Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Pentagon Releases 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Study; High School Hostage Drama; Alleged Drug Kingpin is Captured; Crisis Heats Up in Korea; Students Getting Second Chance Online; GM Launches Chevy Volt
Aired November 30, 2010 - 14:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: Taking a look at live pictures now. We're awaiting a press conference with Defense Secretary Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen talking about, of course -- expected to -- the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, the review that it's been long under way. It's a report that we're expecting them to talk about.
This is a report on military attitudes, whether troops think military readiness, cohesion, morale would suffer if openly gay men and women were allowed to serve. Sources who have seen the findings say 70 percent of the GIs who answered the survey anticipate positive effects, mixed effects, or no effect at all if "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is repealed.
Sources also tell CNN the study's authors predict "limited and isolated disruption in the ranks, but nothing widespread or long- lasting." Opposition is said to run highest among the Marines, but even there, it seems to be in the minority. And that reflects the general population.
Take a look at this. A CNN/Opinion -- I think we have right now Defense Secretary Robert Gates at the podium. Let's listen to him.
ROBERT GATES, DEFENSE SECRETARY: Good afternoon.
This past February, I established a high level working group to review the issues associated with implementing a repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law regarding homosexual men and women serving in the military. And based on those findings, to develop recommendations for an implementation should the law change. The working group has completed their work, and today the department is releasing their report to the Congress and to the American public.
Admiral Mullen and I will briefly comment on the review's findings and our recommendations for the way ahead. We will take some questions. And then the working group's co-chairs, General Counsel Jeh Johnson and Army General Carter Hamm, will provide more detail on the report and answer any questions you might have on methodology, data and recommendations.
When I first appointed Mr. Johnson and General Hamm to assume this duty, I did so with the confidence that they would undertake this task with the thoroughness, seriousness, professionalism and objectivity befitting a task of this magnitude and consequence. I believe that a close and serious reading of this report will demonstrate they have done just that.
We are grateful for the service they have rendered in taking on such a complex and controversial subject. The findings of their report reflect nearly 10 months of research and analysis along several lines of study and represent the most thorough and objective review ever of this difficult policy issue and its impact on the American military.
First, the group reached out to the force to better understand their views and attitudes about a potential repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law. As was made clear at the time, and is worth repeating today, this outreach was not a matter of taking a poll of the military to determine whether the law should be changed. The very idea of asking the force to, in effect, vote on such a matter is antithetical to our system of government and would have been without precedent in the long history of our civilian-led military.
The president of the United States, the commander in chief of the armed forces, made his position on this matter clear, a position I support. Our job as the civilian and military leadership of the Department of Defense was to determine how best to prepare for such a change should the Congress change the law. Nonetheless, I thought it critically important to engage our troops and their families on this issue, as, ultimately, it will be they who will determine whether or not such a transition is successful.
I believe that we had to learn the attitudes, obstacles and concerns that would need to be addressed should the law be changed. We could do this only by reaching out and listening to our men and women in uniform and their families. The working group undertook this through a variety of means, from a mass survey answered by tens of thousands of troops and their spouses, to meetings with small groups and individuals, including hearing from those discharged under the current law.
Mr. Johnson and General Hamm will provide more detail on the results of the survey of troops and their families. But in summary, a strong majority of those who answered the survey, more than two- thirds, do not object to gays and lesbians serving openly in uniform.
The findings suggest that for large segments of the military, repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," though potentially disruptive in the short term, would not be the wrenching, traumatic change that many have feared and predicted. The data also shows that within the combat armed specialties and units there is a higher level of discontent, of discomfort, and resistance to changing the current policy.
Those findings and the potential implications for America's fighting forces remain a source of concern to the service chiefs and to me. I'll discuss this later.
Second, the working group also examined thoroughly all the potential changes to the department's regulations and policies dealing with matters such as benefits, housing, relationships within the ranks, separations and discharges. As the co-chairs will explain in a few minutes, the majority of concerns often raised in association with the repeal dealing with sexual conduct, fraternization, billeting arrangements, marital or survival benefits, could be covered by existing laws and regulations.
Existing policies can and should be applied equally to homosexuals, as well as heterosexuals. While a repeal would require some changes to regulations, the key to success, as with most things military, is training, education and, above all, strong and principled leadership up and down the chain of command.
Third, the working group examined the potential impact of a change in the law on military readiness, including the impact on unit cohesion, recruiting and retention, and other issues critical to the performance of the force. In my view, getting this category right is the most important thing we must do.
The U.S. armed forces are in the middle of two major military overseas campaigns -- a complex and difficult drawdown in Iraq, a war in Afghanistan -- both of which are putting extraordinary stress on those serving on the ground and their families. It is the well being of these brave, young Americans, those doing the fighting and the dying since 9/11, that has guided every decision I have made in the Pentagon since taking this post nearly four years ago.
It will be no different on this issue. I am determined to see that if the law is repealed, the changes are implemented in such a way as to minimize any negative impact on the morale, cohesion and effectiveness of combat units that are deployed, about to deploy to the front lines.
With regards to readiness, the working group report concluded that overall, and with thorough preparation -- and I emphasize "thorough preparation" -- there is a low risk from repealing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." However, as I mentioned earlier, the survey data showed that a higher proportion, between 40 and 60 percent, of those troops serving in predominantly all-male combat specialties, mostly Army and Marines, but including the Special Operations formations of the Navy and the Air Force, predicted a negative effect on unit cohesion from repealing the current law.
For this reason, the uniform service chiefs are less sanguine than the working group about the level of risk of repeal with regard to combat readiness. The views of the chiefs were sought out and taken seriously by me and by the authors of this report.
The chiefs will also have the opportunity to explain their -- to provide their expert military advice to the Congress, as they have to me and to the president. Their perspective deserves serious attention and consideration, as it reflects the judgment of decades of experience and the sentiment of many senior officers.
In my view, the concerns of combat troops as expressed in the survey do not present an insurmountable barrier to successful repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." This can be done and should be done without posing a serious risk to military readiness.
However, these findings do leave me to conclude that an abundance of care and preparation is required if we are to avoid a disruptive and potentially dangerous impact on the performance of those serving at the tip of the spear in America's wars. This brings me to my recommendations on the way ahead.
Earlier this year, the House of Representatives passed legislation that would repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" after a number of steps take place, the last being certification by the president, the secretary of defense, and the chairman that the new policies and regulations were consistent with the U.S. military's standards of readiness, effectiveness, unit cohesion, and recruiting and retention. Now that we have completed this review, I strongly urge the Senate to pass this legislation and send it to the president for signature before the end of this year. I believe this is a matter of some urgency, because as we have seen in the past year, the federal courts are increasingly becoming involved in this issue.
Just a few weeks ago, one lower court ruling forced the department into an abrupt series of changes that were no doubt confusing and distracting to men and women in the ranks. It is only a matter of time before the federal courts are drawn once more into the fray with the very real possibility that this change would be imposed immediately by judicial fiat, by far the most disruptive and damaging scenario I can imagine, and one of the most hazardous to military morale, readiness and battlefield performance.
Therefore, it is important that this change come via legislative means. That is, legislation informed by the review just completed.
What is needed is a process that allows for a well-prepared and well-considered implementation. Above all, a process that carries the imprimatur of the elected representatives of the people of the United States. Given the present circumstances, those that choose not to act legislatively are rolling the dice that this policy will not be abruptly overturned by the courts.
The legislation presently before the Congress would authorize a repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" pending a certification by the president, secretary of defense, and the chairman. It would not harm military readiness.
Nonetheless, I believe that it would be unwise to push ahead with full implementation of repeal before more can be done to prepare the force. In particular, those ground combat specialties and units for what could be a disruptive and disorienting change.
The working group's plan, with a strong emphasis on education, training and leader development, provides a solid roadmap for a successful, full implementation of repeal, assuming that the military is given sufficient time and preparation to get the job done right. The department has already made a number of changes to regulations that within existing law applied more exacting standards to procedures investigating or separating troops for suspected homosexual conduct, changes that have added a measure of common sense and decency to a legally and morally fraught process.
I would close on a personal note and a personal appeal. This is the second time that I have dealt with this issue as a leader in public life.
The prior case being at CIA in 1992, when I directed that openly gay applicants be treated like all other applicants. That is, whether as individuals they met our competitive standards.
That was and is a situation significantly different in circumstance and consequence than confronting the United States armed forces today. Views toward gay and lesbian Americans have changed considerably during this period and have grown more accepting since "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" was first enacted. But feelings on this matter can still run deep and divide, often starkly, along demographic, cultural and generational lines, not only in society as a whole, but in the uniformed ranks as well.
For this reason, I would ask as Congress takes on this debate, for all involved to resist the urge to lure our troops and their families into the politics of this issue. What is called for is a careful and considered approach, an approach that to the extent possible, welcomes all who are qualified and capable of serving their country in uniform, but one that does not undermine out of haste or dogmatism those attributes that make the U.S. military the finest fighting force in the world. The stakes are too high for a nation under threat, for a military at war, to do any less.
Admiral.
ADM. MIKE MULLEN, CHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF: Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
I too wish to thank Jeh Johnson and Carter Hamm, as well as everyone involved in the working group, for their extraordinary efforts over much of the past year. I fully endorse their report, its findings, and the implementation plan recommended by the working group.
The working group was given a tall order. Indeed, nothing less than producing the first truly comprehensive assessment of not only the impact of repeal of the law governing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," but also about how best to implement a new policy across the joint force.
As the secretary indicated, the working group surveyed our troops and their spouses, consulted proponents and opponents of repeal, and examined military experience around the world. They also spoke with serving gays and lesbians, as well as former members of the military who are gay and lesbian.
The result is one of the most expansive studies ever done on military personnel issues, and I applied the time that was taken to arrive at solid, defensible conclusions. More critically, I was gratified to see that the working group focused their findings and recommendations rightly on those who would be most affected by a change in the law -- our people, all of our people.
And so, for the first time, the Chiefs and I have more than just anecdotal evidence and hearsay to inform the advice we give our civilian leaders. We have discussed this issue extensively amongst ourselves and with the secretary, and the Chiefs and I met with the president as recently as yesterday.
I only want to add three points to what the secretary has already laid out. First, I think it's noteworthy that the working group found strong leadership to be the single-most important factor in implementing any repeal. That may sound fairly obvious, but it is a key, critical point.
We all have our opinions, and those opinions matter. This is, without question, a complex social and cultural issue. But at the end of the day, whatever the decision of our elected leaders may be, we in uniform have an obligation to follow orders.
When those orders involve significant change such as this would, we need to finds ways to lead the way forward. Our troops and their families expect that from us, and I think the American people do as well.
Second, we've heard loud and clear that our troops also expect us to maintain high standards of conduct and professionalism, both as we move forward in this debate and should repeal occur. We treat people with dignity and respect in the armed forces or we don't last long. No special cases, no special treatment. We're going to continue to comport ourselves with honor and hold ourselves accountable across the board to impeccably high standards, repeal or no repeal.
Finally, the report shows that however low the overall risk of repeal may be with respect to readiness, cohesion and retention, it is not without its challenges. We can best address those challenges by having it within our power and our prerogative to manage the implementation process ourselves.
Should repeal occur, I share the secretary's desire that it come about through legislation, through the same process with which the law was enacted, rather than precipitously through the courts. I further hope that such debate in the Congress will be as fully informed by the good work done in this report as my advice to the secretary and to the president is.
Thank you.
QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, you said it would be unwise to proceed with repeal until there is more groundwork. How long do you envision that process lasting? And is this a concern and a recommendation that is shared by the White House as far as once Congress acts, there still being a period in which the policy is in place?
Admiral Mullen, do you also share that recommendation?
GATES: Well, first of all, just to be clear, what we were talking about is that should the Congress vote to repeal the law, what we are asking for is the time subsequent to that to prepare adequately before the change is implemented in the force. How long that would take, frankly, I don't know. There is -- the report, as you will see in the implementation plan, lays out an ambitious agenda of things that need to be done, including not only leadership training, but training of a military force of over two million people. I would say this -- I think we all would expect that if this law is implemented, the president would be -- if repeal is passed, the president would be watching very closely to ensure that we don't dawdle or try to slow-roll this. So I think his expectation would be that we would prepare as quickly as we properly and comprehensively could, and then we would be in a position to move toward the certification. But how long that would take, I think -- I don't know.
MULLEN: There is a level of risk here, as is laid out in the report. And I would hope you spend as much time on the implementation plan as the report, because the implementation plan, certainly from all the military leadership, is strongly endorsed should this law change.
And it is in that implementation plan that the risk levels are mitigated, and principally mitigated through leadership, certainly the training, the guidance, but the engagement of the leadership. And having enough time to do that is critically important as we would look at implementation. That's what really mitigates any risk that's out there.
ALI VELSHI, CNN ANCHOR: OK. You're listening to Admiral Mike Mullen -- he's the Joint Chief -- the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff -- and Defense Secretary Robert Gates.
Interesting. Both of them saying that they are endorsing this report that says that for most of the military, this long study of the military, most people in the military do not think that repealing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," allowing openly gay --
BOLDUAN: Would negatively affect military readiness, cohesion, and all of the things that they were looking for, over two-thirds, which --
VELSHI: It's a big number, but we should just be clear, this isn't a poll about whether people in the military like the idea of repealing it or think it should be repealed. Gates was very specific about this was a study and a poll of whether or not it would affect -- negatively affect the way the military operates.
BOLDUAN: If we were told we needed to implement this, how would it affect all of these things?
(CROSSTALK)
VELSHI: And more than two-thirds says not much.
BOLDUAN: So, what you're hearing, the two big points are, right, over two-thirds said that it would not affect negatively, really wouldn't have any impact. But also, you hear from Defense Secretary Robert Gates that he's urging the Senate to pass this repeal and having it go through Congress rather than go through the court system.
VELSHI: Right. And both of them were saying that. And it may be confusing to people. Why does it matter that it is repealed through Congress, as opposed to the court striking it down as unconstitutional?
BOLDUAN: Admiral Mike Mullen, he kind of got to that. They want to make sure that it is implemented in the right way, that the systems are in place and they've thought about how to do this so it would not cause any damage.
One key part of that, he said, is going to be leadership. And I think that's why they're emphasizing that it's best if it goes through Congress, not through the courts.
VELSHI: All right. And then the next thing that happens if this goes forward is how you actually implement this, because there are -- while two-thirds say it's not a problem, there are some who say this isn't going to work out all that well.
BOLDUAN: Right. And now all eyes are going to be turning to Capitol Hill, because we're going to be hearing from Gates, Mullen, as well as the top brass of all the extensions of the military on Capitol Hill, testifying at the end of this week. So now eyes turn there. We'll be hearing more from them.
VELSHI: Very measured. It seemed that Gates was endorsing it a little more than Admiral Mullen was.
BOLDUAN: These two men are measured. This is how they work.
They wanted an objective analysis, as they emphasized. This is how they operate. They wanted to have the facts before they make any statements, because what they say it comes down to, it doesn't matter what your personal opinion is. If the Congress changes the law, it is our job to implement.
VELSHI: Right. OK. Well, we'll continue to follow this.
We're also following two breaking stories. One of them, several people have been shot this afternoon at a St. Louis funeral home, a funeral home in the north part of St. Louis. We're going to tell you what we know about that.
And some developments in that Wisconsin school shooting.
BOLDUAN: We have that -- the Wisconsin hostage situation.
VELSHI: That's right.
BOLDUAN: One person was shot. That would be the person with the gun. He was a sophomore.
We'll have more of all of this going on coming up after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELSHI: OK. Breaking news now out of Wisconsin.
The 15-year-old accused of holding high school students hostage yesterday is dead. We learned a little while ago the 15-year-old who held classmates and a teacher at gunpoint for hours died at the hospital.
Yesterday's standoff lasted from mid-afternoon to mid-evening, when police burst in and the student shot himself. His motives and state of mind are a big mystery right now. Police say he made no demands and was even-keeled and well liked at school.
Once again, the 15-year-old accused of holding a classroom hostage died at the hospital today from a self-inflicted shotgun wound.
BOLDUAN: And another update on a breaking story that we've been talking about this hour and last, an update on the shooting that we had heard about at a funeral home in St. Louis.
The update is that we now are told that four people are dead in that shooting at the funeral home in St. Louis. Several people shot.
The name of the funeral home we are told is Reliable Funeral Home. This is coming from our affiliate KMOV. But again, four people are dead in that shooting at a funeral home in St. Louis.
VELSHI: We'll continue to update you on both of those stories.
Police say he's a major player in Mexico's drug war behind thousands of murders in Juarez. Now he's behind bars. I'll bring you that story right after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELSHI: OK. The latest on Mexico's bloody drug war.
An alleged drug kingpin now behind bars. Officials say he's responsible for 80 percent of the murders in Juarez over the past 16 months. Eighty percent of the murders in the murder capital of the world.
BOLDUAN: I know.
VELSHI: CNN Senior Latin American Affairs Editor Rafael Romo, who knows the story very, very well, joins us now.
That strikes me as a very big deal, because we hear about incremental successes by the authorities in Juarez which don't seem to make any different at all.
BOLDUAN: Right. I thought that number was wrong when I read it.
VELSHI: Right. Right.
RAFAEL ROMO, CNN SR. LATIN AMERICAN AFFAIRS EDITOR: Exactly. And Ali, you made a very good point. When you talk about somebody who is responsible for killing 80 percent of people there, this year, so far, there have been more than 2,800 murders in Juarez alone. Last year, 2,600. So Mexican officials say that he's responsible, at least as far as we know, for deaths that occurred in -- since August of '09, until he was caught during the weekend. This guy, Arturo Gallegos Castrellon, he's 32. He's the leader of Los Aztecas. This is a band of mercenaries at the service of the Gulf Cartel.
And the reason why we have so much violence in that part of Mexico is because we have that Gulf Cartel and also Los Zetas and the Sinaloa Cartel fighting for territory there. They're fighting each other. They're fighting the Mexican government and the army, and that's the reason why it has become the capital of the -- the world's capital of murder in that part of Mexico.
And also very important, this guy is believed to have ordered the murder of one U.S. consular employee, Lesley Enriquez. You probably remember in March --
VELSHI: Yes.
BOLDUAN: Yes.
ROMO: -- she was coming back from a children's party with her husband Arthur Redelfs, who is 34. They had their baby daughter in the back. They were attacked, shot at. They were killed. The baby fortunately survived, but they were both dead at the end.
BOLDUAN: This is a very big deal. This is a big deal. This is a big arrest. So, how did the arrest go down?
ROMO: Well, they -- the Mexican officials say they had been following this guy for a while, and finally, over the weekend they were able to surround the house where he was staying with a group of armed men and that's where he was caught. The real question now is: is this really -- if he was responsible for 80 percent of the murders in Ciudad Juarez, that will tell you that the decrease in violence is going to be substantial.
BOLDUAN: Is Juarez different now --
ROMO: Is that going to be the case or not?
VELSHI: Unless somebody fills this void left by him.
And one of the things that we talk about often with this Mexico drug violence, it's not really the tactical advantage of being able to surround the house and find the guy. It's the fact that is everybody involved in the takedown honest? It's there -- you know, it's so permeated law enforcement and the judiciary in that area, is it the success that they have this guy behind bars?
ROMO: Exactly. Well, ultimately, what happens in the next few weeks is going to really determine what kind of success. President Felipe Calderon is saying that they're winning the war, that you've seen more violence because the criminals are desperate and are trying to lash out. But what happens in the next few weeks, especially in Juarez, is really going to determine if this strategy has been successful.
And also, now the army is back in Ciudad Juarez, around the city, and they're trying to find out if there's a real need for the troops to go back in. They were pulled out earlier this year and were replaced by federal police, but there may be a need, if the violence continues, to just send the troops back in.
VELSHI: What a dramatic situation.
BOLDUAN: An interesting upcoming couple of weeks as people will keep an eye to see if it's safer.
VELSHI: Yes. We'll watch it closely. Thanks, Rafael. Good to see you.
BOLDUAN: Thanks, Rafael.
ROMO: Thank you.
VELSHI: And coming up tonight: Anderson Cooper is live on location from southern California with exclusive access to a newly- discovered drug smuggling tunnel. That's on "AC 360" tonight at 10:00 Eastern.
BOLDUAN: And an unsolved code on a sculpture outside CIA headquarters remains one of the most famous secret encryptions in the world. But there's finally a clue from the encrypter himself. We're going way off the radar in just a minute.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BOLDUAN: We want to get an update on some breaking news. We actually want to correct something. There's a lot going on in St. Louis, and we want to correct you on something.
At the funeral home where we were reporting a shooting at a funeral home in St. Louis, there are four people that are shot. They are not dead. We do know that there are two in critical condition and the other two, their conditions are unknown at this time.
But there is still a lot going on in St. Louis. There's a shooting in a funeral home earlier, just reporting on it the last couple of hours, but four people have been shot. They are not dead. They are in -- they have two in critical and two with unknown conditions.
We also want to update you on some more breaking news right now out of Wisconsin. The 15-year-old accused of holding high school students hostage yesterday, he is dead. We learned a little while ago that the 15-year-old who held classmates and a teacher at gunpoint for hours died at the hospital.
Yesterday's standoff lasted from mid-afternoon to mid-evening when police burst in and the student then shot himself. His motive and state of mind really are a big mystery. Still at this point, police say he made no demands and was known as an "even keel" and well-liked person at school. Once again, the 15-year-old accused of holding a classroom hostage has died at the hospital today from a self-inflicted gunshot wound -- Ali.
VELSHI: Looks like my travel luck is about to run out.
CHAD MYERS, AMS METEOROLOGIST: Yes.
VELSHI: I just told Chad that I'm catching a flight out of Atlanta after the show. And then I see, all of a sudden, there's a ground stop at the airport here. What's going on?
MYERS: Do you know what that means when you see that on our map? Ground stop means that planes that want to take off from other airports to Atlanta are stopped.
VELSHI: I see.
MYERS: Hang on. You can't get in the air because we have no place for you.
VELSHI: Right. And I have often been on those planes coming in to Atlanta and think there's nothing wrong with the weather here.
MYERS: Correct.
VELSHI: Right. Right.
MYERS: Here in Salt Lake City, it is sunny and you're going -- come on.
VELSHI: Right. It's a busy airport and they can't -- you know, they don't want more trouble than they can handle if they've got it. So -- but clearly, something is happening here.
MYERS: Here's the picture of the airport that's on the air right now. That's the visibility.
VELSHI: Oh, my.
MYERS: Less than about -- I'd say a quarter mile, maybe less.
VELSHI: Oh, my.
MYERS: And there's a couple of planes -- there you see some cars parked.
(CROSSTALK)
MYERS: Yes, it's going to be a second. Here's what we have. I'll go back to the radar here in a second. But the line of weather is right through Atlanta right through here.
So, the planes that were all coming in from the west trying to get in and they would have turned around in a circle and landed like that. Now, they're just doing big circles up here northwest of Atlanta and another one looks like another going over here. Here, this is South Carolina. So, planes are just going around and around, wasting time --
VELSHI: Right.
MYERS: -- basically while you're in the air getting bumped around. You love those flights, don't you?
VELSHI: And the problem is if they can't get in fast enough, they got to end up going somewhere else.
MYERS: And I haven't seen any diversions yet, but I think that's probably going to happen because this weather literally, let's grab a hold of it right there. Grab a hold of it, pull it off, is right through Atlanta and a new tornado watch box is now for upstate into South Carolina --
VELSHI: OK.
MYERS: -- parts of North Carolina and such. Then you get closer to Atlanta, and the reason why we have this stopping is because the storms are literally right over the airport right here. So, planes can't lands. You never know whether one storm is going to push air down to the surface, that air goes out and then you can get a stall, which means either the planes are going to lose energy, that means the plane thinks it's flying, but all of a sudden the wind is going in the same direction as the plane and the plane doesn't like to do that.
VELSHI: And it sounds looks like the storm is going to be nice enough to follow me all the way to New York.
MYERS: All the way up there.
VELSHI: And I see delays -- we got delays at Newark. We got delays at JFK.
MYERS: I have them for you right there. Atlanta, we know it would stop. That doesn't mean that planes aren't still going to take off. They are. But if the planes aren't on the ground already, how are you going to get where you want to go?
VELSHI: My plane is somewhere else at the moment. Right.
MYERS: Your plane is still in Seattle. Right, exactly. New York, LaGuardia, Newark, 35, 45 minutes or so on.
VELSHI: I mean, LaGuardia, 35 minute delay. Do you pay attention to that?
MYERS: No.
VELSHI: If you spill something you know, a cup of coffee, they have a delay there. All right.
MYERS: And you know what? We're going to talk about Kryptos, it's about -- it's the encryption thing. VELSHI: Encryption, right.
MYERS: But there's so much breaking news, I will absolutely --
VELSHI: Oh, we'll say that. If we can't get in today, we'll get it in as always.
OK, Chad, thanks very much. It used to be that if you failed a class, you repeated in summer school or you didn't graduate. Now, there's a new option. I'm going to tell you about it in "Chalk Talk" when we come back.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELSHI: Time now for "Globe Trekking."
North Korea, it's the one we've leading with every day. It is throwing gas on its rhetorical battle with South Korea -- today, warning of an all-out war any time if South Korea and the United States continue the joint naval exercises in the disputed Yellow Sea. Those are under way right now.
Despite the threat, those war games continued full speed ahead today and are scheduled to run through Friday. The U.S. military says they are designed to send a clear message of deterrence to North Korea.
Washington says the exercises are in response to North Korea's sinking of four South Korean -- of a South Korean warship in March which killed 46 sailors. The north denies it had anything to do with the sinking.
More on this now from CNN's Stan Grant onboard the USS Aircraft Carrier George Washington.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
STAN GRANT, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: One after one, these fighter jets are coming back in to land on the USS George Washington aircraft carrier. There are about 75 of these. We'll take a break right now.
They make an absolutely almighty sound as they come in, an extraordinary sight as they come to such an abrupt halt. You can really feel that shake right through your body.
Now, these aircraft departed these exercises in the Yellow Sea between South Korea and the United States. There are about 6,000 troops -- await that. About 6,000 troops on board this aircraft carrier and they've been linking up with the South Korean forces.
We're about 100 kilometers, 60 miles south of the disputed maritime border between North and South Korea. Now, these exercises were meant to be for defensive purposes, but, of course, they've taken on a whole new significance after North Korea's attack on Yeonpyeong Island, South Korea branding that as an inhumane act, an act unprecedented since the Korean War to target civilians and warning that any more aggression, any more provocation and South Korea will hit back and hit back hard.
Now, the U.S. forces are standing shoulder to shoulder with South Korea as their ally in this region. North Korea is saying this is a pretext for war. But what we are seeing here is a real display of the fire power that South Korea and the United States have at their disposal. And here's another one. And that's another example of that fire power I've been talking about.
Stan Grant, CNN, on board the USS George Washington, in the Yellow Sea.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
VELSHI: Got a presence right there in the middle of this. We will keep you posted as this story develops. Keep tuned in to us because it is developing.
In Rome, a massive student protest over expected spending cuts in education brings the city to a virtual standstill. Protesters also disrupted traffic and blocked train tracks in Milan, Pisa and Venice. The mass demonstrations are called "Block Everything Day." It comes as the parliament debates a bill on education reform. Students argue that the cuts breach their right to education.
All of this are just more headaches for Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi. He faces two different confidence votes this upcoming month -- Kate.
BOLDUAN: Time for a little "Chalk Talk" now.
Traditionally, students who failed courses during the year have to repeat them again to get credits. When school districts at the same time are looking for new ways to boost graduation rates, many are turning to something called online credit recovery -- students getting online instruction and then taking a test to regain the credit. Forty-six states and the District of Columbia have OK'd this online credit recovery and Los Angeles schools have been using the technique for a year and a half now.
Themy Sparangis, the chief technology director at a Los Angeles Unified School District, joining me now live from Los Angeles. So tell me, Mr. Sparangis, why the surge in this online credit recovery now? What's going on behind the scenes here?
THEMY SPARANGIS, CHIEF TECHNOLOGY DIRECTOR, LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT: Well, what's happening is that we're always looking for better ways to serve our students to make sure that they achieve, they are successful.
And the online, particularly these hybrid programs where we use the online together with a teacher in the classroom, have grown very, very well, because we can have differentiated instruction using the online system and then also leverage the face-to-face teacher for any individualized or small group instruction.
BOLDUAN: In these tough economic times, when I think of online, you know, this online element, it seems like it must be a money saver not having to run the cost associated with keeping a summer school going on all summer long. Doing some of these online elements seems like it could save money.
So, is this purely economics driven?
SPARANGIS: Actually, it's not. Money is not what's driving this at all. There is an actual teacher that is online. It's really a shifting of the cost to better serve our students.
BOLDUAN: So, I was looking into this. It seems like while many are clearly jumping onboard with this and taking this on as a good way to work with students and maybe take advantage of how students work these days, being online so much, there seems to be also some concern about the quality of education that students are getting with this online element.
How did your school district work with those concerns?
SPARANGIS: When there's a different pedagogy involved when there's an online teacher and using particularly in these hybrid environments where we leverage online and face-to-face instruction. All of those things come into play into evaluating the student, making sure the student is successful. As a matter of fact, most of our students that do take the online actually find it very rigorous.
BOLDUAN: So many of these online courses are prepared by for- profit companies. How is your school district able to maintain control, educational control over the material and the content?
SPARANGIS: Right. Well, we use both internally developed content and content that is available out there for purchase.
Basically, what we do is we evaluate all of the content from the different providers and the content that we use and make sure it's aligned to state standards, make sure it's aligned to district standards and to make sure that it's effective in the classroom with our students online and in the classroom.
BOLDUAN: Do you see just the element of the online education as part of going to be the new kind of fabric of public education and private education as we move into this digital age? Do you see it as being a key component moving forward?
SPARANGIS: Oh, absolutely. I absolutely do.
BOLDUAN: All right, Themy Sparangis, thank you so much for joining us today.
SPARANGIS: Thank you.
BOLDUAN: All right, so it is the car of the future or is it? GM's long-awaited Chevy Volt is now rolling of the assembly line. Our Poppy Harlow talks with GM's CEO next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELSHI: I think this is a big deal. And I have been a fan of General Motors over the year, I've been a critic of them over the year. You and I have worked on auto stories over the years.
BOLDUAN: That is true.
VELSHI: I think this is a big deal. General Motors officially launched its long-awaited Chevy Volt today with big celebration at the factory near Detroit.
BOLDUAN: It's billed as the world's first extended-range electric car. It has a 35-mile battery range and a gasoline-powered generator that can keep the car moving for 344 more miles. It gets, get this, an average of 60 miles per gallon on gasoline and even when the gas-powered generator runs, the car, it still gets an estimated 37 miles per gallon.
VELSHI: Now for many consumers, the price of this thing might be a drawback. It's $41,000, but buyers of this or the Nissan Leaf get a $7,500 federal tax credit, there are also some state tax credits in California, for instance, you get a little more money back.
Poppy Harlow talks with GM CEO Dan Akerson today. Poppy, the auto bailout is still fresh on people's minds. GM, a company that was in bankruptcy, a lot is riding on this car.
POPPY HARLOW, CNNMONEY.COM: A lot is riding on this car. And you know, it's interesting, guys. It's given GM the a halo effect. This is a green car, a car a lot of people said they couldn't make or they couldn't sell. The demand picture looks pretty good, but, Ali, your point about it being $41,000, that is a lot of money, even with the tax break, for Americans, especially Americans right now.
And one very important thing to note is this is not the car that GM is going to sell masses of that is going to result in American taxpayers being paid back the 27-odd billion dollars that GM still owes us. This is the car that is the future of GM.
But when I talked to the head of GM, the CEO, Dan Akerson, about it, OK, all right, what do you make money on now and are electrics really the car of the future, take a listen to what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DAN AKERSON, CEO, GENERAL MOTORS: There's no question the Volt is a creative, new technology to be introduced, but en mass, it's not going to happen in the first year or two. We hope to have it up to 100,000 over the next two or three years on an annual production here in the United States.
The Kruz, which is a great car priced very competitively and has gotten rave reviews by the trade magazines in our industry, we'll probably produce a quarter of a million of those in the United States this year, and if demand continue as briskly as it has been in the initial phases, we may even have to pick that up.
So there's no question, in the intermediate to near term, combustion engines will be more dominating than electrification of a car, but the future is with the electrification of the car.
HARLOW: Well, and as we look to the future and look to part electric cars, like the Volt, and also all-electric cars, like the Nissan Leaf, how do you think the Volt is going to compete against Nissan's Leaf, which is pure electrical, so BYD's electrics coming out of China?
AKERSON: Well, first of all, we're also developing battery electric vehicles like the Leaf, but this car is unique. This car you can literally drive from New York to Los Angeles.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HARLOW: And, Ali, another thing this car is doing is, because of the launch today, they're announcing a thousand new job additions in Detroit at this plant, which is always a good thing for Detroit.
But, Ali, I know you drove the Nissan Leaf lately and spoke to Nissan's CEO. So you have another side of the story.
VELSHI: Well, Nissan is really touting the fact that this is an all-electric car. He walked me around the car, the CEO, Carlos Ghosn, the CEO, and said there's no tail pipe, there's no exhaust.
But different things. I mean, that car can go a hundred miles before it has to be recharged. This car, as you know, can go 400 miles really -- almost 400 miles without being recharged.
So unclear, Poppy. I guess the mystery is how consumers will take to this.
BOLDUAN: Well -- and I don't want to be the Grinch on this topic.
VELSHI: I was the Grinch yesterday, so you can be the Grinch.
BOLDUAN: Can I be Grinchy? Can I be Grinchy about electric cars?
I was reading about this. Only about 7 percent -- Kelly Blue Book says only about 7 percent of consumers are interested in electric cars. So what is the hubbub all about then?
VELSHI: Right, and Carlos Ghosn from Nissan said that he expects in a few years it will sort of max out at about 10 percent. But you know, that's 10 percent of cars in America not using gasoline.
BOLDUAN: There's a market, albeit a small one.
VELSHI: You know, I don't know. It will be interesting to see what goes on. But we'll talk about this day one day in 10 or 15 years. BOLDUAN: And you'll say, remember when you were being Grinchy? And I'll say, yes, I do.
VELSHI: It was the day after I was Grinchy.
All right, Poppy, thanks a million for that. Poppy Harlow.
Hey you can get the rest of that interview on CNNMoney.com. And by the way, that site is chockfull of information today. The one of my favorite things there is the quiz, "How Well Do You Know the Deficit?" You should try it.
BOLDUAN: That gets me really excited.
VELSHI: It was a lot of fun.
All right, we're going to round out the hour with some "Odds & Ends." Two stories set in two different countries, both involving colorful costume characters that you've got to see right after this break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELSHI: OK, time for today's "Odds & Ends."
(CROSSTALK)
BOLDUAN: I'm just not used to the space.
VELSHI: I don't want to hip-check you and show you how strong I am.
Moving on. Not that there's anything odd about walking across the country dressed as a super hero but --
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ALLEN MULLINS, RAISING AWARENESS FOR HOMELESS VETERANS: The costume is patriotic. And when you see it, you don't know whoever is inside of that costume with the sign loves his country.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELSHI: That's Captain America, AKA Allen Mullins. He hopes to raise awareness about homeless U.S. veterans as he walks on our highways and byways. He's never served in the military, nor has anyone close to him, but Mullins says he's taking it to the streets to get the government mad enough to do something about the issue.
Well, from Captain America to the official "Star Trek" capital of Canada.
You can handle that one.
BOLDUAN: I didn't know one existed, but I'm sure you did, Mr. Velshi. Folks in Vulcan, Alberta, have worked hard to capitalize on the town's Trekkie name. Never mind it was named after the roman got of fire decades before Captain Kirk was a gleam in anybody's eye.
Well, anyway, it's becoming a hot spot for of all things Trekkie weddings with more and more couples boldly going where no man has gone before.
VELSHI: Oh, my.
Well, this is fun. I have to leave. But can you stay for another day and do the show tomorrow?
BOLDUAN: Sure, I'll handle it.
VELSHI: Good to have you here. It was great working with you. We'll do it again soon.
Brooke Baldwin continues with NEWSROOM right now -- Brooke.
