands more out there, as you justconfirmed, again, are out there prepared to do the samething. Is this something Americans have to also try - t ounderstand, why they hate us so?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: To some extent clearly we do. Imean, we need to understand what's the dynamic in societythat's led these young men, primarily young men, to beprepared to sacrifice their lives in order to killAmericans. I don't want to overestimate how extensive thehatred is. But the fact that it takes only two people tolaunch a devastating attack that's what we learned on thellth -- and to take thousands of lives, depending on whatkind of attack they organize.

- * And so they and plus, I think it's important also,'""" it takes a certain skill, a certain discipline, certain

training to be able to mount that kind of attack and avoiddetection by our law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

There are certainly people there who can do it, they did iton 9/11 It doesn't mean it's easy, we'll make it as hardas we can for them. But the fact is.that there clearly arestill a large number of people loose out there, and some ofthem are clearly trying to mount attacks against the U.S.

Q Should we as Americans be concerned about it?Should we try to mitigate this harsh feeling about us andwhat we do as a government and as a people?

TH E VICE PRESIDENT: That's not my view. My view isthat the United States has not conducted itself in such away as to be deserving of such an attack. I don't thinkthat's the case at all. I think, in fact, there are peoplemotivated to launch attacks against us partly because theydislike some aspect of our policy. But to suggest thatsomehow the United States has done something that meritsthis kind of an attack or justifies what these people do, Ijust don't think it's (inaudible).

^ ~--vv J 000457


6/14

I think there's a fundamental difference in the worldview, perhaps. They seem to be motivated by a veryfundamentalist religious view, which (inaudible) -- extremeform of Islam. I don't think that's generallyrepresentative of the Islamic peoples around the world.It's clearly representative of a small group that havejoined al Qaeda and committed themselves to supporting Osama

binLaden,

and toparticipate

injihad,

inholy

waragainst

the infidel -- us, in this case.

Q A lot of folks seem to not understand why we don'tknow whether Osama bin Laden is alive or dead after oneyear. What would you tell them?

TH E VICE PRESIDENT: We don't know. We don't have hardevidence either way. As the President said the other day,he said, you know, if he's alive, we'll get him, and if he'sdead, we already got him.

There has been no hard sign of Osama bin Laden now for

several months. That could mean he's dead, perhaps at ToraBora, as some people speculate, where we did an extensivecampaigns (inaudible) last year. Or it could mean he's goneunderground.

He lives a fairly ascetic lifestyle anyway; this is nota man, you know, who's got huge trappings of office. And hemight well be able to operate underground for a considerableperiod of time, not communicate, or communicate only bycouriers in ways that make it difficult for people to knowwhere he is and what he's up to.

And I just (inaudible) factual, most honest answer Ican give you is: we don't know. He could be dead, he couldbe alive, and we don't really know for sure.

Q So, a year later. The President said at thebeginning, right after 9/11, two of our major missions hereare to put al Qaeda out of business and get rid of Osama binLaden. And we haven't done either.

TH E VICE PRESIDENT: Well, he also said -- you know,we're much closer to the front end of the war than we are tothe back end of the war. It's going to take a long time.It's not something that can be done in a matter of weeks or

even months. We've made major progress, when you considerwhat we've done in Afghanistan, with a relatively smallforce. We (inaudible) the Taliban, liberated the Afghanpeople, and did serious damage to the al Qaeda organization.

But it's not over. And you know, I think we tend tothink -- it's a part of our national character, perhaps,that -- well, we've got a problem to solve, let's

000458


7/14

(inaudible) in two weeks. This one doesn't work this way.And this is a struggle that will go on, I think, probablyfor many years -- I expect as long as I'm (inaudible). Andyou've just got to keep working at it day in and day out,month in and month out. And that' s the nature of thechallenge we face.

Q What do you say to those who say, okay, we've gotthis war against al Qaeda that's not finished. We're stilltrying to find out about Osama bin Laden. Why are wetalking about starting a new war with Iraq?

TH E VICE PRESIDENT: Well, Iraq is a related, bu tobviously a somewhat different proposition. And thesituation in Iraq is the culmination of many years ofeffort.

Saddam Hussein signed up at the end of the Gulf War tocertain U.N. Security Council resolutions: to get rid ofall of his weapons of mass destruction, and to allowinspectors to come in and verify that. He has complied withvirtually none of the resolutions that have been applied tohim. Between 1996 and 1998, on six separate occasions, theSecurity Council took up this issue and found him to be inflagrant violation and demanded that he grant access,unfettered access to inspectors to come in and prove that hewas complying with these resolutions. And he absolutelythumbed his nose at the United Nations, has never complied.

That was '96 through '98. Now, since '98, therehaven't been any inspectors in there at all. We know, basedprimarily on intelligence reporting, as well as some of theearlier work done by inspectors, as well as defectors whocome out and have told us what's going on -- we know he iscontinuing to expand and improve his biological weaponscapability, both in terms of production and for othersystems.

We know he is working once again on a nuclear program.The nuclear weapons program was much further along than wethought at the time of Desert Storm; before we actually didthe liberation of Kuwait in 1991, I was told, as were mostof our senior officials, that he was some years away fromnuclear war. We found after the war, once we got people inon the ground, that he was probably a year from actually

having a usable nuclear weapon. And this was '91, ten yearsago.

No inspectors have been in there since '98. We knowagain that he has weapons design, we know he has thetechnicians who know how to build a nuclear weapon. What helacks is fissile material

000459


8/14

\- highly enriched uranium, plutonium -- that he could use

for a weapon. And we know that he has re-energized, if youwill, his efforts to acquire a nuclear weapon.

We know he continues to work on his chemical weaponscapabilities -- different capability, obviously, than the BWand nukes, but that activity is underway. It's ongoing. We

know he's sitting on top of 10 percent of the world's oilreserves. As he takes that wealth that is generated off ofthat and is earning a lot of money now on the side, outsidethe oil-for-food program, money that goes into his pocket tobe used for whatever purpose he wants, then he is going tocontinue to ignore the United Nations and to build thesedeadly capabilities.

If he had nuclear weapons -- and we don't know whenhe'll get them -- there are various estimates on timing, butwe don't know everything we'd like to know about his program-- once he's got a nuclear weapon, I think it would bevirtually impossible to put together an international

coalition to deal with this problem.

Q Why? Because he would use it as a --

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Because it would threaten -- thinkof those 30 countries that signed up for the coalition inthe Gulf War. Many of them will simply take a pass, facedwith that kind of problem. So time is not on our side.Eventually, the international community has to come to gripswith the fact that this is a growing threat, and all of theefforts to date to deal with it diplomatically and throughthe U.N. have failed.

Q You said several times -- and (inaudible) just now-- we know, we know, we know, we know. Are you prepared,you and the President prepared to tell the members ofCongress and the American public and the internationalcommunity -- where there is, I think you would agree, asingular lack of enthusiasm for doing what you and thePresident are advocating -- are you going to lay all thisinformation out in a way that we can all see it?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: We are certainly going to share agood deal of information with select members of Congress.We've got a problem here in the sense that when we learn

information from sensitive sources and methods about whatSaddam Hussein is doing with respect to his weapons program,it has to be treated in a confidential fashion, or it willdestroy our ability to continue to collect that information.

If you brief 535 members of Congress, it will probablystay classified -- and I don't mean to be critical ofmembers of Congress; I was one for 10 years -- but with that

000460


9/14

many people, you're likely to have a leak in very shortorder. So there's some happy medium here where we can go --as we've done in the past; this is not unusual -- and youbrief just the senior leadership, for example, of theCongress, say, the big four: the Speaker, the MinorityLeader of the House, and the Majority and Minority Leader inthe Senate, and maybe two committee chairman and rankingmembers -- so that they have access to the same informationwe have. And then, in effect, the Congress will act -- workwith its leadership, in terms of addressing this issue andengaging in the debate.

We'll do everything we can to make as much as we canpublic. That's (inaudible), there will be public hearings;the President is going before the United Nations this weekto lay out the case there. But there are certain pieces .ofinformation that are highly classified and need to remainhighly classified, in terms of our ability to continue towork these problems.

Q So then it could come down, in the final analysis,to you and the President saying you just have to take ourword for it?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: No. I think clearly we electPresidents and expect them to make these decisions for us.This is a Presidential decision, without question. He'sindicated he wants to work as closely as he can withinternational leaders as well as members of Congress, andwe'll do all of that. As I say, we'll get as many membersof Congress read in to what we know as we can.

But there has to be some kind of understanding thatthere's a limit beyond which we can't go without destroyingour capacity to be able to know what's going on.(Inaudible.)

Q A lot of people suggested, after your two speechesto the two veterans organizations you spoke at, youessentially issued an informal declaration of war -- that weare in fact in a state of war against Iraq, the UnitedStates of America is. Is that a correct reading of it?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: No.

Q What is --

TH E VICE PRESIDENT: I think that would be an incorrectstatement. I think it would be fair to say that thePresident has not yet made a decision, other than toconclude that doing nothing is not an option. We can't --we cannot continue to ignore this problem.

000461


10/14

He's going to address it with the United Nations, whichis a good place to do it, since they're the ones who havepassed a whole series of resolutions which Saddam hasignored without consequences; there has been no penalty forSaddam Hussein ignoring these requirements. And that hisgrowing capabilities increasingly represent a threat to theregion to U.S. forces in the region, and ultimately to the

United States itself, and that we have to come to grips withthat problem.

Now, that's in my mind sort of a statement of facts,(inaudible) an organization, if you will, of things that areknown out there. And what I just said shouldn't be asurprise to anybody, because in fact a recitation of recenthistory and of what is generally available in the media withrespect to (inaudible).

Q Is it a fair reading, though, of what you and thePresident are saying then, well, yes, the President's goingto talk to the U.N. , yes, we're going to go deal withCongress, and yes, we're going to make as much informationavailable as possible. But if you all don't go along --(inaudible) -- the United States of America will in facttake unilateral action if it comes down to it?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: I don't want to predict what thePresident will ultimately decide, Jim. That's not my role.

%} And he is clearly, as we all are who are part of this

administration, this national security team, deeplyconcerned about what we see out there. And we do believethat it must be addressed, that we cannot simply sit back

and allow these current trends with respect to Iraq tocontinue.

Now next step: what are we going to do about it?Well, that's what we're going to discuss with the Congressand with the United Nations. And the President will leadthat discussion (inaudible).

Q Do you and the President have an open mind aboutthe final act that may have to be taken? In other words,are you listening as much as talking over these next severalweeks, or whatever it takes, to other countries, to membersof Congress who may have reservations, who may haveobjections to what you all are thinking?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: I think we are open-minded aboutit. I think it's important to understand the President ofthe United States has special responsibilities here. Butfirst and foremost, he has an obligation, he's taken an oathto defend Constitution of the United States against allenemies foreign and domestic. He is the one who is charged,

0004621 0


11/14

that we will look to, to see to it that the United States isdefended against potential threat. That's a specialobligation that nobody else has except him.

Secondly, we've reached the point with respect to Iraqwhere, from a military standpoint, the United States'selimination (inaudible). There is no other nation in the

world that can deal with this threat militarily(inaudible) should remember that. (Inaudible.)

Third, I think most of the rest of the world is not asconcerned as we are about vulnerabilities, because theyhaven't been hit, they didn't lose 3,000 people lastSeptember llth; we did. We understand to a greater extentthan ever before, I think, the vulnerability of modernsociety to an attack. So I think it's perhaps more urgentfrom our perspective. The President has greaterresponsibilities than anybody else does in this respect.

And the final point I guess I'd make is the sense thatwe have, that to date the traditional way of dealing withthis problem through the international organization, the .United Nations (inaudible) has produced zero results.

Q So to be sure I understand what you're saying,that you believe that the President of the United States has

i ,. x the right and the responsibility to act unilaterally in this] situation -- if it comes to that?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: No, he has not made that decisionyet, and I don't want to pre-judge it. But I do think that-- you know, question: if military action would haveallowed us to preempt what happened on 9/11, avoid the lossof three thousand (inaudible), absolutely. I don't thinkthere's any doubt about it and .(inaudible) very manyAmericans who wouldn't sign up with that proposition.

We have to be concerned now -- not sort of in light ofwhat the world looked like before 9/11, but what the worldlooks like after 9/11, that we are prepared to make certainthat we can defend the United States against foreignthreats. And we are especially concerned about Iraq becauseof the developments we see with respect to weapons of massdestruction, because he has in the past, for example, had arelationship with terrorist organizations and provided

sanctuary for terrorist organizations of various kinds; andbecause of this continued failure over the years of theinternational community to be able to cope with thisproblem.

So as we've said -- the President said and I'vev repeated, time is not on our side. If you wait, his

\ s are only going to go greater,- the threat will

0004631 1


12/14

increase, and the difficulty of the world coming together,the international community to deal with that threat will(inaudible) .

Q What was the worst time for you, personally, on9/11 or after 9/11?

TH E VICE PRESIDENT:Well, that day I remember thecollapse of the Trade Center and evacuated down there to the

Presidential Emergency Operations Center. There was areport that came in, a plane was headed to the White House.They evacuated me at that point to the shelter underneaththe White House. And that's the plane that ultimatelycircled back and hit the Pentagon.

And, you know, all of those events -- when the secondplane hitting the Trade Center, when we understood this wasa terrorist attack, to the point where (inaudible)aircraft on the ground, the early stages (inaudible),perhaps this is something to watch as the World Trade Center

came down (inaudible) shock. (Inaudible.)

I didn't really expect that that would happen at thattime. But when you think about it, because you're busy inthose early minutes and hours trying to deal with theproblem and then all of a sudden watch in real time theCenter collapse, that was a startling moment. There is apicture that's been taken of several of us who were in thePEOC, itself, Mary Matalin, Condi Rice and my wife, Lynne,at that moment. And the look on people' s faces as theywatch the Trade Center (inaudible).

Q Do you remember what your first reaction was to --what is going on here? I mean, what did you think washappening? . . . .

THE VICE PRESIDENT: My secretary called in -- I was ina meeting with my speechwriter -- she called in and said, aplane hit the World Trade Center. So we turned on thetelevision and the first plane had already gone in. And welooked at it and said, you know, how could that happen? Itwas a clear day, there was no weather problem. How the hellyou can get an airplane hitting the World Trade Center?

And we talked about that for a few minutes. And then

as we watched, a second plane -- we actually saw the secondplane hit. And in that moment you knew, this is a terroristattack.

Q Difficult question, but you're Dick Cheney, anindividual. And you're also Dick Cheney, of the UnitedStates. Did you have a think, oh, my God, I'm THE VICEPRESIDENT of the United States and our country is being

1 2 000464


13/14

attacked? I mean, what -- how did you adjust your thinkingto accommodate this awful event and your responsibilities?

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, it's a fascinating question,Jim. When it happens and -- as I say, the President(inaudible) talked about it -- you've got a job to do. And

because you've got a job to do, you've got to focus on that,

so you don't have time for personal consideration. And youdon't think that you're maybe the target. Even after theairplane was headed for the White House -- and, then, ofcourse, never hit, it circled back and hit the Pentagon.

I'm aware at that point what's transpired out there,but you're thinking in terms of your officialresponsibility. I mean, as Vice President, one of thethings I spend time on is the continuity of government.That's the main reason I'm here, is (inaudible).

So my first reaction that morning, as soon as I heardthe third plane hit the Pentagon, was to pick up the

telephone and call the President, who was headed for hisairplane in Florida, and urge him not to return -- primarilybecause we didn't know ho w extensive th e attack was, wedidn't know what else was in store. We knew Washington wasunder attack. It was important, I thought, to make sure hedid not come back to the middle of a continuing attack.

He didn't like that, but he agreed with me. And thenwe made arrangements to get Denny Hastert out of town into asecure facility, because he was third in line for thePresidency. And we made arrangements to get some Cabinetmembers located outside the city, in secure locations.Because, you know, the key here is to protect the line ofsuccession, and make certain no matter what happens that youneed somebody there who is constitutionally, statutorilycertified to be the President of the United States, ~ ifsomething happens to those ahead (inaudible) on the list.

And you can say, well, you know, what about you?You're number two. And at one point, the Secret Service didrecommend evacuating me from the White House complex and Idecided not to do that, because we had already provided th eline of succession: the President is safe, the Speaker wassafe, others, and it was important, I thought, for me tostay connected, and I could do that, (inaudible) stay in the

PEOC, where I am. Communication with the President, withthe Secretary of Defense at the Pentagon and so forth, andcontinue to work the problem.

You don't think of it in personal terms. You really dothink about it institutionally. This is your job and, tosome extent, you are -- you benefit from having a job to do(inaudible) like this. And you have things that you have to

1 3 000465


14/14

make happen and you don't have time for (inaudible)emotional reaction that might otherwise occur if somebodywere just sitting and watching these events unfold(inaudible).

Q The sense that day -- have there been emotionaltimes for you, when you have felt fear for yourself or for

your wife or your children or your grandchildren?TH E V I C E PRESIDENT: Family members, on a couple of

occasions, when -- want to make sure who (inaudible) thekids and grandkids were taken care of (inaudible). And, ofcourse, their lives have changed because security has beensignificantly enhanced since September llth.

From a personal standpoint, I thought -- a couple oftimes the thought has occurred to me that the reporting wegot from some of the people who were wrapped up inAfghanistan was a fourth aircraft was headed for the WhiteHouse, (inaudible) Capitol building, (inaudible).

And the plane that went down in Pennsylvania, that wastaken down by the passengers -- had they not done that, hadthey not engaged in a very courageous act and taken on theterrorists (inaudible) destruction of the aircraft before itcould conclude its mission -- they all saved my life andthat of all of us who were in the White House complex thatday. And it's something that you think about periodically.If it hadn't been for what they did, that we might not behere today. You know, those kinds of thoughts occuroccasionally, especially when (inaudible) Shanksville,Pennsylvania.

Q (Inaudible.)

THE VICE PRESIDENT: (Inaudible.)

Q Mr. Vice President, thank you very much.

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Thank you, Jim.

END

000466

14

NY B9 Farmer Misc- WH 2 of 3 Fdr- 9-5-02 Jim Lehrer-The News Hour Interview of Cheney 468

Documents

Transcript of NY B9 Farmer Misc- WH 2 of 3 Fdr- 9-5-02 Jim Lehrer-The News Hour Interview of Cheney 468