he was on the other side of the pentagon from where the flight had hit. his immediate response was to run outside the building to see what had happened. he spent a few minutes helping victims. then he ran back into the building to drop other top officials in planning the response. he like other top officials of the bush administration never forgot that day. it gave him an even greater sense of urgency than before and try to affect change in the u.s. military. he came into the job as defense secretary with a main assignment from george bush to transform the military. he was pushing for that before 9/11, but afterwards the mission gained even greater urgency. host: we will take a look at one of the many briefings donald rumsfeld held of the pentagon. it is in response to the question, back when he did a kuwait troop town meeting. when he said to go to war with the army you have, not the one you want. this is his response. >> i am truly saddened by the thought that anyone could have the impression that i or others are doing anything other than working urgent

>> guest: yes, the pentagon. and when he was on the other side of the pentagon everything actually had taken place and they believe that he was probably had something to do that. >> host: let me follow up with that call. what was his response that day and how did 9/11 affect donald rumsfeld both personally and the policy point of view? >> guest: it had a very profound effect on rumsfeld. rumsfeld was on the other side the pentagon from where the american airlines flight hit on september ebook and his immediate response was to run out a side of the building to see what happened and he spent a few minutes actually helping, trying to deal with victims and so on before running back into the building and joining the other top administration officials and planning their response to the disaster. he, like other top officials of the bush administration of course never forgot that day. and it gave him more than anything in even greater sense of urgency than he had before that day in terms of trying to affect change in the

in meetings with the pentagon. a solution has to include working with the pentagon. it is something that the president has been involved in since coming to this administration. >> how high priority is this for him? >> we can get it done. the president has talked about this. i have talked about the fact that to have an enduring solution, this has to be done legislatively. that is -- i think most people recognize this will take time to do. working with congress and the pentagon. i think the president will address this in remarks later today. pardon me? no. again, in order to have a solution, this is going to have to be done legislatively. >> one more question, quickly on the d.c. issue -- why hasn't the president changed his license plates on the presidential limousine? is he going to change them to the taxation without representation license plates? >> the president is not -- the president is committed to changing the status of the district of columbia. i would ask you to arrest people in washington whether they wou

of policy positions at the pentagon. but he himself is not a neo- conservative. many of his views overlap. they depart -- that is in one critical area which is the notion of spreading democracy around the world. he was always uncomfortable with that notion, particularly as a rationale for going to war against iraq. he argued to keep it out of frederick just find the invasion. he was not successful. the white house -- to keep it out of the rhetoric just a fine condition. the white house embrace their rhetoric along with weapons of mass destruction. i questioned him on why he was so surrounded with new kinneocod he had no convincing answer. but it did not seem to me as if it were a strategy on his part he explained it as the result of his taking the advice of white house officials and the choice of wolfowitz, and then dave, and so on. guest: he, the quebec quite a few years. they had served together on various groups and commissions. -- they went back quite a few years. host: here is chicago on the independent line. caller

they both came into the job, the top pentagon job from business, eager to try to make change at the pentagon. they both quickly made a lot of waves, made a number of enemies. they were seen as overbearing, surrounded by a number of aides who were of similar mind and manner. and they both of course ended up leading the united states into a very unpopular wars. there is a significant difference though between mcnamara and rumsfeld inner mindset when they left office. already by the time mcnamara left he was beginning to have doubts and beginning to express regrets about the handling of the vietnam war. not so with rumsfeld for may at times have come to express some regret. he didn't with me, and i pressed him on it, particularly in our last interview, last fall. of course, he has left office younger then-- i am sorry, he has left office older than mcnamara was when he left office, and mcnamara has had more time to reflect. so, we will see where rumsfeld finally comes out. >> host: former secretary rumsfeld is working on his own autobiography? >> guest: he is. it is a little surprising that he

he was on the other side of the pentagon from where the american airlines plane hit. his immediate response was to run outside the building to see what happened. he spent a few minutes helping, trying to deal with the victims, and so on before running back into the building and joining the other top administration officials in planning the response to the disaster. he never forgot that they, like other top officials in the administration. it gave him an even greater sense of urgency than he had before that date in terms of trying to effect change in the military. he came into the job as secretary with the main assignment from george bush to transform the military. he was pushing for that before 9/11. afterwards, the whole mission gained greater urgency. host: week are going to take a look at the comments from one of many briefings he held at the pentagon. this is in response to a question about a kuwait town meeting. he said you go to war with army you have instead of the army that you want. this is his response to one of the questions from reporters. >> i am truly sa

and then left the pentagon on the 11th of april, 2003. this was days after the statute of sitcoaddam fell in baghdad. one week later, i was standing in an air strike area. i stood facing this man. he was in his 60s, may be older. his fingernails were really worn down. he had brown hands. he told me how two families were wiped out. his children and grandchildren were killed. his son was a doctor, his wife was a doctor. that was a difficult moment. but it was also a moment where i knew i had done the right thing. in coming to human-rights watch, i could help to tell the story of those people about what happened to them treated i could look to assess whether the geneva conventions were being followed by all parties of the conflict. that is what it comes down to, what we do at human rights watch. let me tell you a little bit about how that work happens. at human rights watch, we have about 270 people. we work in about 80 nations worldwide. we are split up into different ways. -- we're split up in two different ways. we have the regional divis

the book came into the job, the top pentagon job from business. they were eager to make change and the pentagon. the book quickly made many waves, made many enemies and they were seen as overbearing. there were surrounded by a number of aids who were of similar mind and manner. they both ended up fleeing the united states into very unpopular wars. -- leading to the united states into unpopular wars. there is a difference between the two men in their mind set when they have left office. by the time robert mcnamara had left he was beginning to have doubts and express them concerning the vietnam war. not so with donald rumsfeld, but he may in time come to express regret. he did not with me. i pressed him on a particularly in our last interview last fall. he left office the number -- i mean, he left office older than it robert mcnamara was when he left office. robert mcnamara has had more time to reflect. so, we will see where donald rumsfeld finally comes down. host: and he is working on his own autobiography? guest: he is, he is. it is a little surp

both between the parties but also between the legislative branch and the pentagon. unfortunately these nondisclosure statements have a tendency we are concerned with muzzling our admirals and generals from preventing them from giving us data we need to be able to do our job. this amendment is being brought also by the gentleman from california, mr. forbes, and i would yield to him two minutes. the chair: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for two minutes. mr. forbes: thank you, mr. chairman. if we don't listen to anything else in this debate, we need to pause a moment and listen to what's happening right now. just a couple moments ago missile defense we heard, quote, unless you have oversight you should not spend money on missile defense or other platforms. and yet the majority and this administration fights us every juncture to deny the transparency we need for that very oversight. this administration came in, the first executive order that they had said, the democracy requires accountability and accountability requires trp and the first things they do when

and the pentagon. i think the president will address this during his remarks later today. >> [inaudible] >> no. but in order to have that in during solution, this will have to be done legislatively. >> why hasn't the president changed his license plates on the presidential limousine? >> i think rather than change the logo around a license plate, the president is committed instead to changing the status of the district of columbia. >> but it is a symbol that a lot of people look at. >> i guess i would ask you to ask people in washington if it would like their status changed for the symbolism screwed on the back of a limousine. >> the previous president had a pretty good relationship with the colombian president. do you expect the new president to have -- >> i think today's meeting will mark the continued strong relationship between the united states and colombia. we hope that the meeting represents a deeper cooperation with an important ally. but i think part of that cooperation, part of that friendship

well, the pentagon papers got out. obama deciding not to release these torture photos, which was again i think not a great decision for free speech, those will get out. so i think that what we find is that government transparency is more important than anything else and that especial li given new technologies today, things will get out. so the government has an obligation to be more transparent. host: educated at brown university, liz has done several documentaries, including comba, ghosts of abu ghraib. she is up in new york where she's getting ready to premier "shouting fire," stories from the edge of free speech. tomorrow night, monday, 9:00. greens borrow, north carolina. sarah. good morning. caller: hello. host: hi there. caller: yes. long-time watcher, first-time caller. i have a brief comment and then just a couple of questions. for the comments, i personally feel that it's not really responsible for c-span to show, to talk about a documentary that we haven't seen yet. i think that it's -- i'm going to watch it

as large as the pentagon is. i pentagon where i spent many years. what i did]jé -- what i found war that i never believed would ever be fought. my job for community, at that point, for me, things changed drastically. i went back to work, and i was tasked along with others, i'm sure -- but i was tasked with trying to discern whether or not there was a relationship between saddam hussein and osama bin laden. now, i turned to my boss and i said, nope, job done. what's next. but, of course, i had to sit down with the chief analyst on counterterrorism for iraq and we sat and looked over just about every piece of intelligence that we could in the time allotted us. now, of course, since then people have done even more. but even back then, with what we had, we put together an assessment that said there was no relationship between the two. as we, the united states, went into afghanistan, my work more and more turned towards taking the old target lists that we had for the various contingency plans for iraq for that war th

shoot down flight 93. >> when i got back to the pentagon i was on capitol hill, got back to the pentagon, we had the world trade center and the pentagon had been hit, so three of the occurrences that they had happened, the fourth had not happened, flight 93. it was known to be hijacked and fought to be heading for washington d.c.. what dothought to be heading fo washington d.c.. what do you do about this? we went to get permission to shoot it down, you're shooting down an airliner with americans on it, probably people from other countries as well, innocent men, women and children. is not a good solution because you only shoot it down if you know it is going to be a threat to something on the ground like the u.s. capitol or the white house, because more people will be killed if it crashes and to those objects but at the same time, should an airplane down over washington d.c. there will be debris. this is a terrible solution, a terrible solution, but it was the only one at our disposal and st. goodness we didn't have to use that. it is much better, as i will do later today, go to the airpo

where are they today in the pentagon? >> there aren't any. >> you look at the 1983 cover story, and it says the pentagon undergrad. he is out there from the political engineering, precisely what happened with that and the consequent of the. generationally, are there a few boys is there, how can we amplify them wax is there a way to do that? is there a way to send grassley back? >> i haven't given up hope yet. i have proof of the. i talk on the cover year of 13 pentagon insiders and others who produce this book. if you look at the bios about the author section there are only 12 bios there. 13 is not. there still a lot of people. a lot more than that one, given the proper literature, will be happy to do the right thing work a trade. so i see it as a question of the leaders that we as citizens that the congress confirms and so every time there is a failure >> and not something that they can address. even though the military belongs to them it's our military. there's been a debate outside of work done by cgi and veterans grou

there is a sense in the pentagon that someone is looking over their shoulder. i don't care if they get a sense that someone is looking over their shoulder or somebody in congress is looking over their shoulder. they feel free to do what they want at any cost and when they need more money which is constantly they know how to push the buttons. a whistle-blower attitude is part of the mentality where there is oversight being performed in both of those places that you are not getting right now. in congress, you see some hearings that pretend to be oversight but what you are really getting his senators and house members asking halfy questions. reading off of their question, not listening to for not understanding the baloney nature of the answer and reading on to the next read off question and they call that oversight. until you get the mentality on capitol hill that these things are taken seriously you are not going to get much legislation or a sense, like they said in blazing saddles, we have to save our phony baloney jobs here. we don't have that sense and it is v

. >> host: bradley graham covered the pentagon for the "washington post" for many years and now a book that goes on sale today on donald rumsfeld, "by his own rules: the ambitions, successes and ultimate failures of donald rumsfeld." how did donald rumsfeld viewed the role of government official of public service? >> guest: he was a very interesting public service from a very young age, he was inspired in college senior year

so how will the pentagon response to that idea? >> i don't know what the precise response will be in a letter form from secretary to senator inouye or if there will be a call. allah can tell you is, when this question has come up in the past and frankly, it came up in the secretaries polis side with the japanese defense minister when we were in singapore. the answer has always been the same. right now there is legislation, there is a lot, the ob of amendment which prevents us from exporting that technology to any one. so, as good an ally is japan is and as much as we may like to provide that capability to allies such as japan, the fact is it is prevented, were prevented from doing so according to the ob amendment so unless there's some sort of legislative remedy to this, unless it will repeal, our hands are tied on this issue. that is why the secretary made the further point to his japanese counterpart that, that the of 35 is the plane which we are pursuing and it plain that we would recommend the japanese focus their efforts in te

about getting rid of the waste in the pentagon. we won't do it to pay this. instead, we'll charge it to our kids because we don't have the guts to stand up and make the priority selections that we need to make. i believe in a strong defense, but i also know what the waste is in the pentagon, and the fact that we won't go after all this waste. you know, we'll have a census that's going to cost two and a half times what the last census costs and we won't go after that. we have $80 billion, they say $72, but i'm talking fraud and medicare alone. we won't go after that $72 billion? it's well in excess of that as far as gao is concerned. we won't go after that to pay for this? no. we'll just let the $72 billion go keep going on right out the door and charge $80 billion to our brand kids. we won't make the hard choices every family in america is making today. this is something about prevention, but you're talking about infrastructure here. you're not talking about the real interaction between physicians and patients and television advert

>> what is the pentagon's assessment of the success that pakistan armies have had? >> i think it's been three, four weeks now or longer, and i think i spoke about that three weeks ago and we were a week into it then. it's been five weeks since this operation is underway. i think we are greatly heartened by the fact it's gone on as long as it. one key thing we were looking for in terms of pakistan military operations is sustainability. clearly this operation is sustained. and in doing so i think they have enjoyed great success. so we are pleased. we are encouraged. and we are hoping that the offense continues to the point that the militants in this region are defeated. and we are working with the pakistanis to provide them with whatever they need, wherein reason, to ultimately prevail. >> do you approve for the pac army to move into al-qaeda. do you think they are willing to do that? >> i won't get into those threats, where they exist, i would be encouraging of the pakistan military to take it to them, head on, and defeating them. but i won't go through a strategy, t

there is not a lot of support for that weapons program at the pentagon. it is the determination that they have made going forward that it is not a weapons system they believe should be a priority for this country and the threats that it faces moving forward. the president -- our administration has set up a policy that said if that funding for another aircraft second engine were in the legislation, senior advisers at the white house and the secretary of defense would advocate or veto that, in that is our position. >> five years ago, when the president of haiti was overthrown by the military, the previous commission recognized the new government by the chief justice because under the haitian constitution, he was next in this succession. now with the president leaving honduras, the congress elected their president. >> that is one way of putting it. >> ousted. they elected their president as the new president to the country, which is in accordance of honduran lot. why doesn't the admonition simply follow the president? >> i think what we saw was a severe disr

in the facts that are familiar to anyone who's read the western-run polls, the pentagon-run polls. well, the current u.s. efforts to prevent the -- to prevent the legally required referendum are extremely revealing. sometimes they're called democracy promotion. well, while obama is signaling very clearly his intention to establish a firm and large-scale presence in the region, he's also, as you know sharply escalating the afpak war following the strategy to drive the taliban into pakistan with potentially awful results for this extremely dangerous and unstable state, which is facing insurrections throughout its territory. these are the most extreme in the tribal areas, which cross the afpak border called the durand line. and the same people live on both sides of it, the pastun tribes and they have never accepted -- the afghan government never accepted it as long as it was independent. well, that's where most of the fighting is going on. one of the leading specialists on the region is alec harrison. he recently wrote that the outcome of washington's current policies might well be wh

gives out are given out by the pentagon. are there no fiscal conservatives at the pentagon? i know everybody is trying to prove how patriotic they are today, and everybody feels that we shouldn't question anything the defense department wants. but to allow $295 billion in cost overruns on just these 72 largest weapons systems in my opinion it's unpatriotic not to question that. and i ask again, are no fiscal conservatives at the pentagon? in fact, we've turned the defense department primarily into the department of foreign aid now, and i believe very strongly in national defense. but we cannot afford to run the whole world and we cannot afford to have the department of defense be the department of foreign aid. all of this comes at a -- not long after we have raised our national debt limit to over $13 trillion. nobody can comprehend a figure like that. no one. that is an astounding figure. and yet on top of this debt that we already have, the president's budget in this year and the next two years will add over $4 trillion of

were trying to itll back but it was after that that you planted the bombs in the capital and the pentagon. >> i didn't, the organization took credit for it. those were symbolic actions. they were designed to be in the middle of the night to be understood around the world, ndich they were instantly. they do need a communique to say what or why, and they heard no one. i am not going to defend them. in today's world is indefensible but they were not terrorist actions. >> host: what do you do today? what is your day job? >> guest: i teach at northwestern law school, i had the benefit of teaching human rights and children's rights for almost 18 years. o direct the family justice anter which is an organization, clinical program so law students and social work students work with our lawyers, lawyers who represent kids every day, kids talked with crime, kids pushed out of school, 0 tolerance policies and immigrant kids seeking asylum. m host: what is your relationship to bill ayers? >> guest: he is my best friend, my partner, i adore him. he makes me laugh. >> host: is your husband? >> guest: it

to go do their thing for the pentagon. and then north korea reacts. the only reason we have not invaded them is because they have got that atomic bomb. host: here's hampton, va. on our democrats' line. caller: thank you so much, c- span. i enjoy your guests, especially the men who spoke just a few minutes ago. i would like to say that i hope these young ladies will be able to come back, and do important journalistic work here in the u.s.a., nonetheless, while they are in north korea i don't think we should take a bully attitude of sanctioning and pointing our fingers to the bad boys of north korea. the journalists know that they take on missions that are possibly dangerous for themselves. i hope that our country stands by then, but i don't think we can accuse north korea of making sure that their borders are protected. we don't go over their borders and we don't want them to come over to our borders. we have thousands of service people guarding south korea, so we need to give the same respect. the journalist know the risks

of operational test and evaluation for 4 years in the pentagon. and nt also having started in the defense industry, pierre sprey was one of the original whiz kids who went to be part of the spider mafia, and is part of the fantastic team responsible for the design of the f-16. i am going to sit down because we have a lot to talk about. i want to hear from winslow t. wheeler first. >> thanks very much. it is a real pleasure to be sponsored by the 5 groups that are sponsoring this little event. there are a lot of organizations in washington that pretend to be involved in defense issues. these 5 organizations, in my judgment, are 5 that actually are seriously involved in defense issues. a couple of notes about the book itself, when this airs on tv it will be available on amazon.com, it will be available on march 20th or so, courtesy of stanford university press. we have the cd-i edition on sale, we will be happy to accommodate you for sales when the presentations are over. we are also making available to you free our military almanac. i have my thumb

some fear the pentagons ability to develop cyber warfare may forge partner ships with the private sector. and with governments and businesses a broad. in the cyber domain according to those. kevin chilton of strategic command said in a meeting last month with reporters,nsa had unique abilities to inform the military of threats and a ver theirs intent and to prepare for attack and to prepare for attack and a tack. every day unseen operators using software are using millions of scans that handled 56 teara bytes of data a day and used by millions of military and civilian personnel. that's in the "washington post" and there's also a story looking at - i've lost that story. oh, the associated press. may have heard in light of several news agencies being closed to independent ves gaytive journalism. these are usually, while the associated press decides to show some of the stories as far as journalism starting july first, they will deliver work by the center for republic integrity, the center for ves gaytive report together 1500 american newspapers that are free to public the and publish the ma

one of the things one learns at the pentagon is meetings are supposed to start and stop on time. >> i hope this question does not disappoint you. we traditionally think of warm places when we think of your aior. you outline the beginning of your strategy. as you are looking up 20 years, to the north of your aor, the bering strait, bering sea, and thinking presence and not talking submarines. how much did the arctic feature in your thinking in your formulation strategy? >> it is a terrific question. the shortest answer is it did not figure much, but we did not ignore it. there are all manner of the interesting aspects to the global warming, if that is what is really happening. as there is an unmistakable evidence of increased access to be number passage. it you come up here, what military command is responsible? visit northern command? i could have made a pretty compelling case two and a half or three years ago. is it pacific command? you bet. is it european command? and what about canada? is it their water? how do we work through the policy challenges attended to military operations o

holt: the communication you speak of came from a mid level member of the pentagon. the only formal statement comes from the welsh report, i quoted from earlier, which said, we endorse the use of video recordings in all camps for all interrogations. perhaps this mid level official at the pentagon has not received the word that currently there are being developed improved procedures for detention and interrogation in this new administration. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. mckeon: thank you, mr. chairman. the lieutenant colonel is a high-ranking field officer and i think the record as he stated stands for itself. he's a legislative officer with the department. lieutenant colonel will not state on the record something that opposes his higher rank. i think we all know that. with that i encourage all of us to defeat this amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new jersey. all those in favor say aye. all those opposed, no. in the opinion of

you see the case of the pentagon papers way before the internet. this was when the u.s. government was in vietnam and the secretary of defense says, decides to commission a study saying why are we in vietnam and that's the pentagon papers, sort of an interesting thing that the secretary of defense has to commission a study to find out why we are in the war. well, those papers got out, obama deciding to not release these torture photos which was, again, i think not a great decision for free speech, those sort of will get out. so i think what we find is that government transparency is more important than anything else and that especially given the technologies today things wirl get out so the government has really an obligation to be transparent. >> educated at brown university, liz garbus has done several document tear ris, including "coma,," also produced specials. she's in new york where she's getting ready to premiere "shouting fire: stories from the edge of free speech," and that's tomorrow night, monday, 9:00, hbo. greensboro, north carolina. sorry race on the line.

. >> host: bradley graham covered the pentagon for the "washington post" for many years and now a book that goes on sale today on donald rumsfeld, "by his own rules: the ambitions, successes and ultimate failures of donald rumsfeld." how did donald rumsfeld viewed the role of government official of public service? >> guest: he was a very interesting public service from a very young age, he was inspired in college senior year when adamle stevenson came to talk to his courage reading class at princeton urging of the students to put their work in public service and not long after that rumsfeld ran for congress and became the youngest republican member of congress in the 1960's and believed very march in a public service. he served not only in congress but in nixon and ford administrations and then came back of course and the bush administration but even in between when he was a corporate executive he stayed involved in government serving as a presidential envoy and a couple of government commissions. >> host: the book is 800 pages and extensive biography certainly some presidents don't ge

higher all the retired admiral and generals and called for the revolving door of the pentagon but somebody is going to have to -- i don't think that we can just keep on wasting and blowing money in the way that we are doing. the only question i have, you say at one point in your testimony there are a number of new projects in the pipeline and he mentioned this 30 million-dollar facility. how many, rough guess, how many other new projects are going on? >> i can't answer that because that is the immediate action, we are doing the analysis. we know it's $2 billion. we want to go out and touch those projects to see if they make sense. that's why you need people in theater. it just happened that this was shared when we happened to visit that base and you know, a couple hundred bases in iraq we visited three or four of them and there is obviously the need to do the analysis and then go out and look at the high dollar items and ask those questions does this make sense with the drawdown of iraq. >> so do you mean you from a visit to three or four and there are hundreds of basis so is the 2 billion

but as for their particular deployment, i'd direct that the to the pentagon. >> can i just make sure i got this straight. when you were asked about the syrian fighters coming into iraq, have you actually seen a diminishing of that number or is it not yet clear? >> i think it's too soon to gauge the numbers except to assure you that we track this issue very closely. and compared to say a year ago, there is a substantial -- there are fewer such people coming over. now, whether there are fewer coming over because they understand the consequence of unlawful crossing of the border is greater now than it might have been in the past, that's hard to say. but the specific question had to do with the recent discussions with syrian authorities and whether there is a change in the flow at this point and i think in that case it's a little too soon to say. >> that was since last weekend, right? >> the discussions with syria were just last week, yes. so it is obviously a little early to talk about it. >> thank you. >> there has been discussion with turkey about this may be the year that they may gi

that's several hundred more than the pentagon. i'm not sure the people would say for the pentagon, of all the pride we have for our sole soldiers, airmen, marines, i doubt people would say that's the model of economic efficiency. would they say the social security run by the federal government is the best investment system? would they -- pick pic a system the federal government runs and it's hardly seen as the best. we know we have a lot of dedicated employees there, oftentimes they are saddled and handcuffed by regulations. we have a system that is still after all these years, medicaid that has been around since 1960's, so fraught with inefficiency it invites waste, fraud, and abuse. it has not been revamped. an article that appeared in the "the new england journal of medicine" a couple weeks ago was saying, we've got to fix these systems first, otherwise, i go back to the art youicle, providing health care is like building a house. the task requires experts, expensive equipment and materials and a huge amount of coordination. im

. >> admiral, chris with inside the pentagon. >> hi, chris. >> as the defense department does its quaudrenle defense review what priorities are you advocating for? >> a quadrennial defense review we were just in town two weeks ago talking about this. it is an important effort as many of you know. i'm pleased to report that combatant commanders have a larger say-so than my experience in the past in this -- in the formulation of this quadrennial defense review. it's a huge challenge for the department. as you would anticipate. with a space review, a nuclear posture review ongoing and several other not to mention the annual budget challenges, opportunities, if you will. so it's a -- we're more active in the formulation of the review. you know, we submit an integrated priority list. i mean, this will be mind-numbing for a lot of you but an ipl and we have 10 items on our integrated priority list. these are issues where we would prefer a little more funding a little more emphasis, a little more input or a little more output from the department of defense on those priority issues of ours and we su

pentagon is not favorable, the pentagon has indicated that they are aware of the counterinsurgency efforts that the pakistan military's engaging in and they're satisfied with the structure of this legislation that would help them continue to fight terrorism. we can work out some of the kinks, but are we going to wait while people are suffering? this legislation also has a recognition that we're establishing a new relationship with pakistan and the united states, a friendship relationship. we're acknowledging the recent efforts of the pakistan military and swat, and we are also suggesting that if there are changes in pakistan we will reconsider some of the requirements or some of the struck ures that we put in place. i would also say to my colleagues that i hope the republicans who are so interested in pakistan would be interested in making sure the international monetary fund is funded like the president would like it to be and that they would join in that support because they're so strongly in support of pakistan, which got money from it in the last year. in addition, there are issues dea

>> no, there is not a lot of support for that weapons program at the pentagon. the determination they made in going forward, that is not a weapon system they believe should be a priority moving forward. our administration set out a statement of administration policy that said that funding and funding for other aircraft were in legislation, that senior advisers at the white house would advocate a veto of that. >> five years ago, when president aristide of haiti was overthrown by the military, the previous administration recognized a new government by the chief justice. under the haitian constitution, he was an extensive section. -- next in secession. in honduras, their president is ousted. the new president is in accordance with honduran law. >> what we saw over the course of the week and was is the fear -- was a severe this function in a democratic norms. we haven't changed the recognition of who we believe is the president of the country. >> my other question is on the calls the president has made to members of congress as to cap and trade, is the promise to it

for instance, in 1942, the pentagon, the transfusions of black, when the united states was sent to the second world war, and at that time the director of the red cross in these islands, was charles view, very important scientist who had not invented the plasma but almost invented it because thanks to him it was possible to save millions of lives in the second world war, and so he was a director of this part of the red cross, and he said, i will not order these stupid order because block blood doesn't exist. there is not such a thing like a black black. and he was, of course, resigned. he resigned. but he was expelled. he was a scientist, very important, and he was black. he was black himself. so, he knew perfectly well what he was speaking about. and this is an history not very known here in the united states but it's important. >> host: the punchline of your story, because of story is in "mirrors" there's no such thing as black blood, all blood is red. which is total common sense and of course led to his being dismissed. one of the things that is remarkable about the we you tell these

obama is now the president and these are very recent for instance 1942, the pentagon prohibited, forbade the transfusions of black blood. when the united states was entering the second world war and at that time the director of the red cross -- who had not invented it was possible to save millions of lives in the second world war so he was the director of this part of the red cross and he said i will not obey the order because black blood doesn't exist. there is not such a thing like blood black. and he was of course resigned. he was expelled. he was black himself so he knew perfectly well what he was speaking about. and this is a story that is not very well known here in the united states but is important. >> host: in the punch line in your story there is no such thing as black blood, all blood is red which is total common sense and of course led to his being dismissed. one of the things that is remarkable about the way you tell the stories in how they have the structure very often of a joke and there is a lot of humor room, so i picked out one particular couple examples where i thought

approximately 10% of metro riders use the metro rail stations at the pentagon, capitol south and union station serving the military and the congress. in addition, metro's ability to move people quickly and safely in the event of terrorist attacks or natural disasters is critical. metro system was invaluable on september 11th, 2001, providing its importance to the federal government and the nation during the terrorist attacks of that tragic day. there is a clear federal responsibility to this system. metro is unique from any other major public transportation system across the country because it has no dedicated source of funding to pay for its operation and capital funding requirements. but we are close to resolving that issue. i was proud to work alongside with senator mikulski and senator webb and former senator john warner last year to pass the federal safety improvement act signed into law in october of 2008. this law authorizes $1.5 billion over 10 years in federal funds for metro's governing washington metropolitan area transit authority matched dollar for dollar by local jurisdic

in the pentagon papers case, the solicitor general or the supreme court that publication of the information which pose an immediate danger to national security. 18 years later they knowledge he had never seen any trace of a threat to national security from the publication of the intermission and admitted the principal concern is not with national security, but with government embarrassment. it is important to protect national security, and sometimes our courts have to balance the need for justice with considerations. congress has balanced these important demands. in the criminal context we enacted the classified information procedures act. in fisa that we set up procedures for the courts to look at sensitive materials. we can and should do the same in civil cases. our system of government have never lied with assurances at face value. presidents and officials have been known not to tell the truth on occasion. this is especially in the truth -- in their interest to concern -- to conceal something. in the words of the ninth circuit, the executive cannot be its own judge. to allow that is to a

i would love that. >> video of the wreckage of the plan at the pentagon, not at the moment they are showing at the same time they said they are showing you, how can you take that? >> how about all those people, where did the people disappear? >> exactly. >> am i going to have to put down my herger and again? >> so you did meet caitlin, our daughter? >> she's terrific. >> i don't understand those majors. >> [inaudible] >> vanderbilt, she will be here for the summer but you won't be here, you will be in harvard, right? >> i come here. >> give her advice, will you? >> it sounds like she has launched. >> nice to see you. privileged. i am michael smerconish. >> it is a great pleasure to meet you. >> nice to see you. >> that could haunt you if the film that in your hand. [inaudible conversations] >> i was explaining to your wife there was a particular column i had written a few years ago reflecting on the midterm elections and how i felt the party had gotten off the rails and the republican party, right, and from that particular column spurring the idea laying off the road map and that was long b

host: from the pentagon papers to the current date, have they made classified information -- does it always conduct bad, you know, bad things? if it is a secret document, then the government must be up to something? guest: in some circles that is a reaction, but not in all circles. there are 3 million americans who hold security clearances. most understand there is a proper place for secrecy. at the same time we have seen rampant abuse of this authority to gain policy advantage or to avoid controversy. it needs to be, added. host: georgia, good morning, in a panic caller -- independent caller. caller: highs and 28 years in the military and carried a secret clearance. i want to correct you on something you said. he said that there were three classifications for security. there is a little thing in there called a need to know. if you did not need to know something even though you have a secret past, you did not have access to the material. if he does not know what he is talking about, then he should not say it. as far as classifications, if you want classified material released, just t