Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Charges Against Duke Lacrosse Players Dropped; U.S. Military Announces New Troop Rotation Schedule
Aired April 11, 2007 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everyone. I'm Don Lemon, live at CNN world headquarters in Atlanta.
FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: And I'm Fredricka Whitfield, in for Kyra Phillips, who is on assignment.
Combat duty in Iraq. Troops who are deployed or soon to be, well, this is not exactly what they want to hear. Hear it straight from the defense secretary coming up. We're live from the Pentagon.
LEMON: And the words are rush to accuse -- three college athletes called innocent victims and charges against them dropped. You're live in the CNN NEWSROOM.
It is the top of the hour. Insufficient evidence to proceed -- the case is over, the words -- those words spoken today in the sexual assault case against three former Duke University lacrosse players. The North Carolina attorney general made the announcement just moments ago, declaring the players are innocent and that no attack occurred.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROY COOPER, NORTH CAROLINA ATTORNEY GENERAL: Today, we are filing notices of dismissal for all charges against Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty, and David Evans. The result is that these cases are over and no more criminal proceedings will occur.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
LEMON: But, as one case ends, another one may just be getting started.
CNN's Jason Carroll joins us from Raleigh -- Raleigh.
And, Jason, before we get to you, we may have to cut you off. There's a press conference with the defense secretary we're expecting.
But I want to ask you, in all of this, what is the defense going to do now that this has happened?
JASON CARROLL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, this is exactly what the defense wanted to hear. They wanted full vindication, and that's exactly what they got from the attorney general, Roy Cooper.
What's going to happen now is, later on this afternoon, about 4:00 or so, defense attorneys will now have their statement. Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty, Dave Evans will be there.
What they are expected to do now, at this point, is praise the attorney general, as well as the prosecutors, for their investigation, praise them for their work.
I have to tell you, though, in terms of talking to some of these defense sources, this was something that they thought might happen. But they thought it was unlikely. But they were hoping for it. But this was truly incredible.
Just to go over very briefly some of the things that were said, according to the attorney general, they said that the investigation throughout, the eyewitness identification procedures were faulty, unreliable. No DNA confirms the accuser's story. No other witness confirms her story. Other evidence contradicts her story.
Then, he went on to say she contradicts herself. So, this is exactly what defense attorneys have been saying all along. They are going to be very grateful now that they have heard it from the attorney general's office.
Now we switch to what will happen next. And now the attention will be turn -- after the players, it will turn back to Michael Nifong, Durham's district attorney.
I asked the attorney general what should happen to him now. He is being investigated by the state bar for ethics violations. I asked him whether or not he thought Michael Nifong should be disbarred.
This is what a number of defense attorneys think should happen to Michael Nifong. Attorney General Roy Cooper says the process should be played out. He didn't want to taint the process by making comments on that. But I can assure you, that is exactly what defense attorneys are probably going to be calling for at this point.
LEMON: All right, Jason Carroll, in Raleigh, thank you so much for your report.
WHITFIELD: Meantime, out of the Pentagon, we're awaiting a live news conference involving the defense secretary and the Joint Chiefs chairman. When that happens, we will be able to bring that to you live. We're seeing the live pictures right now.
(JOINED IN PROGRESS)
ROBERT GATES, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: My objective was to set clear guidelines that our commanders, troops and their families could understand and use in determining how future rotations in support of the global war on terror would affect them.
At the time, I also understood that we faced a similar challenge in establishing clear, realistic, executable and long-term policy goals to guide the develop -- deployment of active-duty forces, particularly the Army.
This year, I learned that the then -- earlier this year, I learned that the then level of deployed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan would require active-duty units to flow into Iraq before they had spent a full 12 months at home. It is important to point out that this was the case prior to the president's decision to provide additional forces to support the Baghdad security plan.
This reality was a significant factor influencing my decision to recommend to the president that we grow the Army and the Marine Corps over the next five years, by 65,000 and 25,000, respectively.
As the next step, acting upon the recommendation of the acting secretary and chief of staff of the Army, I am announcing today a new policy intended to provide better clarity, predictability, and sustainability in how we deploy active-duty Army forces.
Effective immediately, active Army units now in the Central Command area of responsibility and those headed there will deploy for not more than 15 months, and will return home, to home station, for not less than 12 months.
This policy applies to all units, with the exception of two brigades currently deployed that have already been extended to 16- month deployments.
This policy is a difficult, but necessary interim step that will be kept in place only until we can shift with confidence to the 12- month deployments and 12 months at home, and, ultimately, to the rotation goal for Army active-duty forces of 12 months deployed and 24 months at home.
Without this action, we would have had to deploy five Army active-duty brigades sooner than the 12-month-at-home goal. I believe it is fairer to all soldiers that all share the burden equally.
This policy will accomplish two other goals. First, it represents a fair, predictable and sustainable commitment to our troops that they can use with confidence to understand what the country is asking of them as they deploy.
I strongly believe that we owe our troops as much advanced notice as possible and clarity on what they and their families can expect, in other words, predictability.
Second, this policy, as a matter of prudent management, will provide us with the capacity to sustain the deployed force. This approach also upholds our commitment to decide when to begin any draw down of U.S. forces in Iraq solely based on conditions in the ground.
I realize this decision will ask a lot of our Army troops and their families. We are deeply grateful for the service and sacrifice of our men and women in uniform and their commitment to accomplishing our mission.
In the end, I believe this new approach will allow the Army to better support the war effort, while providing a more predictable and dependable deployment schedule for our soldiers and their families. The acting secretary and chief of staff of the Army and other senior Army officials will provide a background briefing for you tomorrow morning on the specifics and the implications of this change. Senior Army officers are notifying unit commanders as we speak.
Thank you. Be happy to take some questions.
QUESTION: Yes, sir. Two questions, one very quick one on the Marines. The Marines have, what, seven-month deployments. Will they be extended as well? Should they be extended, as a matter of equity here?
And, also, currently, for those that get extended past 12 months, they get additional pay for those -- those extensions for those additional months. Now that you have a new policy, will troops that are there, you know, more than 12 months be getting the additional pay?
GATES: Yes. On the second part of your question, the answer is yes. They will get the additional pay of $1,000 a month. The first part of your question, I will ask the chairman to answer.
GENERAL PETER PACE, CHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF: For the first part, right now, with the new policy, the Army rotations will change. The Marine rotations will not.
The Army will have 15 months overseas -- up to 15 months overseas, 12 months back. So, they will be deployed 15 months out of 27. The Marines will stay with what they have, which is seven over, six back, seven over, six back. So, they will have 14 out of 26. So, Army will be 15 out of 27. Marines will be 14 out of 26.
QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, is it -- does this step confirm what a lot of people have been saying for some time, that the U.S. military, particularly the Army, is broken?
GATES: No, not at all.
I think that the fact that the Army retention remains as high as it -- that retention in the Army remains as high as it has, that recruitment remains strong -- I saw an article this morning that the Army Reserve was below their goal -- the reality is, the regular Army and the Army Guard are above their goals. So, the Army Reserve is competing with them for that.
So, I think that, if -- if the Army were -- quote, unquote -- "broken," you would not see these kinds of retention rates and our ability to recruit.
I think that what this recognizes, though, is that our forces are stretched. There's no question about that. And it is an attempt, above all, to provide -- instead of dribbling out these notifications to units sort of just in time when they're to deploy, what we're trying to do here is provide some long-term predictability for the soldiers and their families about how long their deployments will be and how long they will be at home, and particularly guaranteeing that they will be at home for a full 12 months.
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: Could you just clarify that -- you're changing the policy, establishing an upper limit of a deployment. But does that mean that all the units that are deployed to Iraq are now extended, all the Army units are now extended to 15 months? And can you also tell us why you're making this announcement publicly now, at the same time that the troops and their families are hearing it? Because, normally, that's done -- they -- they get notified first.
(CROSSTALK)
GATES: All the units that are there and all the units that will deploy are now extended, will be extended to 15 months.
The most important part was that, before making this policy change, we were looking at a growing number of troops in the active component who were going to be home less than 12 months. And what we are doing here is saying, yes, you're -- I think many of those troops were expecting to be extended. And, so, this provides clarity for them and a decision.
But it also tells them they're going to have a full year at home. In terms of why we're announcing it simultaneously with the unit commanders, I will be very blunt. Some very thoughtless person in this building made the unilateral decision yesterday to deny the Army the opportunity to notify unit commanders, who could then talk to their troops 48 hours before we made a public announcement.
And I can't tell you how angry it makes many of us that one individual would create potentially so much hardship, not only for our service men and women, but their families, by giving -- by letting them read about something like this in the newspapers.
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: We have been told repeatedly that the reason for the so-called surge in troops and the extensive deployments is to create conditions in Iraq for reconciliation. But, outside of the oil law, can you point to any reconciliation measure that is moving forward? And are you concerned about it?
GATES: Well, my understanding is that the de-Baathification -- my understanding is, the de-Baathification law has been -- or is being forwarded to the Council of Representatives. And I know that they're working on some of the other pieces of legislation.
But I think that the only -- and -- and they're working also on the revenue-sharing part of the hydrocarbon law. So, I think that we're at a phase where you have the legislative body, in effect, receiving these businesses from the government and working their way through them.
(CROSSTALK) GATES: but, you know, it's still -- it's still early in the process. And we still have a level of violence in Baghdad, obviously. But I think -- and, as General Petraeus has said pretty consistently, he expects not to be able to evaluate all of this until later this summer.
(CROSSTALK)
GATES: I'm sorry.
QUESTION: Are you happy with the pace of reconciliation?
GATES: I would like to see it be moving faster.
QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, can you tell us how long this measure allows to you sustain the surge now? Previously, with the previous measures which were announced, you're looking at being able to maintain that 20-brigade level until August, I believe. How long does this allow to you maintain that level in Iraq?
GATES: Probably at least a year.
QUESTION: A year from now or...
(CROSSTALK)
GATES: A year from now.
BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Can I clarify that and ask a question? Are you indicating that the administration is preparing now to keep the surge in place for one year? And may I also ask both...
(CROSSTALK)
GATES: Well, let me ask -- answer them in order, so I don't forget.
The answer to that is no. We are creating the capability to keep it in place. Whether it will be kept in place depends entirely on the conditions on the ground.
STARR: Now, the other thing I wanted to ask is, the troops certainly had, while you said some of them thought they would be extended, in fact, there had been a general hope that they had, I believe, that they could spend 12 months at home with their families, and only have a 12-month tour on the ground.
So, with all due respect, what would either of you -- and you, as well, General Pace -- say to a recruit today or to a young soldier why should they believe that this is it? Why should they not believe that they're being asked to now, years later, pay a price for a policy that didn't work initially? Why should they believe that this is it, that there won't be further changes for their -- their deployment plans?
PACE: Well, first of all, our troops are very sophisticated. They understand that someone we're not thinking about tomorrow could attack our country and throw all of our planning into a hat.
The bottom line is, is that I do believe that the troops do understand the successes that they're having, the progress that they're making. They have been understanding of the need to increase the length of their tours. They have not known, nor have their families known, with any kind of predictability, how long that was going to be.
Some units were being extended for 30 days, some for 60, some for 90, some for more than that. And that was based on the conditions on the ground. And we were trying -- trying to be very precise in the way we did it. In becoming precise, we -- we were becoming more and more unpredictable for the families, as far as how long their soldier was going to be gone.
This way, the families will know with certainty that, if they are there now, or if their loved one is about to deploy, that it will be for a 15-month period. That does not mean that something could not happen tomorrow that would cause our nation to need more of our armed forces to go do something different.
But, based on the requirements today, and to provide to the leadership of our country the ability to make decisions without being resource-constrained, so to speak, we want to make sure that the policies are in place in this department to be able to provide the requisite number of troops. That is what this is based on.
(CROSSTALK)
GATES: Let me provide a -- let me provide a clarification. I mean, a -- just so there's no confusion.
We are talking about 12 months at home for the active force, 15 months deployed for the active -- 15 months deployed for the active force. We remain committed to the implementation of the decisions that I made in January, that the Guard, the National Guard will -- and reserve component -- will be mobilized for a maximum of a year.
And our hope is that their time at home, our goal, again, there is five years. And our goal is to -- and our effort will be to keep that dwell time at home as long as we can. But I don't want there to be any mistake. The reserve component will still have a maximum mobilization of one year.
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, you also mentioned conditions on the ground. But, just to clarify, is this an open-ended policy, the 15 months? How long do you expect that to be in effect?
GATES: I think that depends on the conditions on the ground. I have said all along that the hope -- the hope had been that -- and has been -- that -- that the surge is a matter of months, not a matter of years.
And -- and, so, we will just have to see how things develop on the ground in Iraq, in terms of when we can begin to move first back to the 12 and 12, 12 deployed, 12 at home, and then move eventually back to the one year at home -- one year deployed, two years at home.
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: And you don't have in your mind it might be a year or two years that this policy is...
(CROSSTALK)
GATES: We don't know the answer to that.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
QUESTION: Can you speak a little bit -- can you speak to how much of this is driven by your commander in Iraq, who, in effect, inherited a plan, General Petraeus, before he arrived in office, and now maybe he needs to rework it a little bit? Is this partly because of his confidence in the plan was -- has -- has changed a bit? How can you characterize that?
GATES: Well, that may be a question that you want to direct to the leadership of the Army tomorrow.
But my impression is that the initiative or the impetus for this actually came as we were looking at the deployment orders over the next several months, and seeing the relatively limited advance notice we were going to be able to give the troops, that the initiative actually came from the Army leadership to say, how can we do this in a way that gives these troops more clarity and more predictability, in terms of meeting our responsibility to provide the forces that the commander has asked for?
So, it's -- I think the initiative, actually, was in this building, with a view to trying to give greater clarity and fairness to the deployed force.
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: Is it fair at all to say that your -- you coming into the job had one expectation, and you kind of learned the hard realities the last few months over the readiness or the ability of the -- of the forces...
(CROSSTALK)
GATES: No. I would say I came -- I came to the job believing that the -- that the Army and the Marine Corps needed to be larger to perform the missions that they had been given, and that I felt that the Guard -- that more was being asked of the Guard than many of the members of the Guard had expected when they joined.
So, I have -- what I have tried to do, as some of these options have been brought to me, is try and put into place, both first with the reserve component, and now with the active component, of the Army longer-term policies that provide some assurances to the troops and predictability, where perhaps there wasn't any before that.
PACE: Don't forget, as General Petraeus -- as the plan was being put together, General Petraeus was in command of the command that had the doctrine for counterinsurgency.
He was very much involved, in that respect, in assisting and providing recommendations to General Casey and the -- and General Odierno. So, he was very much involved with the development of the plan.
As you will recall, when he testified, he testified in support of the plan as it was being written at the time. So -- so, he had -- he went there inheriting a plan that he helped to write.
JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN SENIOR PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: But I just want to clarify a couple things, and then I have a question. Quickly, so will 15 months become essentially become the standard tour of duty? When you said up to 15 months...
GATES: For the active component.
MCINTYRE: I mean, but we're not talking a large number (INAUDIBLE) who would serve less than 15 months? You said up to -- no more than 15 months.
(CROSSTALK)
GATES: That's what their expectation...
MCINTYRE: And does it apply to Afghanistan, as well as Iraq?
GATES: Yes. It applies -- as the opening statement said, it applies to all active-duty Army forces, units, in the Central Command area of responsibility.
MCINTYRE: (OFF-MIKE) clarification. What about the Navy and the Air Force, which also have not a lot, but still a significant number, of ground forces in both of those theaters?
PACE: Again, each service has its own deployment tempo, based on the unique service or perspective.
For example, the Marine Corps and the Navy are tied somewhat to the ship deployment schedule. So, when you try to take Marine units, for example, and have part of the Marine Corps on 12-month tours and the part that is married to the Navy on 12 month tours, it doesn't work. That's -- which is why the Marine Corps works best seven over, six back, seven over, six back.
MCINTYRE: Is there any change in the Navy or Air Force component?
PACE: No.
(CROSSTALK) MCINTYRE: And my last question is, the -- this idea that was -- that we learned about this morning, I guess, about having a war czar, someone to be coordinate the effort in Afghanistan and Iraq that would presumably be even over your level, how do you feel about that?
GATES: Well, first of all, I, frankly, am kind of amused by the level of excitement over this.
Both Republicans and Democrats, for some time, have been urging that there be somebody in the White House who could act as a coordinator for the civilian side of the government, along with the Defense Department.
And the idea is to have someone in the White House who would work as part of the National Security Council, so they're not detached from it, but also have a direct reporting line to the president, who could, when Admiral Fallon or Dave Petraeus or Ryan Crocker have placed -- have requested something from the government and not gotten it, or it's moving too slowly through the bureaucracy, that there is somebody empowered by the president to call a Cabinet secretary and say, the president would like to know why you haven't delivered what's been asked for yet.
So, this person is not running the war. This person is not going to have somebody embedded in the departments. This person is -- this czar term is, I think, kind of silly. The person is better described as a coordinator and a facilitator, somebody -- this is what is Steve Hadley would do, if Steve Hadley had the time. But he doesn't have the time to do it full-time.
And, so, it's a person to make sure that the -- you know, one of the arguments that we hear frequently -- and, frankly, are very sympathetic with -- is that we and the State Department are about the only parts of the government that are at war. This kind of position is intended to insure that, where other parts of the government can play a contributing role, that, in fact, they understand what the president's priorities are, and make sure that the commanders in the field, the ambassador in the field gets what he needs.
QUESTION: Since this new policy will affect both units already in Iraq and those that are going -- maybe you can both take a crack at this -- will there be sort of a larger overlap?
I guess my question is, as this goes forward, will there be -- several months -- will there be a significant increase in the number of troops in Iraq, because perhaps there are units already ready to deploy...
(CROSSTALK)
PACE: No.
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) PACE: Understand, no -- no, what this will allow us to do, among other things, will be, for those units that were going to be going sooner than 12 months, they will now be able to not go early. There's about five of those that were going to go early that will now not go early. It would allow those who are there to be there longer, and then to have longer at home when they get home. But it will not result in an increase beyond the 20 brigades that we're planning on.
GATES: And now they know, with clarity, the end time of when they're coming home. Now, they might come home a little earlier than that, but...
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: You have asked, I think, for a plan on compensation to the National Guard units for -- if -- if they're asked to extend beyond the normal rotation in Iraq. I believe that's it.
Would this plan for the active brigades have any additional compensation that came along with it? Would there be any change in -- in that -- in that...
(CROSSTALK)
GATES: They will get the same -- they will get the same compensation beyond the one year that has been paid up to now for those who are extended.
On the reserve component, additional compensation, I expect to have a paper on my desk Friday, and sign it.
QUESTION: General Pace, as an all-volunteer force, when these soldiers signed up, they signed up with the understanding that, if they were going to be deployed into combat, it would be a one-year tour, and I dare say that they would have two years off, not just one, but two years.
Has the Pentagon, the Army, the military broken that covenant with those soldiers? And, as a uniformed officer yourself who has seen combat, what do you think this is going to do to the overall morale, not only for the soldiers, but for their families?
PACE: First of all, we have had some wonderful young Americans over the last four or five years who, knowing full well that the nation's at war, have volunteered to serve the nation and to go to war.
And I do not believe that, when they signed up, they thought it was going to be one -- one tour of 12 months or any other number. I believe that they knew that they were joining a military that was at war and that they would end up, most likely, going into combat.
That said, it is our responsibility as leaders to provide for them the right training, the right equipment, the right quality -- right quality of life. And this goes a long way toward make sure -- making sure that we will have the proper amount of time to train them, that they will have time with their families, that they will have a predictable life, that they can sit there around the dinner table and know that on calendar month so and so, daddy's going to leave, and, on calendar month so and so, mommy's going to come home, and those kinds of things, which add to quality of life.
Is it an additional strain to go from 12 months to 15 months? Of course it is. Is it in combat and, therefore, even more difficult? Of course it is. And that's why the entire nation should be thankful that we have such incredible young men and women who -- knowing that, who volunteer to serve this nation in a time of great need.
GATES: And then re-up.
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: At least for now. At least for now.
QUESTION: Is it safe to say now, with this announcement, that the surge, whenever it's going to end, is going to last longer than August, that we will still be at the surge level, 20 brigades, past August?
GATES: I don't think anybody's in a position to answer that question now.
Last question.
QUESTION: General, you said more strain than we already have. Even with these new rules, or because of these new rules, how long can the military sustain this level of activity before you start having serious impact on readiness, morale, recruiting, et cetera?
PACE: I think we must pay attention to that every single day, because there's not a precise point on a curve where you can say, when you get to this point, something good or bad is going to happen.
I think the troops want to and deserve to know that their leaders are mindful of what we're asking them to do, mindful of the additional strain, working to make that less than it is.
And the decisions for the Guard that stabilize the Guard at 12- month mobilizations, this decision, that adds predictability and the other things that we're trying to do to grow the size -- grow the size of the force, 65,000 additional Army, 27,000 additional Marines, all of those decisions are signals to the troops that we understand how hard they're working, that the nation is providing the resources to make that less in the future, but, for right now, to get to that better future, we have to ask them for this additional stress on -- on their part and their families.
GATES: Thank you.
(CROSSTALK)
QUESTION: Could I ask one last point? There are 329,000 Iraqi forces, soldiers and police, that you have repeatedly said are in the lead, trained and equipped.
What do you say to a family member who says, why is my husband or brother or son being extended? Why can't the Iraqis pick up the slack? What do you say to them?
PACE: I think you say the truth, which is that there are 329,000 trained. Of the 120 battalions of about 500 Iraqis apiece, about 85 to 90 of those are in the lead, or are working side by side, that they are getting better, that what we are doing as a U.S. armed force with our coalition partners is buying time for the Iraqi government to provide the good governance and the economic activity that's required.
As we said when we recommended this plus-up. No size plus-up for any duration in and of itself is going to be successful. What a plus- up can do for a period of time is provide to the government in Iraq the opportunity to provide leadership, to provide jobs, to do the reconciliation and the other things that only the Iraqi people and the Iraqi government can do for them.
This allows us to be able to provide that stability. And this does not -- this decision today does not predict when this surge will end. What it does is it allows us to provide to the nation, if needed, the amount of force that's currently deployed for a sustained period of time.
QUESTION: Isn't it true that the Americans are in the lead?
WHITFIELD: All right. You were listening to General Peter Pace and Secretary Robert Gates talk about what they are describing as a difficult interim step. Active Army units deployment will now be extended not more than 15 months with their time being at home for 12 months -- Don.
LEMON: All right. Let's get to on the ground where this will be affected in Afghanistan and specifically Iraq, where thousands of U.S. men and women are serving there in the war. Kyra Phillips listening in to this press conference.
And, Kyra, this sort of came as a surprise, not an official announcement from the Army. You heard the general there, secretary of defense and then Peter Pace saying, you know, they were robbed of the opportunity to tell the troops themselves. What's the reaction from there, if any, from Iraq?
KYRA PHILLIPS: Well, a couple of things that I've taken notes on just listening about the fact that these troops are going to stay longer. I'm going to -- I have to say that I'm going to disagree with General Peter Pace for just a moment because he was saying that these men and women knew that when they were going to war they expected this was going to be a war, they expected that it could take a while for them to be here, that they could be here for a long time.
I've got to disagree with him on that because as I've talked to men and women on the ground, specifically the ones that have been here more than once, more than twice, have had to come back and serve here, there are two things they always tell me. Number one, they never expected the extremists to have so much power.
They never expected the chaos that has taken place since Operation Iraqi Freedom started. That was something that definitely surprised them. And second of all, they told me they didn't expect to come back more than one or two tours.
I mean, there are men and women that are coming back numerous times and that has been hard on them, that has been hard on their families. And that was something they didn't expect.
Now, with that said, no one seems to argue with what their mission is. They are true to the mission. They want to do their job. They want to do their job well and be effective while they're here. So I think that with regard to the troops knowing they were going to be in this for this long, I think a lot of them did not realize that.
Now, on the other side of things, he was talking about the amount of troops that need to stay to help make this more effective here. I've got to agree in the fact that those troops are making a difference.
As I listened to this, I did think to myself, something is working. That's why they want troops to stay longer. And I have seen that. Even though it's a long way to go, I have seen those moments of progress like when I went with General Dave Petraeus to the Dora (ph) district, an area had been haunted by this al Qaeda cell and this death squad, and I saw the Iraqis working with the U.S. troops side- by-side in these joint security stations.
And you saw the way they were working together. The Iraqis told me, I am learning these specifics from U.S. troops. I'm learning how to do raids, I'm learning how to gather intelligence, I'm learning how to use new weapons. And the Iraqis are trusting me as an Iraqi in uniform.
So the Iraqis are definitely telling me that they need the U.S. troops and they don't want the U.S. troops to leave yet. It's just too soon. They feel that they are making a difference in certain areas.
So, I can agree with what Gates and Peter Pace were saying in that regard. You are seeing areas where the U.S. troops, if they were to leave, Don, tomorrow, the Iraqis would be in trouble because the Iraqis need the weapons, they need the training, they need that added security.
LEMON: Yes, and Kyra, you're absolutely right. We actually interviewed someone in the NEWSROOM just -- I think it was last week who had -- was among the first to go overseas to Iraq. And then he was serving back then again. So -- and didn't think that he would be there a couple years into the war.
Our Kyra Phillips on the ground listening to that press conference. We appreciate your feedback on that, Kyra. Thank you.
WHITFIELD: Meantime, Don, something else we're watching out of North Carolina. We heard the North Carolina attorney general moments ago talk about the criminal charges being dropped. Well, now you're looking at live pictures of the men at issue. David Evans, Collin Finnerty, Reade Seligmann, all the lacrosse players who now are being given the green light, so to speak, to go on with their lives now that the criminal charges have been dropped.
We're going to continue to follow this. Apparently they're assembling because they, along with their attorneys, are scheduled to have a press conference momentarily.
All right. We talk about all these hot button issues that we're discussing at this hour. Well, here's another one. Don Imus, stay or go? What used to be a few voices calling for his job now turning out to be a chorus. Some pretty big names, influential names, in fact, are joining in that chorus, straight ahead in the NEWSROOM.
LEMON: And all they wanted, they said, was a sofa to sit on. But what was on it knocked them right on the floor. Waited until you see the label. Is it a typo, a sick joke or something more? Details straight ahead in the CNN NEWSROOM.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
LEMON: All right. Live pictures now from Raleigh, North Carolina. This is the Duke lacrosse team, members of the Duke lacrosse team assembling here. We believe awaiting a press conference from the defense team to talk about today the charges being dropped against them. All those three student athletes accused of kidnapping and sexually assaulting a stripper at Duke University.
All cleared of all the criminal charges remaining against them. We announced that -- or we saw the press conference of that just I guess about 45 minutes ago before the defense secretary held his press conference. So they're gathering there, obviously very happy moment for them, relief. And as soon as this happens, we will bring it to you live. Duke lacrosse team there assembling in Raleigh, North Carolina.
Well, North Carolina's attorney general is dropping all charges -- all criminal charges against three former Duke University lacrosse players. We have been telling you that. An exotic dancer had accused them of raping her in March of last year. But Roy Cooper puts that to rest.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROY COOPER, N.C. ATTORNEY GENERAL: The result of our review and investigation shows clearly that there is insufficient evidence to proceed on any of the charges. Today, we are filing notices of dismissal for all charges against Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty, and David Evans.
The result is that these cases are over. And no more criminal proceedings will occur. We believe that these cases were the result of a tragic rush to accuse and a failure to verify serious allegations. Based on the significant inconsistencies between the evidence and the various accounts given by the accusing witness, we believe these three individuals are innocent of these charges.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
LEMON: Well, cooper indirectly addressing Durham D.A. Michael Nifong in his statement. Again, you're looking at live pictures here. The state bar charged Nifong with ethics violations in December. And by January, the case had been turned over to Cooper's office. Now Cooper is proposing a new law that would allow the state supreme court to remove a prosecutor from a case at its discretion.
In the meantime, we're still waiting to hear from the three exonerated men. You see members of the Duke lacrosse team there assembling, smiles on their faces, obviously a relief here. We will bring that to you live just as soon as it happens right here in the CNN NEWSROOM.
WHITFIELD: The other still controversial case that we're following, this involving radio and talk show host Don Imus. Well, now Bruce Gordon is the latest voice calling for Don Imus to lose his job over those comments about the Rutgers women's basketball team. And his voice carries extra influence because Gordon is the former president of the NAACP. He is also a director of CBS Corporation, which manages it Westwood One, the syndicator of the Imus radio show.
Earlier I spoke with Bruce Gordon.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
WHITFIELD: And you mentioned advertisers, which are dropping like flies. Meantime, when you talk about the contractual obligations that CBS and Westwood have to Don Imus, I understand there's a five- year extension that was most recently signed at $10 million a year. So how much does that further complicate the issue of what to do about his job on the air?
BRUCE GORDON, CBS BOARD MEMBER: Well, it certainly complicates it. That's my earlier point. When you say, why can't they just make the decision today? They can't make the decision until they've been through a very careful analysis of the contractual obligations that they have.
And, once again, there's nothing wrong with thinking those things through. So I applaud CBS for being thoughtful. And what I believe is that CBS -- I believe that Les Moonves, who I work with closely, who I believe in, in terms of his value system. I believe that he's principled and he will think this through and he'll get to the right conclusion. It takes time and I expect him to take that time.
WHITFIELD: What do you believe the right conclusion is? Do you believe that he should be fired?
GORDON: If I was the decision-maker -- let me first start -- let me disassociate myself as a director of the company and simply say, as an African-American, as an American in this country, Don Imus would not be able to retain his position with my company because I believe that companies across America have to have a zero tolerance policy when it comes to race relations, when it comes to managing diversity.
And I believe that this kind of behavior cannot be tolerated. So it's easy for me, as a red-blooded African-American and American, to say, he has got to go. It is more difficult for management to weigh all the factors. So I simply am counting on them to weigh those factors. I am hopeful that they'll get to the right outcome and time will tell us that.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
WHITFIELD: Bruce Gordon/ Several big name sponsors have already pulled their ads from the Imus radio show, including Staples and Procter & Gamble.
LEMON: Well, they say all they wanted was a sofa to sit on, but man, they were certainly floored by this one. Wait until you see the label. We're wondering, is it a typo, is it a joke? Or is it something more? Details coming up in the CNN NEWSROOM.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
WHITFIELD: A tragic rush to accuse based on evidence. These three accused are innocent. You are hearing from the quotes of Roy Cooper, the North Carolina attorney general who spoke of these three lacrosse -- former lacrosse players of Duke University, as well as at the time -- or current lacrosse players.
All the criminal charges against them have been dropped. And now if you take a look at the live pictures, assembling there, current members of the lacrosse team all assembling in solidarity of the three who were -- now that we are hearing, wrongly accused.
We hope to hear from the defense attorneys representing those three lacrosse players that I mentioned moments ago, when that live press conference takes place, we'll be able to bring that to you.
LEMON: All right. This has got to be one of the most unusual stories I've seen. Lime green, peacock blue, there are so many lovely descriptions and shades of color. But in Toronto, the tone on a sofa label has one family seeing red. More from Farah Nasser of our affiliate CityTV.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DORIS MOORE, BOUGHT SOFA: I see "nigger brown" on here. Like it says right here, "nigger brown." I thought maybe they spelled it wrong. That's the first thing that came in my mind.
FARAH NASSER, CITYTV REPORTER (voice-over): It's a pretty hard word to misspell. Doris Moore's daughter found it on a label on their new couch.
D. MOORE: I was in the kitchen when they were delivering it. After they left, my daughter came to the kitchen and she told me, mommy, what's "nigger brown"?
OLIVIA MOORE, DAUGHTER: I didn't even know what that word was and I hadn't even heard of the word.
NASSER (on camera): Doris called the furniture store where she bought the couch several times but she didn't get answers. So City News went in to talk to the manager.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you see anything wrong with it?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I told the supplier, take the (INAUDIBLE) this sofa out and I don't like this kind of thing.
NASSER (voice-over): So I'm going to call the supplier to see if he's still selling this product.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm just a trader. I just -- I bring from China. And I sell to the stores.
NASSER (on camera): But are you going to stop selling them?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, definitely.
NASSER (voice-over): Back at the Moore house, this whole thing has been a first-hand lesson in racism for 7-year-old Olivia.
O. MOORE: It teaches me that that word is a bad, bad word.
NASSER (on camera): Even though the product was made in China, Doris plans on lodging a formal complaints with the Ontario Human Rights Commission.
In Chinatown, Farah Nasser, for City News.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
WHITFIELD: All right. Live pictures right now out of the North Carolina. We are seeing members of the Duke lacrosse team who are forming there because we understand the defense attorneys for Reade Seligmann, David Evans and Collin Finnerty are expected to have some comments now that the North Carolina attorney general has dropped all criminal charges against the three men on the right-hand side of your screen.
We'll be right back with more in the NEWSROOM.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
LEMON: Probably a year ago, they thought that maybe their young lives in some ways were over with because they had been accused of all these horrible charges. Well, today they're probably feeling a lot differently. We're talking about the folks you're seeing there, the three guys you're seeing in the picture, Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty, David Evans, once accused of sexual assault and other criminal charges. Today, North Carolina's top prosecutor dropped all the charges against them and said basically there was no evidence, that it was a rush to accuse them and a failure to verify serious allegations. Basically, he said the whole case against these three guys were bogus.
So now we are going to hear from the defense team, they are waiting for a press conference to happen there very shortly. And we're going to bring it to you in the CNN NEWSROOM. But that's them gathering there. The entire lacrosse team appears to be at this press conference. They've gathered.
We saw smiling faces earlier, Fredricka. Obviously, they are extremely, extremely relieved at what has occurred today.
WHITFIELD: Yes. It will it be interesting to hear what the defense attorneys for all three of those once accused have to say. And perhaps we'll even hear from the once-accused lacrosse players themselves.
Well, here's a heart-breaking court battle that has been taking place over a baby's life or death. A Texas judge has ordered an Austin hospital to keep Emilio Gonzales on life support on life support at least until another hearing next week. The boy's family is fighting the hospital which wants to take him off his respirator and is allowed to make that call according to the Texas law.
Hospital officials say a terminal disease has destroyed the boy's higher brain functions and that further medical treatment is futile.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MICHAEL REIGER, HOSPITAL ETHICS COMMISSION: This child is someone who has an irreversible progressive fatal disease. And that what they're doing now is harmful to him. It's causing him to suffer, it's causing him pain, pain that we may not even be able to know about.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WHITFIELD: Emilio's mother disputes that. She hopes to find another hospital to provide care.
LEMON: All right. Let's get you back to North Carolina. There you go. They're gathering there. The defense team and members of the Duke lacrosse team gathering to say what's on their minds after their top prosecutor in North Carolina today said that the charges against the three former lacrosse players were bogus. We're going to bring you this press conference right here on CNN just as soon as it happens. We're going to get a quick break in. But you won't any of it. You're in the CNN NEWSROOM.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(INTERRUPTED FOR BREAKING NEWS)
DON LEMON, CNN ANCHOR: OK. Let's get to you North Carolina. Breaking news here. Duke lacrosse charges dropped today. You see that the press conference is starting. Let's listen in.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Introduce who's here and who's up on the stage so that you will -- introductory arguments -- arguments.
(LAUGHTER)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Introductory comments and introduce who's here and who's up on the stage so that you will know. And then the young men who have been the subject of this miscarriage of justice are going to each speak to you all.
After they speak, each of the primary lawyers for these young men are going to make a very brief statement to you. After that, we are going to open the floor for questions.
And we -- it is not our intention keep anyone from asking questions. So we will try to stay here as long as we can, as long as you all also understand that this has been amazingly difficult few days, an amazingly difficult year.
So if you'll be patient with us, we'll be patient with you, as well. The young men will take no questions. Their families will take no questions at this time. And I hope that you all will -- while you might not understand that, there are good reasons it, you will at least honor that.
Let me introduce first the families to you all. Seated first here behind me are Dave Evans' family. And if you all don't mind, just standing so that everybody can identify who you all are.
(APPLAUSE)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you. Seated next are Reade's mom and dad.
(APPLAUSE)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And then the smallest family unit...
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.voxant.com
