By Kristina Wong

Nov 12, 2009 5:45pm

Gates Irked By Recent Leaks: ‘Everybody Out There Ought to Just Shut Up’

ABC News' Kirit Radia: Speaking to reporters traveling with him to Oshkosh, Wisconsin today, where he toured a plant building the new more mobile armored trucks called MRAP-ATVs that will be deployed to Afghanistan, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates lashed out against the numerous leaks that have emerged in recent weeks about the Obama administration’s deliberations over its Afghanistan strategy and about last week’s Fort Hood shooting. According to one report by the New York Times, Gates said threatened to fire anyone caught leaking, saying “I have been appalled by the amount of leaking that has been going on in this process.” “I think a lot of different places are leaking,” he said, according to the Times. “I’m confident that the Department of Defense is one of them. To have details or options that are being considered out there in the middle of the president’s deliberative process I think does not serve the country and it does not serve our military.” America’s top defense official also blasted leakers of information about the Fort Hood shooting that, he said, endangered the investigation. According to an article by the government funded American Forces Press Services Gates said the leakers did not fully understand the entire incident. “"Everybody out there ought to just shut up,” the normally soft-spoken Gates is quoted as saying.

User Comments

Obama promised to have the most transparent administration ever.
Someone has to keep the promise. Obama isn’t.
Is Gates afraid that Obama’s incompetency will be discovered-we already know.

Posted by: ollie | November 12, 2009, 5:49 pm 5:49 pm

ok!

Posted by: wow | November 12, 2009, 5:49 pm 5:49 pm

I agree with Gates but leaks having been going on since the Bush administration. Seems we cannot keep anything secret.

Posted by: King Julien | November 12, 2009, 6:06 pm 6:06 pm

The applicable journalistic cliche is “an administration in disarray.”

Posted by: Fascist Hyena | November 12, 2009, 6:11 pm 6:11 pm

This demonstrates just how weak this administration is and his actions make all of us feel our country is in good hands to keep us safe. We really do have dumb,dumber and dumbest running this country. I surely trust them running our health care…not!

Posted by: Samuel | November 12, 2009, 6:30 pm 6:30 pm

Eight is enough already, Gates is the one who should shut up, or tell the delayer in chief the time has come put up or shut up, this is America and as LINCOLN said tell the people and they will save the country.

Posted by: earl | November 12, 2009, 6:36 pm 6:36 pm

The leaks are making the press look like idiots more than the administration. I think I’ve heard three different decisions attributed to Obama at this point. How could we possibly tell leaks from a bored reporter making something up at this point?
Obama has already doubled the American lives on the line in Afghanistan. I have no problem with a complete review being done – especially one that takes the time to work out the very complicated question of the exit strategy. A question that McCrystal’s report did not address at all. Nor should it – it’s not the military’s job to figure out the diplomatic, government structure, and social condition required for exit. It is Obama’s. American troops shouldn’t be deployed on a whim or for a nice photo shoot.

Posted by: jhw539 | November 12, 2009, 6:59 pm 6:59 pm

I agree with Gates: Leaking information as Obama is weighing critical factors serves neither the interest of the country nor the military. The question the President is trying to answer, according to Gates, comes down to “How do we signal resolve, and at the same time, signal to the Afghans and the American people that this is not open-ended?”
Good question. I read the counterterrorism blog, and some of the posts really stress the conundrum we’re dealing with here– what do you when it’s true that without state legitimacy there is no way one can create conditions on the ground for that government to take ownership of any sort of popularly supported programs AND YET, if Afghanistan were again controlled by the Taliban, al Qaeda would have a safe haven of operation and a “victory”– psychologically or emotionally at least– that would likely help revive their cause?
I think it’s totally reasonable for the president– before sending the number of troops necessary to start winning on the ground, bypassing the central government if necessary and opting for a tribal-local focus, or whatever–to ask for benchmarks and off-ramps and to really think this thing out so it doesn’t turn into a quagmire.
Good for Gates for telling people to shut up already.

Posted by: Allycat 521 | November 12, 2009, 7:22 pm 7:22 pm

What a big cry baby.
Chris Wallace was right.

Posted by: Huh? | November 12, 2009, 7:22 pm 7:22 pm

“American troops shouldn’t be deployed on a whim or for a nice photo shoot. ”
Unless they’re coming out of the back of a C10 in Dover in caskets, apparently.

Posted by: Huh? | November 12, 2009, 7:24 pm 7:24 pm

“American troops shouldn’t be deployed on a whim or for a nice photo shoot. ”
Unless they’re coming out of the back of a C10 in Dover in caskets, apparently.
_____________________________________-
Stop insulting the fallen soldiers who were returned. The President showed them great honor – for you to cheapen it to push your (ever so important opinion) and partisan political interpretation is shameful. Let the fallen have their honor.

Posted by: tierra | November 12, 2009, 7:29 pm 7:29 pm

“Unless they’re coming out of the back of a C10 in Dover in caskets, apparently.”
Imagine that a President going to honor the soldiers returning home for the last time because of decisions he made.

Posted by: Ryan C | November 12, 2009, 7:31 pm 7:31 pm

Mr. Scrubbed Quote from the NYTimes,
“The images and the sentiment of the president’s five-hour trip to Delaware were intended by the White House to convey to the nation that Mr. Obama was not making his Afghanistan decision lightly or in haste.”
I’d like you to meet Ms. Tierra
“The President showed them great honor – for you to cheapen it to push your (ever so important opinion) and partisan political interpretation is shameful.”
It’s not my partisan political interpretation. It’s a disgusting, craven, political act by this president.

Posted by: Huh? | November 12, 2009, 7:43 pm 7:43 pm

It’s not my partisan political interpretation. It’s a disgusting, craven, political act by this president.
_____________________________________
Your opinion is just that . .. you seem to think it’s more important than the honors shown. . .
Stop insulting the fallen soldiers who were returned. The President showed them great honor – for you to cheapen it to push your (ever so important opinion) and partisan political interpretation is shameful. Let the fallen have their honor.

Posted by: tierra | November 12, 2009, 7:48 pm 7:48 pm

“The images and the sentiment of the president’s five-hour trip to Delaware were intended by the White House to convey to the nation that Mr. Obama was not making his Afghanistan decision lightly or in haste.”
Do you know what the words “images”, “trip”, “Delaware”, “White House”, “intended”, “convey” mean?

Posted by: Huh? | November 12, 2009, 7:53 pm 7:53 pm

Posted by: Huh? | Nov 12, 2009 7:53:44 PM
Look, we know you hate the President. Quit insulting the fallen soldiers and their families by pretending the honor the President showed them was insincere. You don’t know, and you’re more than ignorant to presume.

Posted by: tierra | November 12, 2009, 7:57 pm 7:57 pm

Oh, no, this guy’s an idiot, just like Obama.

Posted by: tanarg | November 12, 2009, 7:57 pm 7:57 pm

“The images and the sentiment of the president’s five-hour trip to Delaware were intended by the White House to convey to the nation that Mr. Obama was not making his Afghanistan decision lightly or in haste.”
This reporting from the NY Times kinda proves my point, and not yours. His “secret” trip to Dover was politically motivated. But why are you surprised? Everything he does is politically calculated. Even down to fake vegetable gardens.

Posted by: Huh? | November 12, 2009, 8:06 pm 8:06 pm

“No its just your partisan interpretation of what the NYT wrote. ”
What’s your intepretation? I’m open to other views. Just not straight denials like others have been doing.

Posted by: Huh? | November 12, 2009, 8:11 pm 8:11 pm

I certainly hope that everyone gets it, that these “leaks” are planned and executed by the WH..
They are not loose lips at a cocktail party, Its a calculated nugget of information tossed out so Obama can check the political wind before committing to any decision. He has done this on EVERY policy he has had to touch.
So now the “administration” is going to punish anyone who “leaks” information. Puh-leeese…do they really think we buy this baloney?
Hows about we just get some pro small business things going and then all will be well again. And pull out of Afghanistan since your heart and gut are really not committed to winning. Just pull out.
There, problems fixed.

Posted by: mjishernameo | November 12, 2009, 8:15 pm 8:15 pm

“What’s your intepretation? I’m open to other views. Just not straight denials like others have been doing.”
Its pretty simple.
He wanted to go down to see the troops coming back from Dover.
He knew his presence would mean media coverage (far more than has occurred since the first casualties returned where the media was allowed if the family agreed which is a sad reflection on the media and ourselves if you ask me) so they asked family members.
Some families realizing the President would bring more media coverage that usual declined to have the media cover their family members return.
Do you really think a President standing in front of a flag draped coffin is a good photo op?

Posted by: Ryan C | November 12, 2009, 8:23 pm 8:23 pm

“Do you really think a President standing in front of a flag draped coffin is a good photo op”
Clearly, according to the NYT, he and his handlers thought it would convey to the country that he wasn’t taking any troop decisions lightly.
You’re interpretation completely ignores that aspect of the NYT story.
As far as I can tell, there’s only one take-away from the NYT’s blurb. Obama went to Dover under political auspices. Not honor or duty. But for political gain.

Posted by: Huh? | November 12, 2009, 8:31 pm 8:31 pm

“Clearly, according to the NYT, he and his handlers thought it would convey to the country that he wasn’t taking any troop decisions lightly.”
Or maybe not since they removed that.
Perhaps an editor asked the writer to back up the statement and the writer had none.
The whole thing obviously became an embarrassment to the right wingers as they have tried every way they can to undermine the appearance.
Poor Liz Cheney had to make up a lie about Bush going to Dover all the time to try and execute some CYA.

Posted by: Ryan C | November 12, 2009, 8:37 pm 8:37 pm

“Perhaps an editor asked the writer to back up the statement and the writer had none. ”
That’s certainly plausible, but given the obvious leanings of the NYT, definitely not probable. More likely, they scrubbed after they realized how craven and calculated that revelation would appear to the public.

Posted by: Huh? | November 12, 2009, 9:01 pm 9:01 pm

Scrubbed in the exact way that Obama’s “shout-out” was removed from video clips and completely ignored.
You’re not being realistic at all if you can’t recognize that there are some people who work in the media who actively try to protect Obama’s reputation.

Posted by: Huh? | November 12, 2009, 9:03 pm 9:03 pm

Yea, its a shame like some one leaked it out from the White House that Obama is brain dead. Thats funny! WE already know that. That wasn’t a leak that was the truth!!!

Posted by: John Demeter | November 12, 2009, 9:09 pm 9:09 pm

Here’s one way the President can stop the leaks….MAKE A FRICKIN DECISION!!!

Posted by: getaclue | November 12, 2009, 9:46 pm 9:46 pm

Perhaps an editor asked the writer to back up the statement and the writer had none.
—————————–
That is most likely. Good journalism does’t rely on rumor or guess work or innuendo, but rather on facts.

Posted by: Billy Davenport | November 12, 2009, 10:13 pm 10:13 pm

“That is most likely. Good journalism does’t rely on rumor or guess work or innuendo, but rather on facts.”
The same NYT that put out that hit piece about McCain and that lobbyist? You know the one, the one that was nothing but guess work, rumor and innuendo.
The Grey Lady doesn’t have the sterling reputation it used to.

Posted by: Huh? | November 12, 2009, 10:24 pm 10:24 pm

Posted by: Huh? | Nov 12, 2009 10:24:02 PM
You don’t understand logic, nor journalistic ethics and application. One bad story (if it exists – hard to trust the trolls on here) does not mean standard journalistic approaches disappear across the board.

Posted by: Billy Davenport | November 12, 2009, 10:35 pm 10:35 pm

“nor journalistic ethics and application. ”
That’s just rich. Yeah, Billy, today’s NYT are pillars of ethics and “journalistic application”.
You’re living in a fantasy world. I understand the necessity to create this false construct, the cognitive dissonance must be approaching some physical pain threshold. It’ll all feel better once some of that mental pressure is relieved. Have you considered trepanation?

Posted by: Huh? | November 12, 2009, 10:48 pm 10:48 pm

“Imagine that a President going to honor the soldiers returning home for the last time because of decisions he made.”
Bush did it without the photo-op. Obama does NOTHING without a photo-op. It was little casket and a lot of Obama.
Bush went to Fort Hood and asked it be kept quiet.
Obama couldn’t manage to get to Fort Hood until all the tripods were set up to capture and memorialize every time Obama scratched his butt.

Posted by: drjohn | November 13, 2009, 8:24 am 8:24 am

“I have been appalled by the amount of leaking that has been going on in this process.”
This is hysterical. These guys reveled in the leaks that brought grief to Bush.
Schadenfreude!
Calling Mr. Schadenfreude!

Posted by: drjohn | November 13, 2009, 8:25 am 8:25 am

“Imagine that a President going to honor the soldiers returning home for the last time because of decisions he made.”
Uh, that would be “soldier” as in one soldier – a craftily hidden fact by the slobbering media.
“Pictures were taken only of Sgt. Griffin’s transfer and not the others because Griffin’s family was the only one to give journalists permission to cover the event.”
And speaking of the slobbering media, they all rushed out there in April to take pictures and write stories. Now the only one who takes pictures is the Associated Press who provides photos to 4,000 media outlet. The rest can’t be bothered so they just buy them from the AP. That’s disgusting.
The press clammering for transparency or another opportunity to slap Bush/Cheney (or any other Republican) in tha face? It never was about the fallen soldiers.

Posted by: Visualize Whirled Peas | November 13, 2009, 9:37 am 9:37 am

This is hysterical. These guys reveled in the leaks that brought grief to Bush.
_____________________________________
Hogwash. Gates was also Bush’s Secretary of Defense – you mean he used to revel in the leaks before? I don’t think so.

Posted by: tierra | November 13, 2009, 10:38 am 10:38 am

Uh, that would be “soldier” as in one soldier – a craftily hidden fact by the slobbering media.
_________________________________
President Obama was directly involved in retrieving and escorting 18 coffins with individual honors for each. He was there from just after midnight until just before dawn. Only one of these retrievals was filmed. The other 17 Obama did with the troops alone.

Posted by: tierra | November 13, 2009, 10:38 am 10:38 am

And speaking of the slobbering media, they all rushed out there in April to take pictures and write stories. Now the only one who takes pictures is the Associated Press who provides photos to 4,000 media outlet. The rest can’t be bothered so they just buy them from the AP. That’s disgusting.”
Very much agreed.
The media should cover casualties if the family says its ok.
That they have not bothered to do so beyond a single photographer until Obama was in Dover is reprehensible.

Posted by: Ryan C | November 13, 2009, 2:34 pm 2:34 pm

“Bush went to Fort Hood and asked it be kept quiet.
Obama couldn’t manage to get to Fort Hood until all the tripods were set up to capture and memorialize every time Obama scratched his butt.”
Ft. Hood was where the recent attack happened that left 13 American dead and 30+ injured.
Casualties return at Dover Airforce base.
And Bush never went to Dover though Liz Cheney claimed he had.

Posted by: Ryan C | November 13, 2009, 2:36 pm 2:36 pm

From reports of soldiers at the scene, we’ve learned that there was no entrance to the killing room for about an hour after the shooting, no ambulances, and no medical personnel allowed in. This caused even more soldiers’ deaths. Why were soldiers allowed to lay there dying for an hour with no medical assistance and very few policemen?
Sources said that only civilian helicopters were used, no military. WHY? Where were the ambulances and military police? Where did the other 2 shooters disappear to, and were never heard about since. How did Hasan “arise from the dead” after 8 hours?
I believe the top military brass knew about Hasan’s beliefs and used him as a “patsy” to gin up American support for these awful wars we hate. The military is HOPING WE ALL TELL OBAMA TO SEND MORE TROOPS!
And yes, we hear that Bush Sr. was there to get money stashed there 15 years ago. He and the Clintons know where all the stolen taxpayer funds are — their offshore accounts and illegal trading platforms.
and DON’T TAKE THE H1N1 VACCINATION!
Why isn’t Napolitano at Homeland Security, Dept of Justice, and the FBI arresting these criminals and Muslim jihadist in U.S. mosques. Seems they’d rather focus on returning veterans and tea-party folks.

Posted by: Bridget | November 17, 2009, 1:31 am 1:31 am

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.