Journalist @baltimoresun writer artist runner #amwriting Chaplain PIO #partylikeajournalist

Journalist @baltimoresun writer artist runner #amwriting Chaplain PIO #partylikeajournalist
Journalist @baltimoresun writer artist runner #amwriting Md Troopers Assoc #20 & Westminster Md Fire Dept Chaplain PIO #partylikeajournalist
Showing posts with label People Gates-Sec Defense Robert. Show all posts
Showing posts with label People Gates-Sec Defense Robert. Show all posts

Thursday, January 09, 2014

MRC Alert: NBC: Ungrateful Bob Gates 'Blindsided' White House With 'Blistering New Memoir'

MRC Alert: NBC: Ungrateful Bob Gates 'Blindsided' White House With 'Blistering New Memoir'
Media Research Center
Tracking Liberal Media Bias Since 1996
Thursday January 09, 2014 @ 08:21 AM ET

1. NBC: Ungrateful Bob Gates 'Blindsided' White House With 'Blistering New Memoir'

At the top of Wednesday's NBC Today, co-host Matt Lauer portrayed former Defense Secretary Robert Gates as an ungrateful and disgruntled ex-employee: "Blindsided. President Obama's former Defense Secretary Robert Gates takes on his old boss – the man who awarded him the Medal of Freedom – in a blistering new memoir. This morning, what may have made him turn?"  In the report that followed later, correspondent Andrea Mitchell fretted: "President Obama's decision to keep George Bush's defense secretary, a Republican, has now blown back on the White House." Like Lauer, she made sure to note how Obama had honored Gates: "Gates gave no hint of his resentment when he left the cabinet two years ago and President Obama awarded him the Medal of Freedom, the nation's highest civilian honor."


2. Networks Ignore Gun Company Putting U.S. Troops First, Rejecting $15 Million Deal With Pakistan

A Utah-based gun manufacturer turned down a $15 million contract with Pakistan in the name of keeping weapons from falling into the hands of America's enemies. ABC, CBS and NBC, networks that routinely demonize the firearms industry and promote gun control, ignored this positive story. Only Fox News highlighted Desert Tech's decision to put the troops before profit. Fox and Friends co-anchor Brian Kilmeade on Tuesday explained, "Fifteen million is a lot of money. But for this Utah gun manufacturing company, it represents more than a year of solid business." He added, "So, you think they would jump at the chance to make 15 million bucks in one day. But the guys at Desert Tech said no because the weapons were headed to Pakistan."
*****

Tuesday, June 22, 2010

Washington Post: Gates says McChrystal "exercised poor judgment" in remarks about U.S. officials


News Alert: Gates says McChrystal "exercised poor judgment" in remarks about U.S. officials
12:25 PM EDT Tuesday, June 22, 2010
--------------------

KABUL — Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said Tuesday that his top commander in Afghanistan “made a significant mistake and exercised poor judgment” in making dismissive and derogatory remarks to a magazine reporter about U.S. government officials involved in Afghan policy.

Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal has been summoned to Washington to explain a Rolling Stone article that includes highly critical comments by him and his staff about Vice President Biden, U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Karl W. Eikenberry and other top Obama administration officials.

For more information, visit washingtonpost.com: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/22/AR2010062200813.html?hpid%3Dtopnews&sub=AR

Related: Obama leaving options open to fire McChrystal

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs describes president as "angry" after reading about general's comments in a Rolling Stone magazine profile.

Michael D. Shear, Ernesto Londoño, Debbi Wilgoren | 2:33 p.m. ET

Can Obama afford a dismissal?

Firing McChrystal on the eve of a major offensive in Kandahar could hurt war effort, experts say.

Greg Jaffe and Ernesto Londoño

*****

Kevin Dayhoff Soundtrack: http://kevindayhoff.blogspot.com/ = http://www.kevindayhoff.net/ Kevin Dayhoff Art: http://kevindayhoffart.blogspot.com/ or http://kevindayhoffart.com/ = http://www.kevindayhoff.com/ Kevin Dayhoff Westminster: http://kevindayhoffwestgov-net.blogspot.com/ or http://www.westgov.net/ = www.kevindayhoff.org Twitter: https://twitter.com/kevindayhoff Twitpic: http://twitpic.com/photos/kevindayhoff Kevin Dayhoff's The New Bedford Herald: http://kbetrue.livejournal.com/ = www.newbedfordherald.net Explore Carroll: www.explorecarroll.com The Tentacle: www.thetentacle.com

Sunday, May 24, 2009

Defense chief praises soldier in pink boxers


Defense chief praises soldier in pink boxers

GI jumped into action with flip-flops, too, after surprise Taliban attack

AP Fri., May 22, 2009

Photo by David Guttenfelder / AP: Zachery Boyd, in pink boxers, was routed from his sleep on May 11 by Taliban fire on a base in the Korengal Valley of Afghanistan's Kunar Province. With him are Cecil Montgomery of Many, La., far right; and Jordan Custer of Spokane, Wash.


WASHINGTON - Defense Secretary Robert Gates says American soldiers have more than their military might and training on their side in the war in Afghanistan. Some have pink underwear.

Gates told an audience in New York about Specialist Zachary Boyd, routed from sleep by enemy fire on his post in eastern Afghanistan.

"He immediately grabbed his rifle and rushed into a defensive position clad in his helmet, body armor, and pink boxer shorts that said 'I Love New York,'" Gates said Thursday night.

[…]

"Any soldier who goes into battle against the Taliban in pink boxers and flip-flops has a special kind of courage," Gates said, adding that Boyd may have hit on a new kind of psychological warfare. "I can only wonder about the impact on the Taliban.

[…]

Read the entire story here: Defense chief praises soldier in pink boxers

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30887233/?GT1=43001

20090524 DEFSEC praise soldier in pink shorts

Related:

U.S. defense chief lauds soldier in pink boxers

Gates: Solider in Pink Boxers Has "Special Kind of Courage"

Soldier Battles Taliban in Pink Undies

Soldier Pink Boxer Picture Draws Attention

Photo of US soldier in pink boxers turns iconic

View related photos


Thursday, November 20, 2008

Democracy Now: Ex-CIA Officials Tied to Rendition Program and Faulty Iraq Intel Tapped to Head Obama’s Intelligence Transition Team


Related:

Melvin Goodman: "Change in Intelligence?"

Glenn Greenwald: "John Brennan and Bush's Interrogation/Detention Policies"

John Brennan and Jami Miscik, both former intelligence officials under George Tenet, are leading Barack Obama’s review of intelligence agencies and helping make recommendations to the new administration. Brennan has supported warrantless wiretapping and extraordinary rendition, and Miscik was involved with the politicized intelligence alleging weapons of mass destruction in the lead-up to the war on Iraq. We speak with former CIA analyst Melvin Goodman and Michael Ratner of the Center for Constitutional Rights.

AMY GOODMAN: It’s been less than two weeks since Obama’s election. Speculation is already rife about the change he intends to bring to Washington’s intelligence community. The Washington Post reported last week that Obama is expected to replace the country’s top two intelligence officials over their support for controversial Bush administration policies like torture and electronic surveillance. Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell and CIA chief Michael Hayden reportedly wish to remain on the job.

No appointees have been named as yet, but questions are already being raised about the people heading Obama’s transition efforts on intelligence policy. John Brennan and Jami Miscik, both former intelligence officials under George Tenet, are leading the review of intelligence agencies and helping make recommendations to the new administration. Brennan has supported warrantless wiretapping and extraordinary rendition, and Miscik was involved with the politicized intelligence alleging weapons of mass destruction in the lead-up to the war on Iraq.

I’m joined now by Washington, D.C.—in D.C. by former CIA and State Department analyst Mel Goodman. He’s a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy, director of the Center’s National Security Project. His latest book is called Failure of Intelligence: The Decline and Fall of the CIA. He is also co-author of Bush League Diplomacy: How the Neoconservatives are Putting the World at Risk.

We’re joined here in New York by Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights. His latest book is The Trial of Donald Rumsfeld: A Prosecution by Book.

We welcome you both to Democracy Now! I want to start with Mel Goodman in Washington. Long years at the Central Intelligence Agency and the State Department. You’ve just written an op-ed piece in the Baltimore Sun that looks at these two top transition officials. Explain who they are and what they represent.

[…]

MELVIN GOODMAN: OK. John Brennan was deputy executive secretary to George Tenet during the worst violations during the CIA period in the run-up to the Iraq war, so he sat there at Tenet’s knee when they passed judgment on torture and abuse, on extraordinary renditions, on black sites, on secret prisons. He was part of all of that decision making.

Jami Miscik was the Deputy Director for Intelligence during the run-up to the Iraq war. So she went along with the phony intelligence estimate of October 2002, the phony white paper that was prepared by Paul Pillar in October 2002. She helped with the drafting of the speech that Colin Powell gave to the United Nations—[inaudible] 2003, which made the phony case for war to the international community.

So, when George Tenet said, "slam dunk, we can provide all the intelligence you need,” [inaudible] to the President in December of 2002, it was people like Jami Miscik and John Brennan who were part of the team who provided that phony intelligence. So what I think people at the CIA are worried about—and I’ve talked to many of them over the weekend—is that there will never be any accountability for these violations and some of the unconscionable acts committed at the CIA, which essentially amount to war crimes, when you’re talking about torture and abuse and secret prisons. So, where are we, in terms of change? This sounds like more continuity.

AMY GOODMAN: I want to turn to excerpts from a December 2005 interview with John Brennan, the former CIA official now leading Obama’s intelligence transition. Brennan was interviewed by Margaret Warner on the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer about his views on the Bush administration’s practice of extraordinary rendition.

Read the entire article and interview here: Ex-CIA Officials Tied to Rendition Program and Faulty Iraq Intel Tapped to Head Obama’s Intelligence Transition Team

20081118 DemNow Ex CIA tapped to head Obama intel transition team

Monday, November 10, 2008

International Herald Tribune: Obama plans quick use of executive power

International Herald Tribune: Obama plans quick use of executive power

The Associated Press

Monday, November 10, 2008

WASHINGTON: Barack Obama will assume the U.S. presidency with "a real mandate for change," and likely will use his executive powers to make quick changes, perhaps reversing Bush administration policies on stem cell research and oil exploration.

John Podesta, who's handling Obama's preparations to take over in the White House on Jan. 20, said on Sunday that Obama was reviewing President George W. Bush's executive orders on those and other issues as he prepares to put his own stamp on policy after eight years of Republican rule.

[…]

"I think across the board, on stem cell research, on a number of areas, you see the Bush administration even today moving aggressively to do things that I think are probably not in the interest of the country," Podesta said.

Obama has supported stem cell research in an effort to find cures for diseases such as Alzheimer's.

Also, the federal Bureau of Land Management is opening about 360,000 acres (145,000 hectares) of public land in Utah to oil and gas drilling, leading to protests from environmentalists.

[…]

Speaking on Fox television, Podesta said Obama was working to build a diverse Cabinet likely to include Republicans and independents part of the broad coalition that supported Obama during the race against Republican John McCain.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has been mentioned as a possible holdover.

[…]

Obama, who will be the nation's 44th president, was to hold its first postelection meeting with Bush this week.

Bush and first lady Laura, will host Obama, his wife Michelle, and their two daughters — 10-year-old Malia and 7-year-old Sasha for a Monday tour of the executive mansion. Obama and Bush were expected to hold substantive meetings then as well.

[…]


Read the entire article here: International Herald Tribune: Obama plans quick use of executive power

___
On the Net:
Transition office:
http://change.gov/

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/11/10/america/NA-US-Obama.php

20081110 International Herald Tribune Obama plans quick use of exe power

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

20080311 Esquire: Admiral William J. Fallon - The Man Between War and Peace

Esquire article on former U.S. Central Commander Admiral William Fallon

March 18th, 2008

Some folks have asked where they may find the Esquire magazine article on former U.S. Central Commander Admiral William Fallon.

It is a good read – however block out some time as it is 7,720 words or so – and several sections I had to re-read for thorough comprehension…

Anyway - it can be found here: The Man Between War and Peace

http://www.esquire.com/features/fox-fallon

The Man Between War and Peace

http://www.esquire.com/features/fox-fallon

March 11, 2008

As the White House talked up conflict with Iran, the head of U.S. Central Command, William "Fox" Fallon, talked it down. Now he has resigned.

By Thomas P.M. Barnett [more from this author] (7720 words)

As the White House talked up conflict with Iran, the head of U.S. Central Command, William "Fox" Fallon, talked it down. Now he has resigned.

Peter Yang photo

1.

If, in the dying light of the Bush administration, we go to war with Iran, it'll all come down to one man. If we do not go to war with Iran, it'll come down to the same man. He is that rarest of creatures in the Bush universe: the good cop on Iran, and a man of strategic brilliance. His name is William Fallon, although all of his friends call him "Fox," which was his fighter-pilot call sign decades ago. Forty years into a military career that has seen this admiral rule over America's two most important combatant commands, Pacific Command and now United States Central Command, it's impossible to make this guy -- as he likes to say -- "nervous in the service." Past American governments have used saber rattling as a useful tactic to get some bad actor on the world stage to fall in line. This government hasn't mastered that kind of subtlety. When Dick Cheney has rattled his saber, it has generally meant that he intends to use it. And in spite of recent war spasms aimed at Iran from this sclerotic administration, Fallon is in no hurry to pick up any campaign medals for Iran. And therein lies the rub for the hard-liners led by Cheney. Army General David Petraeus, commanding America's forces in Iraq, may say, "You cannot win in Iraq solely in Iraq," but Fox Fallon is Petraeus's boss, and he is the commander of United States Central Command, and Fallon doesn't extend Petraeus's logic to mean war against Iran.

So while Admiral Fallon's boss, President George W. Bush, regularly trash-talks his way to World War III and his administration casually casts Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as this century's Hitler (a crown it has awarded once before, to deadly effect), it's left to Fallon -- and apparently Fallon alone -- to argue that, as he told Al Jazeera last fall: "This constant drumbeat of conflict...is not helpful and not useful. I expect that there will be no war, and that is what we ought to be working for. We ought to try to do our utmost to create different conditions."

What America needs, Fallon says, is a "combination of strength and willingness to engage."

Those are fighting words to your average neocon -- not to mention your average supporter of Israel, a good many of whom in Washington seem never to have served a minute in uniform. But utter those words for print and you can easily find yourself defending your indifference to "nuclear holocaust."

How does Fallon get away with so brazenly challenging his commander in chief?

The answer is that he might not get away with it for much longer. President Bush is not accustomed to a subordinate who speaks his mind as freely as Fallon does, and the president may have had enough.

Read the entire article here: The Man Between War and Peace

Monday, March 17, 2008

20080315 Join me in wishing Admiral William Fallon well in his long overdue retirement


Join me in wishing Admiral William Fallon well in his long overdue retirement

March 16th, 2008

Columnist Michael Barone has written an intelligent analysis about the “abrupt resignation of Adm. William Fallon as the head of Central Command…”

I for one, sure hope the doorknob does not hit him on the behind while he is on his way out…

Secretary of Defense Dr. Robert Gates announced his resignation last Tuesday, March 11, 2008 as the commander of Central Command.

No doubt his resignation was toasted by many in the military that evening.

Secretary Gates was, as usual, rather forthcoming as to the resignation stating Admiral Fallon’s reasons involved the controversies that have resulted from the recent, March 11, 2008, article in Esquire magazine: “The Man Between War and Peace,” by Thomas P.M. Barnett.

Gee – ya think?

Others in the military will quietly tell ya Admiral Fallon got confused and thought it was his job to set military and foreign policy instead of implementing it.

He did everything possible to undermine his bosses, Secretary of Defense Gates and President George W. Bush; and cut the knees out from under General David Petraeus. All the while, he overlooked several aspects of his job, such as was reported in the Washington Times - “Warriors welcome Fallon's resignation” by Sara Carter, March 13, 2008:

“Current and former military officials welcomed the resignation of Navy Adm. William J. Fallon, the top U.S. military commander in the Middle East, saying he failed to prevent foreign fighters and munitions from entering Iraq.”

To be certain, not to be overlooked is the fact that Admiral Fallon has led a storied career in the military and that we should all appreciate - and thank him for his service.

Nevertheless, we can wish him the best of luck in his retirement, which is, by many accounts, long overdue. Maybe now he can be a military analyst for Katie Couric or the New York Times – or Code Pink. He’ll fit in quite comfortably.

_____

The Importance of Fallon's Fall by Michael Barone, Saturday, March 15, 2008

The abrupt resignation of Adm. William Fallon as the head of Central Command almost got lost amid the breaking news of Barack Obama's victory in the Mississippi primary and Eliot Spitzer's resignation as governor of New York. But it's a much more consequential development -- in the foreign and military policy of the Bush administration in its final year in office and in the relations between civilian commanders and military officers in the long run of American history.

Though everyone involved denies it, Fallon was kicked out for insubordination, or something very close to it. His conduct became impossible to overlook after the publication of a jauntily written article in Esquire by Thomas P.M. Barnett, author of "The Pentagon's New Map."

Barnett paints Fallon as a seasoned officer who coolly and wisely has been frustrating George W. Bush's desire to invade Iran. He points out that Fallon opposed the surge in Iraq ordered by Bush in January 2007 and that he has tried to rein in Gen. David Petraeus, whose leadership of the surge has produced such impressive results. He seems to take it for granted that readers will applaud Fallon for opposing a move that converted likely defeat to a high chance of success.

Fallon also made it plain that he wants to withdraw troops from Iraq, as soon as possible -- even though Defense Secretary Robert Gates has approved Petraeus' request for a pause after currently scheduled troop withdrawals end in July.

Fallon is not the first subordinate to work openly to undercut the commander in chief…

[…]

Read his entire column here: The Importance of Fallon's Fall

####

20080315 Join me in wishing Admiral William Fallon well in his long overdue retirement


Friday, March 14, 2008

20080313 Washington Times: Warriors welcome Fallon's resignation by Sara Carter

Washington Times: Warriors welcome Fallon's resignation by Sara Carter

Warriors welcome Fallon's resignation March 13, 2008

By Sara Carter - Current and former military officials welcomed the resignation of Navy Adm. William J. Fallon, the top U.S. military commander in the Middle East, saying he failed to prevent foreign fighters and munitions from entering Iraq.

They said "there was no misperception" regarding Adm. Fallon's "non-warrior" approach to handling foreign involvement in the region.

"The fact is that [Central Command] had the external responsibility to protect our troops in Iraq from the outside and under Fallon they failed to do it," said retired Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely, a military analyst. "We have done nothing to protect our soldiers from external threats in Iraq."

Others said Adm. Fallon was pushed to resign.

"No matter what [Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates] said [Tuesday], we know for a fact Admiral Fallon was fired," said a former senior Defense official who works closely with military officials in the region. "We have kids — soldiers — getting killed because Iran, Syria and other foreign fighters are coming across the border into Iraq, and yet Fallon was unwilling to do anything to hold [those nations] accountable."

Adm. Fallon announced his retirement Tuesday, saying he had no substantial disagreements with the White House on the Middle East but that the "disconnect between my views and the president's policy objectives" had become a distraction.

Read the rest of Sara Carter’s article here: Warriors welcome Fallon's resignation

Related Stories

Iranian reformist seeks regime end

Demagoguing Adm. Fallon's departure

Top military leader Fallon resigns

Iran still funding militants, U.S. says

####

Thursday, March 13, 2008

20080311 Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announces the retirement of U. S. Central Command’s commander Admiral William Fallon

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announces the retirement of U. S. Central Command’s commander Admiral William Fallon

U.S. Department of Defense

Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs)
News Transcript

On the Web: http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=4172


Presenter: Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates March 11, 2008


DoD News Briefing with Secretary Robert Gates from the Pentagon

SEC. GATES: Good afternoon.

Admiral William Fallon is, at this moment, issuing a statement announcing that he has asked my approval to step down, from his current duties as commander of U.S. Central Command, and retire. Admiral Fallon advised me of his decision early this morning. He told me that, quote, "The current embarrassing situation, public perception of differences between my views and administration policy, and the distraction this causes from the mission make this the right thing to do," unquote.

I have approved Admiral Fallon's request, to retire, with reluctance and regret. Effective March 31st, Lieutenant General Martin Dempsey, deputy commander of U.S. Central Command, will serve as acting commander. He will serve in that capacity until such time as permanent relief can be nominated and confirmed.

Admiral Fallon has served his nation well throughout a distinguished military career for over 40 years, first in the Navy and then at the helm of two of the most important and dynamic operational commands, Pacific and Central Command. Fox Fallon has led our nation and hundreds of thousands of men and women in uniform with conviction, strategic vision, integrity and courage.

Admiral Fallon fought bravely in the skies over Vietnam, commanded an air wing during Desert Storm and then went on to lead at the highest levels of the U.S. armed forces. As commander of CENTCOM, he has managed, with skill and diplomacy, the mounting challenges across the broader Middle East and has kept foremost in mind the need to protect our vital national security interests in the region.

Fox Fallon has dedicated his life to the preservation of the freedoms we in this nation enjoy today, and all Americans should be deeply grateful for his dedication. On behalf of the Department of Defense and the nation, I thank him for his years of selfless service.

Admiral Fallon reached this difficult decision entirely on his own. I believe it was the right thing to do even though I do not believe there are, in fact, significant differences between his views and administration policy.

I'll take a few questions.

Read the rest here: Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announces the retirement of U. S. Central Command’s commander Admiral William Fallon

####

20080311 SecDef Gates announces the retirement of CentCom Adm Fallon

Wednesday, September 05, 2007

20070903 DoD Transcript News Briefing with Secretary Gates Al Asad Air Base in Iraq

DoD Transcript News Briefing with Secretary Gates and National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley and Deputy National Security Advisor Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute at Al Asad Air Base in Iraq

U.S. Department of Defense

Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs)

News Transcript


Presenter: Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, National Security Advisor

Stephen Hadley and Assistant to the President and Deputy National

Security Advisor Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute

September 03, 2007 2:00 PM EDT


DoD News Briefing with Secretary Gates, Stephen Hadley and Lt. Gen. Lute from Al Asad Air Base, Iraq

SECRETARY GATES: Well I hope that you all thought that the trip was worthwhile. Because we were concerned that you all might not be adequately cared for since we were separate – we came in separately from the president’s plane, I wanted to do this. So I have a “three-for” you here tonight. Steve Hadley, myself and Doug Lute. And I’ll ask Steve to just say a few about the purpose of trip, and then we’ll open it up for questions – all on the record.

MR. HADLEY: We thought about this five or six weeks ago. Obviously we’re going into an important week, week after next in Washington with General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker coming back and reporting. And the president thought it was important for him to come to Iraq and hear firsthand from Gen Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker about how they saw the situation – the assessment, their assessment of the situation.

He also thought it was important to have a face-to-face meeting with the leaders of the Iraqi national government before we went into this important week and important debate back in Washington. And it was particularly appropriate to do so since just a little over a week ago the five principal leaders of the various groups in this country got together and signed a document, in which they as you well know, talked about how they were going to work together to move an agenda forward in this country, had made some progress on issues involving de-baathification and provincial powers, which hopefully will set up some provincial elections, and talked a way forward about addressing some other issues.

So the president wanted to congratulate them, and he did in his meeting today. Congratulate them for the achievement of a week, 10 days ago, but also emphasize that that could only be a starting point. They now need to press forward to get resolution of a number of those issues as well.

And finally, he thought it was appropriate to come to Anbar province. A lot of discussion about what has gone on here on this province, which is very important for the future of Iraq. You may remember in the speech he made in January of ‘07, when he talked about the reinforcement for the surge. It was really for two purposes. One, to get sectarian violence down, which was centered in Baghdad. And secondly, to try and take advantage of what was beginning to happen in Anbar provinces (sic) with local political leaders and tribal sheiks coming together to fight al Qaida.

And that process with the leadership of our civilians here and with the huge contribution made by our men and women in uniform. And the reinforcement of those troops that the president announced last January. We’ve really seen some remarkable progress here. A progress against al Qaida. A coming together of local political leaders to begin to provide security and services to the locality. And beginning to reach out and connect with the Iraqi government. The president wanted to hear from those leaders firsthand – thank them for what they’ve done for Iraq, what they’ve done for the war against al Qaida, and for helping to make Anbar a place that will not be a safe haven from which al Qaida can plot against the United States.

And finally, in that meeting, he wanted to have a session with both the Anbar leaders, but also Iraq’s national leaders to encourage this connection – support from the national leaders to the Anbar leaders here in terms of economic and other support so they can begin to show a difference in the lives of their people. And similarly inviting the leaders of Anbar to begin to try and make a contribution for the broader reconciliation process that needs to go forward in Baghdad.

So, that was the concept of the trip, and it reflected in the meetings that the president had today. And it’s been a good day, and of course, the most important thing is then to end it speaking directly to the men and women in uniform and thanking them for their terrific contribution they’ve made here.

SECRETARY GATES: I might just say a word since we haven’t talked for several days about the process that we went through this week. I felt it was very important that the president have the opportunity to speak directly to each of his senior military commanders and to get their views on the way forward. Admiral Fallon and Central Command had been doing their own analysis. The Joint Chiefs of Staff, under the leadership of General Pace, have been doing their own analysis. And, of course, General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker have been doing theirs. So we had opportunities on these conference, televised conference settings, for General Petraeus to tell the president his assessment and what he was thinking about. We had an opportunity for Admiral Fallon to do the same with the president. Actually during that same session, but Admiral Fallon was there in person. And then as you well know, the president came over to the Pentagon on Friday and heard from the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

And so I thought it was important for the president to hear directly from these commanders, not filtered through me, or even summarized by General Pace. And I think that’s been a very satisfactory, a very satisfactory process.

Q: Mr. Secretary, we wanted to ask you about one of the comments the president made outside that caught our attention, which was his reference to if security conditions continued to improve that it would be possible to maintain the same level of security with fewer American forces. Could you elaborate on that a bit in terms of what time frame he’s talking about and if he’s talking about Anbar province in particular (inaudible) ?

SECRETARY GATES: Well I don’t want to, first of all I don’t want to preempt General Petraeus’ testimony on the hill a week from I guess today and tomorrow. But clearly, that is one of the central issues that everyone has been examining. What is the security situation? What do we expect the security situation to be in the months ahead? And I would say in the next several months. And what opportunities does that provide in terms of maintaining the security situation while perhaps beginning to bring the troop levels down? That’s what everybody’s been looking at. That’s what we’ve been examining. And I think I’ll just let the president’s words speak for themselves without foreshadowing what General Petraeus is going to say.

Q: If I could just follow up Mr. Secretary. Was he referring to Iraq as a whole or specifically about Anbar in those remarks? Or how do you view the situation?

SECRETARY GATES: I think he was referring to Iraq as a whole.

Q: (inaudible) If I could just follow up one more – (inaudible) you’ve stated quite often that troop numbers will come down as conditions permit. So I guess I’m sort of wondering whether there’s some new understanding that withdrawals are possible. Whether there’s a timetable under consideration for withdrawing troops or whether we’re still at the stage we were, we’ve been at for a number of years, which is as security improves we will look at it and then make a decision (inaudible) troops?

SECRETARY GATES: Well, let me answer and then invite Steve to answer. I think there is the general view that certainly her in Anbar the security situation has improved. It has improved in other parts of Iraq as well. And so we’re trying to look at Iraq in its different pieces, and clearly there is hard work that remains to be done in some, but the situation elsewhere is in pretty good shape. And so that’s the kind of analysis that has been driving the work that’s been going on.

MR. HADLEY: He said security; we’ve seen some improvements of security. A lot of work ahead. We’ve seen some improvement in the Iraqi Security Forces. So the issue is, are we at the point where we can continue to make security progress and reduce the number of forces. As the president said very clearly, the starting point for that debate, for him, is the report from our commanders on the ground, informed by Admiral Fallon and secretary of defense, and Pace and the joint chiefs. And that’s what will begin to play out when General Petraeus returns to Washington and begins his testimony to Congress a week from today, a week from tomorrow.

Q: (cross-talk)

MR. HADLEY: So, what he was trying to do was frame the issue, and then give General Petraeus an opportunity to present it to the Congress and to the American people. And that’s how he wants to proceed.

SECRETARY GATES: I might add I also have an opinion on this.

Q: What is your opinion?

SECRETARY GATES: I will share it at the appropriate time.

Q: (inaudible)

SECRETARY GATES: Yes, I think so.

Q: Can you talk about how important it was that all the commanders give the president directly their thoughts? How are the differences between where your commanders and your military commanders are? Are they wide difference or are they very narrow – there’s general agreement on some principles? (inaudible).

SECRETARY GATES: I’m going to answer that question kind of enigmatically. Just because I wanted the commanders to present their views independently and directly to the president does not necessarily mean they were in disagreement.

Q: (inaudible) presented their analysis will come in the future, and will be presented separately or together?

SECRETARY GATES: The president already has it. That’s what we did this week.

Q: Are you expecting the president to make some sort of major speech or pronouncement on the way forward for the next several months after he gets the Petraeus/Crocker report?

MR. HADLEY: I think you can expect at some point the president will, having had General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker and an opportunity to speak to the Congress, the president having heard from them, the secretary of defense, his combatant commander Admiral Fallon, General Pace, the joint chiefs, Secretary Rice, and having heard the political side from Ambassador Crocker, and then pulling on what he’s learned today, I think you can expect at some point the president is going to tell the American people what he thinks, and outline the way forward based on these inputs.

The president actually said that several months ago. He said he would get the reports that I’ve just described. He would talk to, consult quietly with members of Congress, Republicans and Democrats, and then he would make his decision. And when he does make that decision, I’m sure he’ll have an opportunity to explain it to the country.

STAFF: In the interest of preserving your filing time, let’s take one more question.

Q: When the American people look at the surge strategy and whether it’s had a positive impact, has it had a positive impact in Anbar or is the successes in Anbar been kind of a serendipitous event that’s been extraneous to the surge?

SECRETARY GATES: Let me start and then Steve follow up, and Doug if he wants to say something. I think that what has happened in Anbar is not just fortuitous. The strategy out here to try and enlist the help of the sheikhs, for the tribal leaders to come together began, for all practical purposes, almost a year ago. We have seen, the fruit of that effort has really become more apparent in the last few months, but it has been underway for quite some time with a lot of courageous leadership by the Anbaris themselves.

But they were very explicit in their comments to the president today that it was the additional, the presence of the additional U.S. forces, the Marines that came in, that helped cement the gains they felt they had made but were at risk and made the situation in their view one that is pretty stable as far as they’re concerned. General Lute.

GEN. LUTE: Yeah, I’d just add that the president last January announced an addition of 4,000 Marines to al Anbar, and they’ve been here serving since then. But the Anbaris themselves have added 20,000 Anbaris to the rolls of the Iraqi Security Forces. So you get a sense of order of magnitude here. Four thousand additional Americans perhaps served as a catalyst for something that actually started before they arrived, and helped us promote the addition of about 20,000 Anbaris to Iraqi Security Forces.

MR. HADLEY: This is not serendipity. If you remember the president’s speech January of last year, he focused on two things. Reinforcements into Baghdad to deal with sectarian violence, and reinforcements to Anbar to take advantage of the opportunities that he saw emerging and that had been worked on. So this was part of the plan, and an essential part of the plan that he outlined in January of last year.

GEN. LUTE: If I may, one other thought on Anbar, though, and we shouldn’t leave without this. There an the American contribution, there was an Anbari contribution; we should not underplay the prominence of what al Qaida did here to spark these moves. It was really al Qaida which overplayed its hand here, and I think if you look across the Arab world, Anbar province in Iraq is the place where al Qaida said it was going to plant its flag and create Anbar as the cornerstone of its caliphate. And what we’ve seen now, I think first time in the Arab world, is that the Anbaris have said, “Not here; you’re not doing that.” And they rejected the al Qaida vision. So al Qaida played a role in what happened here in Anbar as well.

SECRETARY GATES: In fact, it was said explicitly today that for the first time a Middle Eastern people got to see what rule by al Qaida would be like, and the Iraqis rejected it.

Q: Mr. Secretary, if I may, what was the atmosphere like in the meeting between the tribal sheikhs and the Maliki government. I mean I think anyone would acknowledge there’s still strains in those relationships. Could you give us a sense of whether they just showed up or if there was a feeling of reconciliation? What was it like?

SECRETARY GATES: Well, I think, actually, there was, I think, a good feeling, and each of the elements – there was also some military in there, we had the provincial governor there, we had the sheikhs, and we had the national leaders. And I would say there was a sense of shared purpose among them, that they were all in this together. And then there was some, what I consider some good-natured jousting about resources, and who’s going to get what in terms of reconstruction and so on.

STAFF: Thank you all.

http://www.defenselink.mil/Transcripts/Transcript.aspx?TranscriptID=4031

But I actually think I frist had this transcript called to my attention on the Global Security web site…

####

Monday, May 21, 2007

20070520 Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates signs copies of his book


Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates signs copies of his book

May 20, 2007

http://www.defenselink.mil/multimedia/

05/20/07 - Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates signs copies of his book, "From the Shadows," before speaking at the commencement ceremony of his alma mater, the college of William and Mary, in Williamsburg, Va., May 20, 2007. DoD photo by Cherie A. Thurlby. (Released)

####

20070520 20061201 Secretary of Defense Gates Speeches


Secretary of Defense Gates Speeches

May 20th, 2007

05/20/2007: College of William and Mary Commencement

05/19/2007: Armed Forces Day

05/19/2007: Team America Rocketry Challenge

05/09/2007: Senate Appropriations Committee

05/03/2007: Greater Dallas Chamber of Commerce

04/25/2007: Navy Flag Officers Conference

04/18/2007: American Chamber of Commerce of Cairo

04/10/2007: Army Chief of Staff Change of Responsibility Ceremony

03/29/2007: House Appropriations Committee--Defense

03/27/2007: American-Turkish Council

03/26/2007: U.S. Pacific Command Assumption of Command Ceremony

03/23/2007: U.S. Northern Command Change of Command Ceremony

03/16/2007: U.S. Central Command Change of Command Ceremony

03/09/2007: U.S. Senate Youth Program

03/08/2007: Message to the Troops on Care for Wounded Warriors

03/01/2007: NCO Breakfast

02/27/2007: U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations

02/11/2007: Munich Conference on Security Policy

02/06/2007: Posture Statement to the Senate Armed Services Committee

01/12/2007: Statement on Iraq to the Senate Armed Service Committee

01/11/2007: Press Availability With Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice

01/11/2007: Testimony on Iraq to the House Armed Services Committee

12/22/2006: Holiday Message to the Troops

12/18/2006: Secretary Gates' Swearing-In Remarks

12/18/2006: Message to Department of Defense Personnel

12/15/2006: Farewell Parade

12/10/2006: Town Hall Meeting with 4/1 Cav

12/10/2006: Town Hall Meeting

12/08/2006: Pentagon Town Hall Meeting

12/01/2006: Union League Club Gold Medal Award Ceremony

20070520 Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates College of William and Mary Graduation Exercises Remarks

Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates College of William and Mary Graduation Exercises Remarks

College of William and Mary May 20, 2007

Courtesy of Joseph McClain, Director of Research Communications, The College of William & Mary and U.S. Department of Defense, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs) Duty Officer

For more information go to: “Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates transcribed commencement remarks;” or - http://www.wm.edu/news/index.php?id=7791

and -Video of Gates' remarks and -Commencement 2007 coverage

_____

Thank you, President Nichol. Members of the faculty, parents, distinguished guests. Justice O’Connor—Chancellor—a pleasure to see you. Justice O’Connor administered my oath of office as Director of Central Intelligence in 1991 and, more recently, as President Nichol has mentioned, we served on the Baker-Hamilton Commission last year—although my tenure on the group was rather abruptly interrupted.

Speaking of which, in terms of my timing in taking on the responsibilities of the Secretary of Defense, it reminds me of a story told long ago by Senator Richard Russell of Georgia, who spoke of having seen a bull that charged a locomotive. He said, “You know that was the bravest bull I ever saw, but I can’t say much for his judgment.”

Dr. Kelso and Secretary Coleman, your recognition here today is well-deserved.

To the members of the Class of 2007: Congratulations. I am truly honored—and flattered—to be your graduation speaker.

I presided over 39 commencement ceremonies as president of Texas A&M, yet, today is the first commencement speech I have ever given. I thank all of you for the extraordinary privilege of letting it be at my alma mater.

To the parents: you must be welling up with pride at the achievements of your children. Having put two children through college, I know there are many sighs of relief as well, and you are probably already planning how to spend your newly re-acquired disposable income. Forget it. Trust me on this. If you think you’ve written your last check to your son or daughter, dream on. The National Bank of Mom and Dad is still open for business.

I guess I am supposed to give you some advice on how to succeed. I could quote the billionaire J. Paul Getty, who offered advice on how to get rich. He said, “Rise early, work late, strike oil.” Or, Alfred Hitchcock, who said, “There’s nothing to winning really. That is if you happen to be blessed with a keen eye, an agile mind, and no scruples whatsoever.

Well, instead of those messages, my only words of advice for success today comes from two great women. First, opera star Beverly Sills, who said, “There are no short cuts to anyplace worth going.” And second, from Katharine Hepburn, who wrote: “Life is to be lived. If you have to support yourself, you had bloody well find some way that is going to be interesting. And you don’t do that by sitting around wondering about yourself.”

In all those 39 commencements at Texas A&M, I learned the importance of brevity for a speaker. George Bernard Shaw once told a speaker he had 15 minutes. The speaker asked, “How can I possibly tell them all I know in 15 minutes? Shaw replied, “I advise you to speak very slowly.” I will speak quickly, because, to paraphrase President Lincoln, I have no doubt you will little note nor long remember what is said here.

I arrived at William & Mary in 1961 at age 17, intending to become a medical doctor. My first year was pure pre-med: biology, chemistry, calculus and so on. I soon switched from pre-med to history. I used to say “God only knows how many lives have been saved by my becoming Director of CIA instead of a doctor.”

When reflecting on my experience here I feel gratitude for many things:

To William & Mary for being a top-tier school that someone like me could actually afford to attend—even as an out-of-state student. By the way, hold on to your hats, parents: Out of state tuition then was $361 a semester.

Gratitude for the personal care and attention from a superb faculty and staff—a manifestation of this university’s commitment to undergraduate education that continues to this day;

Gratitude to those in the greater Williamsburg community, who opened their hearts and their homes to a 17-year-old far from his own home; and

Gratitude for one more thing. During my Freshman year I got a ‘D’ in calculus. When my father called from Kansas to ask how such a thing was possible, I had to admit, “Dad, the ‘D’ was a gift.” So, I’m grateful to that math professor too.

What William & Mary gave me, above all else, was a calling to serve—a sense of duty to community and country that this college has sought to instill in each generation of students for more than 300 years. It is a calling rooted in the history and traditions of this institution.

Many a night, late, I’d walk down Duke of Gloucester Street from the Wren Building to the Capitol. On those walks, in the dark, I felt the spirit of the patriots who created a free and independent country, who helped birth it right here in Williamsburg. It was on those walks that I made my commitment to public service.

I also was encouraged to make that commitment by the then-president of the United States, John F. Kennedy, who said to we young Americans in the early 1960s, “Ask not what your country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your country.”

We are celebrating the 400th anniversary of the founding of Jamestown. Looking back, it’s hard to imagine this country could have gotten off to a more challenging start. It began as a business venture of a group of London merchants with a royal patent. The journalist Richard Brookhiser recently compared it to Congress today granting Wal-Mart and GE a charter to colonize Mars.

Brookhiser wrote, “Its leaders were always fighting. Leaders who were incompetent or unpopularsometimes the most competent were the least popularwere deposed on the spot,” He continues, “The typical 17th Century account of Jamestown argues that everything would have gone well if everyone besides the author had not done wrong.” Sounds like today’s memoirs by former government officials.

Jamestown saw the New World’s first representative assembly—the institutional expression of the concept that people should have a say in how they were governed, and having that say brought with it certain obligations: a duty to participate, a duty to contribute, a duty to serve the greater good.

It is these four-hundred-year-old obligations that I want to address for the next few minutes. When talking about American democracy, we hear a great deal about freedoms, and rights, and, more recently, about the entitlements of citizenship. We hear a good deal less about the duties and responsibilities of being an American.

Young Americans are as decent, generous, and compassionate as we’ve ever seen in this country—an impression reinforced by my four and a half years of experience as President of Texas A&M, by the response of college students across America—and especially here at William & Mary—to the tragedy at Virginia Tech, and even more powerfully reinforced by almost six months as Secretary of Defense.

That is what makes it puzzling that so many young people who are public-minded when it comes to their campus and community tend to be uninterested in— if not distrustful of—our political processes. Nor is there much enthusiasm for participating in government, either as a candidate or for a career.

While volunteering for a good cause is important, it is not enough. This country will only survive and progress as a democracy if its citizens—young and old alike—take an active role in its political life as well.

Seventy percent of eligible voters in this country cast a ballot in the election of 1964. The voting age was then 21. During the year I graduated, 1965, the first major American combat units arrived in Vietnam, and with them, many 18-, 19-, and 20-year-olds. In recognition of that disparity, years later the voting age would be lowered to 18 by constitutional amendment.

Sad to say, that precious franchise, purchased and preserved by the blood of hundreds of thousands of Americans your age and younger from 1776 to today, has not been adequately appreciated or exercised by your generation.

In 2004, with our nation embroiled in two difficult and controversial wars, the voting percentage was only 42 percent for those aged 18 to 24.

Ed Muskie, former senator and Secretary of State, once said that “you have the God given right to kick the government around.” And it starts with voting, and becoming involved in campaigns. If you think that too many politicians are feckless and corrupt, then go out and help elect different ones. Or go out and run yourself. But you must participate, or else the decisions that affect your life and the future of our country will be made for you—and without you.

So vote. And volunteer. But also consider doing something else: dedicating at least part of your life in service to our country.

I entered public life more than 40 years ago, and no one is more familiar with the hassles, frustrations and sacrifices of public service than I am. Government is, by design of the Founding Fathers, slow, unwieldy and almost comically inefficient. Will Rogers used to say: “I don’t make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts.”

These frustrations are inherent in a system of checks and balances, of divisions and limitations of power. Our Founding Fathers did not have efficiency as their primary goal. They designed a system intended to sustain and protect liberty for the ages. Getting things done in government is not easy, but it’s not supposed to be.

I last spoke at William & Mary on Charter Day in 1998. Since then our country has gone through September 11 with subsequent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. We learned once again that the fundamental nature of man has not changed, that evil people and forces will always be with us, and must be dealt with through courage and strength.

Serving the nation has taken on a whole new meaning and required a whole new level of risk and sacrifice—with hundreds of thousands of young Americans in uniform who have stepped forward to put their lives on the line for their country. These past few months I’ve met many of those men and women—in places like Fallujah and Tallil in Iraq and Bagram and Forward Operating Base Tillman in Afghanistan—and at Walter Reed as well. Seeing what they do every day, and the spirit and good humor with which they do it, is an inspiration. The dangers they face, and the dangers our country faces, make it all the more important that this kind of service be honored, supported, and encouraged.

The ranks of these patriots include the graduates of William & Mary’s ROTC program, and the cadets in this Class of 2007, who I’d like to address directly. You could have chosen a different path—something easier, or safer, or better compensated—but you chose to serve. You have my deepest admiration and respect—as Secretary of Defense, but mostly as a fellow American.

You are part of a tradition of voluntary military service dating back to George Washington’s Continental Army. That tradition today includes General David McKiernan, William & Mary Class of 1972, who led the initial ground force in Iraq and now commands all Army troops in Europe. It also is a tradition not without profound loss and heartache.

Some of you may know the story of Ryan McGlothlin, William & Mary Class of 2001: a high school valedictorian, Phi Beta Kappa here, and Ph.D. candidate at Stanford. After being turned down by the Army for medical reasons, he persisted and joined the Marines and was deployed to Iraq in 2005. He was killed leading a platoon of riflemen near the Syrian border.

Ryan’s story attracted media attention because of his academic credentials and family connections. That someone like him would consider the military surprised some people. When Ryan first told his parents about joining the Marines, they asked if there was some other way to contribute. He replied that the privileged of this country bore an equal responsibility to rise to its defense.

It is precisely during these trying times that America needs its best and brightest young people, from all walks of life, to step forward and commit to public service. Because while the obligations of citizenship in any democracy are considerable, they are even more profound, and more demanding, as citizens of a nation with America’s global challenges and responsibilities—and America’s values and aspirations.

During the war of the American Revolution, Abigail Adams wrote the following to her son, John Quincy Adams: “These are times in which a genius would wish to live. It is not in the still calm of life, or the repose of a pacific station that great characters are formed. . . . Great necessities call out great virtues.”

You graduate in a time of “great necessities.” Therein lies your challenge and your opportunity.

A final thought. As a nation, we have, over more than two centuries, made our share of mistakes. From time to time, we have strayed from our values; and, on occasion, we have become arrogant in our dealings with others. But we have always corrected our course. And that is why today, as throughout our history, this country remains the world’s most powerful force for good—the ultimate protector of what Vaclav Havel once called “civilization’s thin veneer.” A nation Abraham Lincoln described as mankind’s last, best hope.”

If, in the 21st century, America is to be a force for good in the world—for freedom, the rule of law, and the inherent value of each and every person; if America is to continue to be a beacon for all who are oppressed; if America is to exercise global leadership consistent with our better angels, then the most able and idealistic of your generation must step forward and accept the burden and the duty of public service. I promise you that you will also find joy and satisfaction and fulfillment.

I earlier quoted a letter from Abigail Adams to her son, John Quincy. I will close with a quote from a letter John Adams sent to one of their other sons, Thomas Boylston Adams. And he wrote: “Public business, my son, must always be done by somebody. It will be done by somebody or another. If wise men decline it, others will not; if honest men refuse it, others will not.”

Will the wise and the honest among you come help us serve the American people?

Congratulations and Godspeed.

###