>> but my question goes more toward what eventually you do with them once if we can agree there is something that would be the end of the war? as the chairman said, they would just be released. is that correct? in dealing with muhammed or other individuals that violated the geneva convention? >> no. interesting in the prior discussions we were having, we

talked about the distinction beeen detaining somebody under the law of war for the duration of the hostility there is some question as to exactly when these hostilities will cease but separate from that is the ability to convict somebody for violations of the law or of the criminal code and to hold them for the duration of their sentence which may go beyond the end of hostilities that is a fixed sentence supported by the prosecution. >> i wanted to add that element to the conversation. one of the things that ncerns me is when we talk about the role of the commander in chief and it well lawfulness under the laws of war for the geneva convention the prisoner of war status, a guantana bay, there is a lot

left to interpretation for the commander in chief. you talk about just a few minus ago one of the hot-button issues are state information for cool punishment-- grow punishment until the president started to define certainhings, that was arguable. for some it wamore obvious but there was room for argument. my question to you, as we move forward, the judge advocate that was here, some of the questions quite frankly that you have then asked to answer involve a lot of speculation and you have not been able to answer them. neher has the judge advocate. it is imperative we do as much as we can to me as clear and detailed as possible so moving forward we are not caught in

the cloud of war when it comes to how these people are prosecuted. that is what we are trying to do today. one of the things that is out there for me is when we do with future detainee's or prisoners specifically with regard to habeas constitutional rights. we talk about detainee's and afghanistan and where are we will go in the future with regards to terror. what do specificay foresee us doing to make sure we are as locked in as possible when we pick up somebody as the extension of mr. conway's question if we pick up a bad guon the battlefield who is clearly a terrorist or al qaeda or somebody like that, what rules of criminal procedure will we be able to follow for the person with regard to habeas for the

future? can we address that with what we're doing here today? >> congressmen let me try to answer this question this way. which is part of the question that you asked earlier, mr. kris. there are no easy deep clean answers when this will be over and how you treat people in the future of the so-called war ends which is one of the reasons why you seek to bring people to justice so that you can get out of the process day-long prison sentence prevent terms of detainees and back-room we are building a new facility. we are putting in place review procedures that i think that our improved from that have been @pproved at this end, level by general petraeus. i think we're headed in the right direction in terms it

and our ability to hold these people consistentit the rule of law and consistent what are the amecan standard's. >> i had 10 more questions but my time is up. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. chairman my eight -- i want to thank both of you for making efforts to try to resolve what is clearly one of the most complex legal issues we have ever faced i appreciate you trying to find some reasonable compromise understanding of the diffences in the battlefield vs. the legal every now. my chair man and his country lawyer style, has hit on an issue directly. the way i see the issue we have detained individuals on a minimastandard under the law of war and we are justified according to the supreme court inontinuing custody so long

as the conflict continues. we're struggling with those individuals because although we would have the particulate suspicion in terms of offenses and involvement, we do not have enough as it appears to me, to be sending these individuals to vious forums because if we did, we would have done so already. of the question becomes, wants the conflict is over, what do we do? masking a bit more direct way, do you believe based on the supreme court case and the dictum with a net following the removal of troops from our iraq will we continue justified detention of individuals detained from iraq after the combat troops leave? if not, what do we do then the? >> iraq and afghanistan are

two different situations as we wind down our presence in iraq, pursuant to the security agreement, that does not mean the conflict against al qaeda and the taliban will be over. we are very much in afghanistan dealinwithhe threat right now sell so part of the mission of the u.s. miliry is capture and attention. >> let's go down a few years and assume we withdrawal from afghanistan. we have these individuals the we believe our very danrous people although not sufficient proof to bring them before a forum. what do we do then? i know we are looking at these cases determine what forums to send them my question is similar, whatfforts are we making in viewing them to require additional evidence so we can afford them to these

four wurm -- forms and hold them beyond the end of t conflict whether iraq for afghanistan? >> that collection effort is definitely on e growing. consists of intelligence, military resources, avenues, we constantly do that. if for no other reason then to find out just the authority to keep those indiduals, but in my view as the military where we can gain in permission about people we have not yet captured. we are constantly doing negative. >> by have more time, with regard to the issue, you suggesting in a battlefield, if there was a door knockdown and soldiers take a statement at gunpoint, are you suggesting the standard even under those circumstances should be used

as opposed to a reliability standard? if so, why? >> we're suggestg a standard that takes account of that circumstance. in other words,, in a civilian context, cops and robbers, you try to discourage the police from taking statements but that is the mission of the military threat but it should do that. what we're asking for and urging is a standard that takes account of these circumstces and would not preclude them. >> do think it is realistic car chords will find an individual giving a statement under a voluntary standard will be admissible? >> you have touched on the very reason why i think we need to get it right or codify a standard to take a account of the circumstances so the dges to non misinterpret. >> winans have a different

voluntary with somebody is in custody with reliability standard that applies when you deal with issues on the battlefield? >> that is very close to what we are proposing. >> i yield back. thanyou. >> i think t gentlemen. mr. hunter? >> thank you for being here. this is a little difficult for me to be sitting here with you because frankly, the rules of engagement and what the military lawyers do on the ound floor guys lik me is make life hell, frankly. you make things very difficult and i would say some of the dod law with rules of engagement how w treat detainee's makes us kill more people because we do not want to capture them. i have seen havbeen have seen guys get detned we could not hold on to them according to the jag so we

release them and then we kill them. i don't think you have to understand to research and point* that in fact, o buddy of mine that i served in fallujah who was in the fbi now, he was a jag and we have different types, but they make it very difficult. in afghanistan we had a jag with us 24/7. 24/7 watching the bad guys and we saw them doing bad things and the jag would say we could not do anything gourde day taye them and you have a three-star general relying on the it is '03 or '04 to give them a decision the general could override and strike but if the did it would be against what the jag said a and the general's career would have been in jeopardy. but we will go one to the questions. i am not an attorney in so i will try eight if you could

speak plainly to me if you don't mind as i am at a disadvantage. >> the nature of the trials, to you think we're leaning towards holding the detainee's and our military briggs as opposed to federal penitentiary's? >> i think ... >> i think the military major they would be tried? i am not one who thinks this administration came in and this stuff started. in 2007 under the bush and administration there were looking at camp pendleton and miramar in a san diego to put detainee's because they thought would be conducive to hold them. does that lead into that process of thinking? >> congressmen letter b respectfully disagree with

your characterization. >> you cannot disagree because i have been there three times and i have seen that. i have been there more than you have frankly if you want to argue with that. >> i have two good jags sitting behind the one went to moscow with the psident the other has one accommodations the. >> i am not saying you're not good lawyers. i am sure you are. >> my point* is that your dad lawyers are enable ersberg of amd power, they do not prohibit. i am the top lawyer at the dertment of dse and here to work with the united states military to help them get the job done consistent with the ruling bloc, not to stand away. out like to respectfully disagree with the characterization but having said that, i do want to address your other point*. where we're headed is a system

where you have both systems justice available for the interests of national security to put away the bad guys, in one form or another, we need to have both systems available for fedal, a criminal fense is. what we have right now is frankly a system that could be made better that in the eyes of some,all short. we have the opportunity to fix it for purposes of promoting national security and i hope this congress will take up that opportunity. >> glittery move on i do not know the answer to either of my questions and i am almost a time when you talk a rut cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment of detainees, do think we shouldfford our military the exact same thing? we change boot cp? because we humiliate and

degrade our marines and soldiers and sailors and airmen all the time. it is not fun sometimes bei in the military. right? we do not get too muc sleep, we ar sleep deprived and don't always get through or not always have three meals per day. we are given detainee's better treatment then i got or the jag sitting behind you if you went to ranger school, he is saying yes and then he w humiliated and degraded will we make that sametandar that we have? >> without a doubt i will not disagree that being in the military is hard and difficult. you do not always get three meals per day, but please understand, this is not about being nice to the bad guys. it is about american values, who we are as americans, how wwould want

our people treated if they are captured, there was the discussion o reciprocity. >> i think the reciprocity argument is absurd this is evil incarnate. america win wars and we don't do it that way but by killing the bad guys but thank you very much. >> it appears we have completed our first round. bit if we went to go over to the second round i know some want to ask some questions, what your asking of us is to look at the senate language three your eyes and your recommendations. as i understand it, you have five such recommendations i

will try to convince them the first is prohibit the use of involuntary statements. second, further regulate the use of heresy. next use the bella process forthcoming state that a charge a of a material support is not a commission that could be tried with a commission and the fifth is to establish a sunset. am i correct? >> that sounds right to me. i don't know. >> that is what you are here to do. am i correct? >> a believe so except mr. kris can correct me i think we and the administration are pretty satisfied with the

current senate language. but i coulde wrong about that. >> it would be helping it if you are very, very clear with your recommendations to this meeting. spell out so we can understand it. can you do that for us? wiin 10 days? we would appreciate i >> mr. chairman, if i may deferred to other members. >> mr. bartlt? >> thank you very much you stated mr. johnson we will not release prisoners to countries that torture. does that mean we have stopped than negative gen?

>> as a general matter, congressman i think it is our view that the extradition and sure cure to bring people together not push them away as a gentle matter. >> that is my view and the deal with the adminisation. >> the extraordinary rendition and that we are now more proving, they' not going to countries that torture? >> i hesitate to comment on specifics military optis which a state that military principal. >> would it not be a huge contradiction for the administration to tell us they will not release prisoners then continued to eight improved extraordinary renditions to countries that we know darn well to tture? >> i hesitate to comment on

specific operations. i am not sure what you have been mined but as a general matter, that is my viewnd i think that is the administration's view also. >> we have been talking a lot about the sensation of hostility. we have no intention of releasing these psoners the we have already deemed so bad that we could that release them even if the court determines they are innocent. where we talking about a cessation of hostilities doesn't that create pblems in the future when we have withdrawn from iraq and afghanistan and still hold prisoners? >> bed chairman -- question the congressman asks is a good one. when does this war and? theris no easy answer to

that question. i have not heard one yet from a lot of bright people. that is the reason why we think we have detention authority, but even in this case they says circumstances can change depending how far out you go and the reason why we think some port -- some sort of a periodic review of a detaining the situation is approprie because the rate cut off late in the future where the person is:pea threat two or they could be transferreto another coury with security guarantees. >> i elicited answers and i think both of you have indicated that if the courts found a detainee in a sense, that we knew was a really bad guy, that we would

not rease him, that they say couple of interesting questions. one o them, how that we already judge them guilty by determining he is so bad matter what the court does we will not release him? of that is so, why do we go through a court proceeding in particular a military tribunal? their millet -- millions of people in the world when you say military tribunal they cringe because of their associations are ours is different but this is a psychology and in this area, perception is reality and the reality isilitary tribunals have very little around the world but i am not talking about them i'm talking about the problem with the world that just makes the point* that i made my first round. i am not sure why we are here or why we bought this troubled

by try to follow my mother's council do not borrow trouble. if we could move these prisoners to the international court? what we do that? we bragdon this was not our war with a coalition, wire be burdened with this as a single nation wide and remove them to the international arena and avoid all of the stigma we would get from these proceedings a matter what we do or how careful we are? >> congressman i would urge that's if we have the adjudication of guilt or innocence i think the comment that was made earlier that that is not law enforcement context when united states military makes a determination

that they should detaining a belligerent on the battlefield. that is not the adjudication of gilts, a decision for reasons of national security and safety th that person needs to be detained so they don't return to the fight. that is very different from the adjudication of guilt or innocence. i would try to answer your question by saying that military commissions in my judgment should not be judged in any way as second class justice produce say there is the perception out there but let me try to address that. our jag cherished notions of justice there are some excellent jag that i work with every day that are committed to the process. >> i think said gentlemen.

mr. "forbes"? >> and to mr. johnson dinky for being here i know it is tough and long but you keep telling us you want us to get it right but we cannot do that unless we ask tough questions he said he wanted to ta abou the administration's position. i want to do that. when was the last time that you were at gntanamo bay on behalf of the administration and? >> sometime within the last few months. >> you notice the security we had for manyetainees because oftentimes you go through the door and we have double doors on some of the detainee's, we have guards, well-trained they don't move anywhere unless there with a naval officer also shackled when they're getting interrogations' questioning or when they have medical treatments because

they could grab a pen and a stab it through the nurses guy. th is whathe professional people told us. mr. courtney raised the suggestion earlier about the general prison population, but if it is citibank's contemplating putting those prisoners with the general population? is that a possibility? >> i think the answer is no for a variety of reasons. >> so then it is meaning less about what mr. courtney raises about the general population? you can respond in any way but where do we have that type of security and what type of capacity do we have there now to build for the prisoners? >> there are two different questions whether it should be a facility or a civilian or military base so that is one distinction.

with respect to the dot cited think i have the number is right that we have about, more than 200 terrorism related people already in custody including 303 at the super max facilities. >> but that facility isn't that 90 site -- 95% pull at all times? >> thatounds plausible. >> that may follow up. you also look at the tribunal facility is that we build 10 getanamo bay to house these military proceedings. you also notice very important that is the only one in the united states because we have security matters that can come up and we have to have a 42nd delay between testimony and statements between when it is released to the people watching we're not told there's not another facility that has those capabilities to

disappear that deprivation we were given? >> the facility is first-rate absolutely it is the expeditionary facility and built that way with the intention and it would be moved. >> giambi moving that facility to somewhere in the united states? >> if we move the detainee's then we would move the lity. >> if youave one facility or even entertain the possibility of transferring these individuals across the country back to the trial proceedings because they have motions and everything els you have to locate those prisoners in conjunction with that facility? >> ideally we would keep the detainees were being prosecuted someplace close the. >> everybody what have decided it would be prosecuted three

military commission would need to be located by that site? >> that is my optimism -- optimistic solution i'm not sure if it could be done that w. >> has the administrapion entertain putting them in other parts of the country and transferring them with a security risk that may be present to the hearings that they would have before the military tribunal and the actual proceedings? >>deally as mr. kris would tell you and dealing with civilian criminal defendants who are prosecuted, you want to keep them close. >> my question is would the administration and even entertain t doing that? >> that would not be an efficient the scenario. >> thank you. thank you for your patience. >> mr. conaway? of american interests of

prolonging the misery of our panelists i want to talk about the forward looking issue of auorization and use of force. we h testimony from one of your colleagues last year that said in my professional opinion it would be constitutional and prudent to confirm the military's authority with the associated forces that testified last year. what your thoughts on that? . .

>> are you planning to proper that legislative fix that you believe is necessary? we all want to make sure that the president has all the authority he or she ultimately needs to deal with this issue. do you have legislation in my? >> no, i don't think we're there yet. >> just one la thing. other than public opinion, now we talk about ghetto. other than public opinion, what other reasons to rehab for closing that facility? will these prisoners be safer somewhere else? will they be better cared for so else? will be cheaper somewhere else?

is the treatment that? is anything other than -- it's legitimate, mr. bartlett. is there any rational region given that we have trillions of dollars of the pending deficits ahead of us, that we would spend the money on replicating gitmo somewhere else in the united states? >> the reason to close wonton amo, sir, if not just someofty notion of symbolism. lots of people cross-section bipartisan from john mccain, george w. bush barack obama, have said guantanamo should be close. why have they said that? because guantanamo is a bumpersticker for al qaeda. >> you're still talking about public perception. i am talking about national security. talking about this enhancing national security. >> as you said, we'll move into the united states. doesn't the bad guys to the exact sam issue?

it really is about the perception and not any of the mechanics. you said earlier in your testimony, and i agree with it having been there myself, that you couldn't keep these people in anything better than what they are kt in. in fact, when we moved them into a federal priso they'll probably have some course of action against us for having lowered their standard of living moving to a prison here in the united states. is there anything besides just perception? >> there are tangible national security reasons why that the facility needs to be close. and we're determined to do that. >> so we wl spend n dollars -- >> and, i can tell y that for high-value individuals who we determe we must again, we will detain them in a facility as secure if not more securfor the safety of the american people. that i think i can give you some

pretty good assurance on. >> i have no questions. this whole farce argument that they may escape or whatever fality we keep the mid is it a red herring. thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. >> before i call mr. mccain, does anyone else wish to answer any other question? >> thank you, mr. chairman. first elected clear by one of my statements. we didn't release somebody that we shouldn't have. we had somebody that we had to rease and we saw them again. they had been killed at that point. and also i understand that jags are enablers. i'm talking about the way that they have to do it, they have to play around a lot as well. they have to try to make things work for us on the ground that's a lot that is made here by d.o.d. and it makes it difficult for evybody on the ground trying to make things work. but the jackal itself i think is

good, but it is the longer they have to deal with. so my question is this. if we threaten or we verbally abuse -- help me out here. i am not leading any particular life question for any particular and to. if we bust out the door and we threat somebody, you know, show the rifle in their face, kick them down, you'll add them, threaten them verbally to get an answer out of them and they give that answer, what does that count as in this whole scheme of things? >> again, it depends on the circumstances. what we are advocating is a voluntariness standard that takes account of that battlefield reality. the other point i would mak is that we ban't let the tail wag the dog here. we can't let the law-enforcement mission, which is an portant one for national secury,

overcome the essential mission of the united states military. and that was part of that letter i read earlie the military's mission iso capture and engaged in a. that is what they do. and i don't nt them to do it anyway different at the point of capture than they do it now just to make mr. kris at the. >> you don't think the mca is going to cnganything onhe ground? it will be the same as it is now when it comes to the actual point of engagement? >> i don't believe that the reforms in the mca that are in the senate bill or that the administration is proposing would or should alter how the military does its job at the point of capture. that is correct. >> thank youery much. thank you, mr. chairman. >> mr. rooney? >> thankou, mr. chairman. as quickly as i can. going off what mr. hunter was just saying. when you talk about voluntary versus reliability, and it seemed that admiral macdonald

was sort of saying that, you know, reliability was eferable, and that you were going bollettieri, why is he wrong? >> first, i respect admiral macdonald aot, and i respect his views on this issue. it is when he and i have discussed extsively we think that there should be a voluntariness requirement versus it just being a factor. because we think that military commission judges, courts, what have you, are going to try to impose that anyway as we have more and me of these prosecutions. so as a requirement we ought to get it right, make sure that it accounts for all of the circumstances that congressman hunter is concerned about. so we are advocating a voluntariness standard, but it has some good line which in their that we are happy to put forward for the record whin

the 10 days that i think is sufficiently flexible to take account of the battlefield. and whenou look at it is really not that far from what admiral donald tsang. >> and i am assuming that because we are sort of going down unchartered territory here, because we are fighting a nonconventionalype of enemy and nonconventional war. we are sort of setting new rules for what mr. nter, his scenario had. assuming we move forward here, and let's just specule country acts ao country, north korea, china, whoer. and go back to a conventional war. do these rules apply to future conflicts, or do they just apply to the conflict that we are in now with kind of an enemy that is undetermined natinnally or under a common flag? are we setting new rules of engagement, new laws of war for all conflicts moving forward? or if we fight a conventional war do we go back to the old

system? >> well, the military commissions act and the senate bill, by their terms, referred to, you know, unlawful enemy combatants or unprivileged enemy belligerent. in other words, people who violate the laws of war. e bill does not redefine laws of war. does not redefine substantively the laws of war and as thehairman noted what we are advocating is a sunse provision to deal with change of circumstance. >> one last thing and this goes too with mr. conway again, you're talking national security, i ask mr. holder on the judiciary commiee if the stigma, if there's a stigma with guantanamo bay, does that still hold after a trial evidence comes out, this guy is a really bad guy, he needs to be put away for the rest of his life, everybody agrees that why can't

guantanamo turn from a detention center to an actual prison? and mr. holder at the time said the stigma was still there. he would i think agree wh you that there may be nationa security, bumpersticker for al qaeda. what i am saying is doesn't it take leadership at the highest level from you, mr. holder, from the president, to say to the world and the global community, the stigma is wrong that we are holding these people on a first class facility with people that are doing things the best way possible, giving them the uost care with regard to their culture, everything else. and not to say that super max can't hold them. we know, you know, that we are sure they are more than capable. but why do we have to react to what a bummer sticker for al qaeda might save rather than take leadehip and say this is the reality. this is the new stigma. this is the new reality. why can't we do that? >> first of all, ihink we have tried that. second, i think that the leadership to be exerted here is

to respond to the call of people from both parties, both of the last two president. this one and the last one. and safe let's get it done. okay. everyone to closeuantanamo, or least a lot oeople want to close the guantanamo. let's get it done. let's make the bureaucracy work and impose a deadline on doing so. that's what i think the leadership should be doing. >> i is deadwood you are saying. agai as so many of my colleagues having been there, having seen the facility, having been told how much money we have spent there and quiteikel still spending and building down there which is in same. but anyway, in this day and age i think that that is part of the problem, a lot of us have, that we cancel the refine what the reality is. thank yo mr. chairman. thank you. >> thank the gentleman heretofore call on mr. mckeon, let me urge our witnesses that should you have additional

materials you would like to submit o our committee, feel free to do so. it will be very helpful i you could do it within 10 days of today. plus the recommendations that i referred to aew moments ago. mr. mckeon? >> thank you, mr. chairman. and thank you very much for letting us continue. i know this is a very impoant issue to all of usand i know the chairman is going to be going to guantanamo and will get a firsthand view of what is going onown there. i referred in my opening statement that my opinion changed after having had t opportunity to visit. all i had seen from the guantanamo was at the pictures that we all saw a few years ago that causedpparently this problem that caused this perception that has caused all these problems. and i would like to associate

itself with questions of mr. conway. i've only known him for several years, and i keep wanting to call him the wrong name. and disturbing, because, frankly, the comments that you may, mr. johnson, about how things are different down there and what the job that is being done down there now. ther was an ad in one of our papers here on the capitol hill, a couple of days ago, an ad run by prison guard fro our federal prisons asking for more help, more guards. and i met with a federal prison guards a few months ago. and they told me that at times onguard is in the yard with 750 prisoners. and heaid they can kill me at anytime. i guarantee if he were in a yard with these prisoners and

guantanamo, wouldn't have to be 700, he would have been dead. these are guys that have one purpose in life. and i may be generalizing there, but i think most pele that have had the opportunity to inteelate with them would have that same conclusion. i think you indicated that in your testimony, that they are very dangerous individuals. we have down there 1000 guards for these little over 200 prisoners, and they are very careful and they still have problems. theyo on hunger strikes. there's a few leaders that they said they have separated, but they still get the word back to the other prisors, want to go on a hunger strike, want you to commit suicide, want you to kill a guar theseind of things. and they carry out those orders. as much security as there is a

there, i don't think we have to worry about terrorist attacks from the outside, which i think we would have to worry about anywhe that we had been in the state. and it just seems to me that if we could do what mr. rooney suggests, come to a new reality, have the leadership really say, look, you know, in this time, of economy, this time but we are still at work, we have got real financial problems in the country. i think that thatacility, the courthousd alone cost $12 million picu said they could move it somewhere, and i think you are probably referring inside the courtroom, the desks and those kind of things. the wiring, the ability to do the things that mr. foreman caused by, i think what caused a tremendous amount of money to duplicate anywhere in the

country. i think it would be political opposition on a grand order. i used to be on a city council. i know what it takes tget a building permit to build a building. there would be people that would be fighting is thing. the delays would be years, n weeks or months, before a facility could be built to handle them to do this situation. the prosecutor told us that if he cld be allowed to move forward he could wrap this up in three years, maybe he is optimistic, four years. i don't appear to have a better feel for that. but to think that we could duplicate what we have there, somewhere here in the country without e opposition that would come from -- without all the problems that would be associated with this kind of move, let alone the security problems that are involved. i just wish we could really step back and take a real look at all of these circumstances before we

move forward. and maybe that is why th president asked for six months -- or the commission as forsakes much more to look at this. i think reality really needs to be brought to bear here. i thank you again for what you're doing. i think you did a tremendous job of telling your side of the story, and carrying out what your mission is. mr. chairman, i thank you for your desire to go down there. you are a tremendous chairman for the committee and i appreciate all that you do. and with that idea back. >>r. mckeon, thank you so much. mr. johnson, mr. kris, appreciate your testimony today. please submit to us what else will be helpful, including the official recommendations that we refer to a few moments ago. with that, we are adjourned. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudibleonversations]

>> is a key resource. go online, follow the latest tweets, video ads and links. watch the latest ents includg town hall meetings and share your thoughts on the issue with your own citizen video. including video from any town halls you have gone to. and there is mort c-span .org/health ce. >> this past monday the hudson institute here in washington hosted a conference on the future of the russian military. analysts examined. analysts examined the nation's efforts to restructure its

defense. russia's relations with china and europe and its role in arms-control. this last an hour and a half. >> good morning. i would like to welcome everybody to hudson. my name is tranny. i'm the director for the center for political and military analysis and a longtime student of the sovt slash soviet military. i want to first of all begin by thanking you so much for coming. we are truly amazed at the turnout. late august, weave a record number of peop here for hudson event. partly a tribute to our speakers. partly attributed to the person holding the conference in honor of. and partly of course because, again, we undersnd are very important.

perceptions of international security trends, russian and natial security and visions of future war among other topics. i would request everybody now please turn off or turn to silent any of your communication devices that you might have. le for very pleased that c-span c-span viewers, we want to elinate as much as possible distracting nses. just to review the procedures for today's we separate panels, and there will be short breaks between them, about 10 minutes long. we will break for an hour at lunch between 12:30 p.m. and 1:30 p.m. >> the speakers for the first delivered a presentation, will then allow for the cmentator or the speakers to ask questions of themselves. and then we will be glad to on up for aude discussion and

commentary. we have people with microphones. they will come to you please wait for the microphone to come so it will be picked up by the tvecor. and just identify yourself and youp affiliation as a courtesy to thepeaker. i will introduce people in the order date when they giva presentation to each panel, at e beginning of the. i want to begin,owever, by saying it is my great pleasure to introduce enders wimbush who is a senior vice president at international programs and policies at huds institute. [applause] >> thank you very much, richard. this is indeed an impressive audience, and i'm sure that this is going to be an impressive location. today's events are a tribute to a remarkable individual, mary c.

fitzgerald, a hudson expert for more than 20 years and a good friend and a colleague. i am particularly grateful to richard weitz, and my old friend and colleague, stephen blanc, from the army war college, for putting this event together a mang it possible. so thanks to the two of you. let me say a word about mary. from 1989 t 2009, mary fitzgerald served as a research fellow in sino russian military of cells at the hudson institute. she was fluent in russian and she analyzed russian and chinese military writings for the department of defense on their impact, revolutionary impact with respect to emerging technologies, military doctrine strategy, operational concepts, organizational structures and defense industry imperatives. mary served as a consultant to

the white house office of science and tecology policy, the defense, the u.s.-china economic security review commissi, the emp commission, and many, many others. honing in on soviet military doctrine, that few in the west could access, mary was e of the first to discover the critical soviet concept of the revolution and military affairs, or the rna as we know it today. a focus on the new high-tech way of war emerging. married and became a favorite of andrew marshall, the director of the officof assessment, the office, the office of the secretary of defense, widely considered to be one of the world's preeminent military strategists. and andy marshall worked to ensure that mary's discoveries and subsequent research opting

to broadest possible audience among intellectuals in the united states and western europe. the pioneering imact of mary's work can still be seen today. thconcept of the rna, and i many assets transformed american defense strategy. the rma, with its strong emphasis on network-ntric warfare, precision strike, dominant battle space awareness became a central u.s. defense doctrine shaping the contours of how our military understands and pursues a future uerstanding of the wai warfare could take place. but highdighting the critical importance of the rma was just one of mary's significant contributions to national security. her interviews with former and currt russian military officers uncovered much that

would otherwise have been missed by western analysts. her examination of the impact of new technologiesnd how national defense is understood, drawing on her earlier work on the rma, along with an analysis, strategy, operations, military organizations, fce structure and in defense industries. lead to other critical research on emerging field of electronic and space warfare. lar, mary was one of the first in the west, to uncover the people's republic of china's focus on what ha been termed thspace theater for global warfare. years, years before chinatun the world in january 2007 was a very public display of its anti-satellite capabilities, she warned of this danger.

at the time of her death, ma was well into her latest research broadly titled chinese and russian asymmetrical strategies for space dominance. and as usual, her insights were unique. mary fitzgerald templated cutting-edge studies for the d.o.d., which included russian views on electroc and information warfare, the impact of the rma on russian military affairs, russia china convergent and divergent on 21st century warfare, and many, many other salient seminal studies. she contributed to many books and was the author of a monograph. the first being soviet views on sdi in 1987. the second, the changing soviet doctrine of nuclear warfare in

1989. and a third the new revolution in russian military affairs in 1994. she contributed a pivotal chapter to the -- to hudson's 2000 of china's new great leap forward, high-technology and military power in the next half-century. and that title -- that chapter was entitled china's evolving military juggernaut. she published just about every place that was important. in the strategic review, and orbitz, and comrative strategy, and defense analysis, in the international defense review, the naval war coege of review, air power journal, the air force magazine, the armed forces journal defense news, "the wall street journal," the christian science monitor, and many, many more. and a 1994 to 1995, she served adjunct professor at the air

command and staff college where she lectured extensively on russian aerospace theory and practice. in 2007, she submitted testimony on china's military strategy for space to the u.s.-china economic and security review commission. but what made very unique? was her workmanlike focus on analyzing military trends. she was a pioneer, as one of the first female analyst in her field. though she was always modest about her work, her discoveries, both shaped u.s. policies and launched the careers of numerous other analysts, many in this room today, and ma other areas of inquiry. others with far less knowledge, no language skills, or really

y expertise might have sout the limelight, but mary never did. when the chinese conducted their auspicious anti-satellite test january of 2007, time magazine tracked down mary, who quite rightfully should have a place as a talking head o every networon defense issues in thi town, but mary very kindly and patiently deferred. she was modest in the heart, and she always wanted to let her analytical work speak for her. she didet one major public recoition in 1)93 after the gulf war. she was awarded a civilian medal by the chief of army intelligence for her unique contributions to understanding russia's reaction to operation desert storm mary fitzgerd broadened our understanding of significant national security

challenges, and she helped americarepared for the warfe of the 21st century. many of us knew very far deep devotion to her family and friends, and/or ms compassion and her extraordinary witty, sharp sensof humor. myolleague a hudson, ken weinstein, said it best in his tribute mary. as american citens, kim said, we all owe her a debt of gratitude. her many contributions will live on in the decades to come rough the research field she pioneered and the changes she brought about by her work. i want to thank you on behalf of hudson and our board of trustees for joining us in honoring mary with this auspicious conference, and we know that the rult are

gointo be citing and provocative, ande know that mary, as modest as she was, would heartily approve of. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you so much, for that report. >> the first panelist will be stephen blank who will speak about russian military doctre. doctor blank has sved as regial security expert at the u.s. army war collegetrategic studies institute since 1989. he has written many books, articles, conference papers, probably one of the most prolific scholars in the field. some of his latest works include editor of imperial decline, military in the future, and of nationalities. as he played an instrument role

in helping us organize today's coerence by helping put the speakers, and will be helping produce and edit the vole of conference papers from today, which will be available on the website for downloading. also, personally i owe steve a lot of gratitude. is bent in the field to many younger scholars, including myself. >> thank you, richard. i have to say that because i work with the army that my presentation today does not reflect the views of the army. the defense department or the u.s. government. this is my views alone and we have other people who are employed by the government, and that cost goes for tm as well. i'm going to be talking about the new national security strategy that the russian government published on may 12. on its face, this is an extremely self-confident document. in startup icing, i say quite

falsely in my view, but it says that russia has overcome and mastered economic and political crisis of the past and is on his way to further developme. nonetheless, if you look at this document carefully and if you look at the date that goes into this document, what you see is instead a growing feeling of anxiety, and its political struggle within t russian political elite, and an unresolved struggle at best. those of you have gone back and studied russian history in any deathknell that there was a perennial conflict in russian secuty will take between those people who think that the government and the policy involved ought to ha a primary defense oriented or military oriented respect where as those responsible for the economic development in the country invariably say that we can't afford it. and they are constantly saying that security policy must be

tailored to what russia can really afford. t@is is a debate that goes back at least in the 19th century. it is still the case n. and in this concept we find a. this strategy was supposed to come out in 2004. as a matter fact, this was supposed to come out in 2004 but by already 2005 prominent officials started saying we don't have the means, the resources to write strategy. the war defense docine of 2007, a prominent actually said that russia doesn't have the resources to wte a defense doctrine even though they said it was cominout then. i don't know what changed in the 18 months after that but they suddenly got the resources to do so. at wha he was really alluding to was the fact that thereas a tremendous and unresolved potical strqggle has held up a petition and tell now. and the struggle comes down really between those that i just

descry. one would be taking primerica defense oriented military oriented point of view, and others argue on behalf of a policy, not that it is pro-west. it is more based on the economic realities in russia's situation, theperceived it. this concept of a defense oriented mr militarized and political scientists have called securitize concept, that is, more and more subjects are beled suects of national security. for example, possibility of avian flu, or the publication of orthodox christianity through what is becoming a national church. aren't matters of national security, thus they have been securitized. they have become an issue that has been reserved not for public debate, but for the governmental elite to supervise the society. and of course, we know that frkm

a long-standing trition in russia. as a rult, the people who have that kind of military and securitization he postulated in this doctrine and in the debate going from 2004 to 2009, an extensive all-encompassing threat perception of russia. russia is being threatened practically on all fronts by the west. at are those threats? nato enlargement, the concentration of troop oupings, and increased military forces around russia and the cis. given what isctually going on and thatf the evidence for this is actually shaky. nonetheless, this is not to deter people from saying we are confronting a greater military threat. as part ofhis process, second threat is encroachment by the west upon the cis. russia believes it is entitled to it here been told by the cs and it also believe that is at

risk from western, particularly american approach. third, there is a tendency in the world most pointedly pressed by the u.s. invasion of iraq for the unilateral use of force without going through the united naions. and this is a threat to rsia because what they are saying is that the united states could decide to use force against russia or ruscian interests or allies without anybody stopping them. and therefore the united states is something of a roguelement in world affairs. and this is a deeply held point. furthermore, they see a development not just of nuclear proliferation, although the assessment of that threat varies with various people. but also a growing tendency on the part of the u.s. to think of nuclear weapons as instruments war. and for that matter if we look at russianuclear, theyhink of them in the exact way the same terms. for fightingeapons.

>> as a matter fact they just announced that they're going to carry practical nuclear weapons on cruise missiles and submarines. there is a doctrine in 2000 talk about possibility of first bike of using nuclear weapons if russia's vital interests aret risk. furthermore, they see a growing resort to war as an instrument of policy around the world, and that these wars are coming close to russia. once again, we are the main purveyor of this threat. lastly, and by no means least, russia sees itself as being threatened by a comprehensive information war strategy on the part of the west. and information warfare here is not just to be taken down cyber networks. it is really an attempt to use information technology to undermine the structure of society andovernment and unhinge a society from within, making it vulnerable to political penetration or even overthrow.

therefore, the military or general staff response is essentially calling for something that looks rather neo- soviet. there is an attempt to bring back elements of the mobilization system that characterized the soviet union general staff pointed to cls for havinthe minste of defense and perpetuate the deputy commander in chief. in peacetime as well as in war, and therefore having to capability to mobilize the country. i have even talked about the use of military against not just foreign threats but also against domestic teats that they discern. pruden bought this threat assessment by about 2006 even though it had been circling since 2004. by 2006 to 2007 if you read his speech very carefully,e accepts almost point by point every single one of these threats. however, the problem that the general staff aces is that the

government refuses to buy its answers as to how to respond to these threats and the national security strategy is a document that not only assesses threat, it is more important perhaps a doctrine that calls for responses on part of the government. the other side of debate that ssia said they can't afford that type of policy. it causes russia's isolation that we have nobody we can rely on in the world. it is based o a presupposition of cflict with everydy and its neighbor, and russia therefore must pursue an overall foreign defense policy that is primarily based personal on enhancing its economic capality. and itpolies must be cut to the capability. they must not exceed russia's capability to act in the world. now, there are consequences of this debate. and indie security strategy, we see on the one hand that the threat assessmeft was bought by the government. the government talks about t fact in the security strategy

that the likelihood of war in the next decade or so is primarily connected with this scramble for energy and will probably take place in areas around russia's strategic perimeter. that is, the arctic, the middle east, central asia. this presuppes a few that energies disputes are going to lead to armed conflict among states, and that since energy is russia's main weapon for its prosperity the west is after its energy and that this is going to lead to war. now, the kind of force that they are talking about are not described in any detail here. they should be described and will be the forthcoming defense doctrine, but we need to talk abou the fact of the russian litary iseing reformed as a present so that the army, and to some degree the air force, the helicopter force, would be able to project power to the cis and

dominate the cis in the event of any kind o conflict. but that the war that they expect, at least that the general staff expects with nato, is going to be primarily an air naval, and maybe even nuclear and electronic warre which requires long range strike capabilities. the problem is that the defense industry can't produce either in numbers or in quality required for potential capabilities. even having trouble doing that with the capabilities. and therefore the onlreliable weapon system that is coming out these days is the land-based icbm. which they can produce six to eight year. now the fact that that means that the doctor is going for one kind of war and russia defense policy is calling for another. it's not an uncommon trend in russian history, but it is one that causes a lot of probms because even in the 80s we pointed out that the military political doctrine on the one hand was aery true what they

called the military tactical doctrine and it was a lot of pressure on russia toeform and they did. furthermore, the government by having bought general threat assessment and in this doctrine has also recently seen the fact that the government today as it is constituted in moscow doesn't work. it is a dysfunctional state. just to giveou one example that we had a conference last year here in town where sasha go to pointed out that 30 to 50% of the defense budget was done as a minor of coarse. that's why w have why women anticorruption campaign in the government as a whole, and in the defense ministry as a whole as well. but this doctrine, apart from its postulation of foreign, is primary a doctrine to enforce bureaucraticoordination to in policy disputes and to set up this russian ideals of the power

vertical, although that is what putin calls a. it is a czarist ideal of a governnt that functions like a machine where everyby is spiritually and politically united, the ideal of the czars inherited from the germans of e 18th and 19th century. a vision that bewitched constantly try to impose what they called systematic government without fully faces the oscar smith tigers from virginia. this high school football season promises to be as emotional as they come for the team from parkersburg, iowa. ed thomas was shot and killed by a former student and player of his, mark becker. we look back on that day and how forgiveness from thomas' family is helping everyone move on. >> on the morning of june 24th in this red barn behind the sacred acre... >>911.

>> we have a shooting i think right now out at the high school. >> at the high school where? >> in the bus barn: >> in the bus barn? >> yeah. >> do you know who it was? >> no, i don't. the kids just come running out and said, "somebody shot ed thomas." >> ed thomas, okay. >> my mom called me at 8:07 on my cell phone and told me. she just said, aaron, your dad's been shot. somebody in the weight room shot your dad. instantly just what? >> ed thomas was 58. mark becker was quickly arrested and charged with first-degree murder. trial has been scheduled for september 15th when he will claim insanity and/or diminished capacity. becker had played for thomas, as had his father dave and his two brothers, including scott, who started as a junior for the falcon last season. attending the same church, the

thomas and beckers had been family friends for more than 30 years. what difficulty is there in sipping the way it happened? >> if i did not have faith, i have no idea how a p erson would accept this or get through this. it's not for me to know god's plan. i just have to trust and believe that a lot of good will come out of this. terrible situation. >> the service was closed to cameras that monday morning, but pastor brad zinnecker still remembers the words spoken by thomas' oldest son aaron. >> he gets up and just gives this passionate charge. "you can mourn today, but tomorrow you get to work, you get there early, you stay late, and you live your life with a passion, and that's how you honor my dad." >> it's hard to argue with me being his own son, how can they

stay home next day? >> outside the church, hundreds lined the streets to the cemetery to say their final good-byes. >> a bunch of the local football teams had shown up in their own jerseys and lined the street and gave a symbol of the fourth quarter and it was just so powerful driving through that. >> what do you now do as a football team to honor your dad in. >> if you want the really honor dad, every day you'll come out the this practice field and work as 45rd as you can. it's the same thing dad has been telling kids for 30 something years. >> number 52, scott becker. >> among those listening to the message was senior scott becker, the younger brother of the man accused of killing his coach. what concern did you have for scott being welcomed back and embraced by this team and this

community. >> you know, to be honest, scott's a good kid. i didn't worry about it. we had a new student come in and i had scott show him around that. speaks to the kind of kid scott is. good block, becker! >> "e: 60" requested an interview with the mark becker's father. they declined in an e-mail that in part reads, "we do hope to share our story in the future about the mercy and the grace that the thomas family, our church family and our entire community has shown to our family." >> those players rallied around scott. i think that's what ed would have wanted them to do. we're going to stay strong as a team. >> ed thomas spent 37 years as a high school football coach, 34 at aplington-parkersburg where he won two state titles. thomas was honored as the nfl coach of the year in 2005. four of his former players are in the league, including the

packers aaron campman and brad peaster of the jacksonville jaguars. thursday in the shadows of new york city, tiger woods had a day he'd like to forget about. he'd li(announcer)t about. what does greatness taste like? round of miller lite. (announcer on call) ...here it comes... watch this now... got it! my goodness! now you have seen it all. (announcer) that's what greatness tastes like. triple hops brewed. great pilsner taste. miller lite. taste greatness. before taking it on, one must study it first. rushing in unprepared may prove overwhelming... with all that juicy, 100% angus beef. there! you found a point of entry!

the bacon beckons like a springboard to paradise. one small bite for man... etcetera, etcetera. angus axiom number 11: bring on the bacon. the astonishing new angus third pounders. all angus. all mcdonald's. ♪ ba da ba ba ba

>> for a guy like ron fellows, he said, "he's my hero." i get goose bumps just thinking

about winning at this track. >> none of the elite cars coming in except the five car. that is ron fellows. that pit stop will have dividends. fellows leads by 42 seconds. >> jim was his hero. he finally won here. >> this is incredible. i'm going to lose it. >> with a preview of this weekend's nascar nationwide race in montreal, welcome to the home depot garage studio. sprint cup series off this weekend. an interesting look to the field going to compete in montreal, but first place you start when you think of racing in montreal was last year's event when they ran on the rain tires in the wet. randy, i bet that was a trick for the drivers. >> yes, it was. you talk to all the race car drivers, and they loved it. i got to do it in japan and it was difficult because you couldn't see. same thing as going down the highway. that's one thing. the crew guys, like jacques ville move said, racing in the rain is not a problem.

>> you think the teams will be better prepared if rain becomes a possibility? >> i don't know about team, but i understand that carl edwards has a bigger squeege this year. they'll have the cars as prepared as they can, i just don't know how you can take a car racing in the rain and still have the drivers see. >> probably not fun. fellows had the most fun of anyone. ron a native at toronto area in canada. speaking of an interesting looking injury list, fellows heads that list. >> a lot of names. i want to play off randy for a second. i was in japan also on the rain tires. i didn't know you were. there i couldn't see you. >> i was in front of you. i ran third. >> assuming a dry race for sunday, the nationwide series regulars like carl edwards, kyle busch, against guys like carpentier, jacques villeneuve.

>> ron fellows clearly has the advantage. the emotional side of being a canadian, having won the race, and he has so much emotion towards jacques villeneuve, so it's certainly a big upper hand for him. >> stock car guy or road race will win? >> marcos ambrose. he's going to got at them again. >> do we consider him a stock car guy or a road racer? >> at bristol he's a stock car guy. >> i think he's a stock car guy. i do think in his performance at bristol he's certainly a stk car guy, but experience has always kept... knowing how the race has kept road race guys from winning a race like this. guys like carpentier and fellows have the experience. >> i think it will be a lot of fun to watch road race or oval guy. marcos is beth. circuit villeneuve in montreal, it should be fun. >> second round play at the barclays at liberty national in jersey. hey, what exit? tiger woods struggling with his

putter all afternoon. the greens notoriously difficult on this course. first hole for birdie. tiger not happy. second hole for par. tiger not happy. on nine, seven-footer for par. tiger not happy. he would bogey nine. third shot on 10, you know it's coming. tiger not happy. he would settle for par on ten and then again for birdie on 12. chances of tiger returning to this course in jersey city. on 13, birdie opportunity, that lifts out, as well. he would par that hole, putting for birdie on 14. looks to be online and hill, another par for woods.

more on his round in a moment. paul goydos the leader for most of the day. he had a great quote. he said, this course is so challenging. asked if he likes this course, and he said, "versus being a polo field? ". finished with an even par 71. three shots off the lead is webb simpson. two career top tens. his best finish came at the bob hope classic earlier this season, finished in fifth. tiger woods is nine shots off the lead. top stories on the way, including the latest on the brandon marshall saga in denver. that's coming up. ♪ you and i must make a pact

♪ we must bring salvation back ♪ ♪ where there is love ♪ i'll be there ( i'll be there ) ♪ ♪ don't you know, baby, yeah ♪ ♪ i'll be there ♪ i'll be there

i'll be honest with you... that whole et favre thing was really hard to keep track of. so we had to come up with a system. you're sure? he's coming back! he's coming back. he's coming back. he's coming back.

he's coming back.  >> coming up on "o's xtra," we'll look back at the opener for the o's against cleveland. the orioles' disappointing loser ins the opener of the series. roch kubatko joins us on set. we'll get an update on a couple of injured orioles pitchers, koji ohera. jason berken is on the mound tonight. she looking to make it back-to- back wins after a stellar outing last weekend in chicago. it's the orioles and indians, game two of the four-game series. it's you, it's me, and it's rick! and it's "o's xtra," right now!

>> welcome to a night of o's baseball. matt wieters, nolan reimold among orioles signing autographs during batting practice today as the birds look to bounce back today. it is the second game of this four-game series against the cleveland indians. welcome in jim hunter with rick dempsey. where have you been for two week ? i have been looking all over for you. >> you are back oh to the minor leagues again. >> no. i'm back on "o's xtra." i want to ask you about another disappointing loss. the 19th game this year the orioles have lost by one run. being competitive is fine, but what does this team and maybe the individual players collectively become a team, what do they have to do to get it to the next step? >> jim, there have been so many heart break games this year that you can look back at most of them and say there was one defining moment where you can say some fundamental of baseball where the team kind of broke down a little bit. if you look at last night's

ballgame, it comes down to a principal. i know melvin mora talked about it about going to the mobbed about telling the pitcher. one of the principles never really to try to throw any hitter inside, and especially in today's game when you're behind in the count because you don't want to give them an opportunity to know what is coming and be able to pull the ball that's what happened last night with jim johnson. he threw the fastball in and marte hits the ball out of the ballpark for a two-run home run. there's other games, too, where the game will be trying to steal second base on a hit and run or a straight steal and they don't look back at the hitter to see whether or not the hitters going -- hitter is going to make impact. once they hear the crack of the bat, they don't know which way to go. it's little thins like that that can cost you a lot of ballgames and really make the game that much more difficult because it's hard to accept one- run also losses all the time when little things like that break down. >> so it is not only the fundamentals of the game, it is executing the fundamentals of the game day in and day out.

let's look back at the highlights. orioles trail 1-0 when melvin mora came up in the bottom of the second, and he got all of that one and made it a 1-1 game. >> melvin is really starting to swing the bat well. he hit as home run. it has been a long time since melvin has done that. it was a great swing. it put an rbi on the board. >> the bottom of the seventh. 3-2 orioles. and matt wieters goes deep, opposite field again. >> she really starting to show his power. he is getting more comfortable all the time. he hits one up in the seats the opposite way and really giveorioles the two-run lead. >> the top of the ninth. there's two outs, one on and andy marte on a 3-2 pitch hits it out. that goes for a two-run home run and it gives the indian as 5-4 lead that would be the final. the orioles get two men on in the bottom of the ninth after two men down against kerry wood and can't get the tying run in from third. each team with 10 hits. raphael has the win in relief. and moss worked out the jam to

pick up his 17th save. following the game the orioles talked about another tough loss. >> it is definitely a day i had to battle. after three innings i didn't really think i was going to get through six. i made some key pitches there. i got that one, but i got under it a little bit and i was thankful for that. >> and what allowed you to settle down after giving up the first at-bat home run? >> i had my thoughts more clear in the last two starts, but i was really able to go to my slider to get ahead and keep the batters off balance. it was pitch that helped me get through the six innings. >> kid you pitch for you confidence to get back to the right track? >> my confidence is fine, you know. it's always going to be just what it needs to be. it is just -- you always want to g out there and have results, and tonight i was able to get good six innings. >> and it -- to throw the ball over the plate, two outs, and

my job is trying to hold the game and, be runs, three runs, and he had an uncomfortable situation. so it is a big mistake and i was just trying to get away with sink it and the ball was over the plate and then he got a chance to make good contact. >> and it is just like anytime you blow a game. you got to forget it and come back out the next day because we have plenty more left. so you can't let it bug you too long. obviously it is going to sting a little bit. you take your lumps and learn from it next time. >> so the orioles pitchers following last night's 5-4 loss. matt wieters did hit a home run and he really is beginning to come on.

the consistency is beginning to show. we'll g across the field and welcome in amber for moreen that. >> jim, matt wieters has really been hot this week, not only defensively, bees also offensively. he has four-game hit streak going and in that timespan he is batting .313. last night we saw him hit his sixth home run of the year, and as dave trembley pointed out, all of those things that we saw listed about matt wieters on scouting reports before this season, we're finally starting to see them here on the field in the later part of the season. one of the things written about mat is he can hit for power and we're starting to see that. what is interesting about his home runs the fact that all of them have been opposite field home runs. and i spoke to terry crowley about what exactly that means the and he says for one thing it shows that he is using the whole field. the other thing, it shows that he is strong, but overall mostly it is a sign of good things to come. >> in the past, the switch hitters have told me that it take as little while to pull

the ball at this level, and it's encouraging that while he's learning, you know, how the handle himself at the big league level, he is getting his home runs and just -- i think it is more coincidence that they're opposite field. like i told him last night when they came back and i really had a good feeling when he was hit, and i told a few of the players, he's going to go deep the at-bat. when he did, you know, he came back and i told him, i said i didn't figure on you going to left field. i thought you'd pull it. he said if the pitcher was -- threw it where he was supposed to, i would have pulled it. he feels good about it. he has big power when he pulls the ball. and it is encouraging to see young players use the whole field. that tells me that he has a chance to be a great ballplayer agreat hitter. he has been great this week. he has a four-game hit streak.

at home, matt wieters has really been great at the plate a .305 batting average at home this season. as we all mentioned, all five of his home runs had been to the opposite field and terry crowley expanded. he said when a young hitter shows he can hit balls on the outside of the plate, it shows pitchers that they can do that, and then they'll start to get more balls in towards the plate and that gives more of an opportunity to pull the ball and that's where a lot of your power numbers will come from. it is a good sign for matt wieters that he is showing the pitchers that he can get his arms extenned and he can eliminate that half of the plate. >> thank you very much. you can see the progress of matt wieters behind the plate an at the plate. his fifth home run last night. when we come back to "o's xtra" presented by at&t, we'll be joined by roch kubatko, maybe he and his fan club will get an update on the orioles when we come back! hey i'm worried about mrs. lowenberg next door.

why? i don't know she's wandering around the lobby, yammering about fios tv, internet and phone all for $79.99 a month. she seems crazy. actually, fios customers get that price for six months. it's like getting three services for the price of two. so am i the one that's crazy? no? (announcer) get fios tv, internet and phone for just $79.99 a month, plus a free dvr for 3 months. call the verizon center for customers with disabilities at 800.974.6006 tty/v

announcer: during the autobahn for all event, you can get great lease deals. i love it! i just want to know it's the right move. me? thirteen days in the future. you get a deal on the car you always wanted. scheduled maintenance is included, it's all good. what's the future like? you love your new jetta. and the suit? you like it? no...i love it!  >> "o's xtra" presented by

at&t. the indians taking bp. tonight it is game two of the four-game series against the tribe as the biers try to bounce back from last night's 5- 4 loss. here is the cleveland lineup. slightly different from last night. brady sizemore still in the lead-off spot. he had three hits including a home run and two rbi's. cabrera, and half of their dh'ing. laporta, marte for the indian. here is the orioles' lineup looking to bounce back following last night's lossment roberts back this the lineup after a night off last night. reimold and markakis. a big night for melvin last night. he had three base hits including a home run. he is 5-8 over his last three games. luke, scott, wieters and izturis will round it out for the orioles. we're joined now on set by masns -- masnsports.com by roch kubatko. apparently it is causal friday. here you are again tonight. there's so much interest with september 1 coming next week,

who the call-ups are going to be and i think the fans really need to understand the 40-man roster ramifications here because there might be a play tear the orioles want to look at, but if they put him on the roster, he is son the roster for last year. >> right. it is kind of a gad news, good news situation where the bad news is there is not a lot of flexibility. the good news is there is not a lot of flexibility on that roster. you guys have been around this organization for a long time now. back in the day it was very easy to hack off guys to make room. there was a lot of dead weight, whatever. that's not the case now. you can move rich hill to the 60-day d.l. that will open one spot. there is talk of doing that with lou montanez now although he is swinging a bat in sarasota. their concern is he won't have enough at-bats to face major league pitching. after that you have a problem because they're talking about adding seven, eight guys. they're talking about one infielder, one outfielder athird catcher, some bullpen help and now maybe another starter. the pitch is the easy part. you have a lot of 40-man guys

there are sarfate, waters, miller that is not a problem. but if you look at the position players, justin miller, he is not on the 40. the outfielder could be gathright or floor teeno, post- non-roster guys. the third catcher could be rodriguez. you have to make room for those guys. they're rubing at maybe seven or eight. they're talking about one coming up on tuesday when you first are allowed to spin the roster and the second wave once the minor league season is over. who you can bring up is largely dictated on how they can massage that 40-man roster. it is a problem, but it is a pleasant problem to have. >> the problem with what you just described a60-day d.l. gets you a free man on the roster now, but in the off season there is no disabled list. so anyone that the orioles might add now has to be somebody they're considering adding in the off season and justin turner is one of those players. >> right. >> it is really a puzzle for andy macphail because once that person gets added to the

roster, you can't take them off and then you might lose that player. >> are we ever going to see koji uehara again? >> brad bergesen, he is fairly close. what is going on with those guy ? >> koji is now actually closer than brad bergesen. go figure. she supposed to throw in the next day or two at the minor league camp in sarasota. we should see him at some point in september in a bullpen role where they maybe want to have him pitch an inning or pain two to stretch him out, not go any farther than that. the problem with brad bergesen is he is still only able to throw on flat ground. he has not been clear the throw from the mound. they're not sure when he is going to be. i asked dave trembley and he said he is having doubts if he is going to the six-man rotation. he said yes, we have doubts now that could change their plans for that rotation and for what they do with the call-ups because they want to protect these young starters and start limiting the running, berken, hernandez, which is why they're bringing in more relievers.

bergesen was supposed to be part of the six-man rotation. he has to will listed as doubtful as to whether he will be able to throw from the mound in time to be able to pitch in september. so he could be absolute down or he could be a much later addition. so now they're looking at maybe to have to add another starter. they may -- they're just concentrating on bullpen a arms. there is a setback. we know bergesen had the x-ray, the mri, the c. t. stan and there is no fracture. it is that landing leg, and i guess it is still too sore for him. if he doesn't have a timetable yet to throw off a mound, you can't count on him to join that expanded rotation. [ and one player that may work in their favor is chris waters simply because he is stretched out and on the 40-man roster. always good stuff. school of roch. check it out. one of these days rick dempsey is going to get a plug in roch's blog. "o's xtra" continues. it is the o's and the indiansment when we come back,

you'll hear from the skipper. it is an adam jones' update, when we come back! ÷x÷:l:lzúz0z

 >> the field is manicured a they're ready to go it rooks like another one of the disturb yabses in the area. adam jones is out of the lineup

again today. he has missed the last four. so tonight it is five and a short time ago manager dave trembley with the update object adam jones. >> a few swings, and i thought he did a little running and i thought he was going to be able to play today. he got scratched, and i asked ritchie if he would be this the lineup tomorrow, and he said a very good likelihood of that occurring. so -- >> caution? >> yeah. >> i guess. >> i guess it is better to be cautious at this particular point in time than to, you know, do something else, you know what i mean? just give him another day and let's hope we can get him out there tomorrow and get him going. i know he wants to play. he can't do it until i get the okay to do it.

>> the way that he acted, the way he addressed the media and his comments to the media about getting out there the next day, did that -- your belief fact make-up and that he is the right guy for this job because he has that ability? >> i'm -- i'm glad to hear that he took that approach. i didn't see it and i didn't hear it. i do know this, i was the last guy to leave last night and johnson was the last play tore leave and he came in and talked to me before he left. the next time there is a shot to save he want to the be the guy out there, so, you know, it just happens. you know, it happens. to me, he's the closer on the team. unfortunately it happened, it wasn't fun for anybody.

i do xm radio every friday in september. i said today, what is your feeling last night after that? what did i feel? sick is what i felt. how do you think jim johnson felt? sicker. i mean, i allude to la sworda. i was talking to him earlier this year. he scad he lost a couple of games like that and he goes back and he can't sleep. so he gets up in the middle of the night and he doesn't get his wallet, i.d. and he is out wandering the street -- streets of philadelphia at 3:00 in the morningment some cop pulls him over and thinks he is some kind of vagrant. lei, how are you doing? what do you think i'm doing like that? and the guy recognizes him. we just lost two run--two one- run games, and he is from philadelphia, outside philadelphia. i can't sleep. the guy says get in the back of the car and they drive around. and he drove around philly

until 6:00 in the morning, gets him a cup of coffee and puts him in the room. i was waiting for jimmy's to open up this morning, i can tell you that. i was talking those streets down there last night. it's tough. it is tough. jim johnson, he made a pitch he wish he had back. the pitch to marte was not the thing for me. it was getting laporta out. you got two outs and the number eight guy up and you have no balls and two strikes, you have to get him out. you he didn't get him out. that's the guy you have to get out. he is human. he is like anyone else. i am going to talk to kerry wood today. woody, he blew a string of saves in a row earlier this year until cleveland. it happens. it happens. that's the way it goes. not good. but he's ready to go tonight. >> well, the number one attribute of a closer, you to

have talent. two, you have to have amnesia, because they might need you again tonight. sheer the pitching match-up for tonight. carmona will go for the indians and jason berk on the mound for the orioles after a big win last weekend in chicago. it is the orioles and indians, game two of the four-game series on masn!

>> the pitching match-up. jason berken for the orioles, what is the scouting report? >> well, he has been picking up the pace as of late. he started the season off 1-9, but his last four outings he is 2-2. so he has really been doing a pretty good job because he has been singing that song, the boot, scoot and boogie! get down, turn around and go to town! his last outing he was down in the strike zone, so he was getting down. he is turning the record around. he was 2-2 instead of that ugly 1-11 at one time. and we call it the boot scooting boogie. that's all i can say! >> let's go over. what do you have for carmona?

>> he took a little bit of a sabbatical, kind of funny for him, but he spent two months back in the minor leagues. you remember 2007 he was 19-8, fourth in the runner up for the cy young voting, so he has really seemed lately to be able -- he is turning it back around again. the fist 12 games of the season he recorded a 2-6 record with a 7-4 e.r.a., but his last five games, he is back to himself with a 2.70 e.r.a. and a 1-2 record at least. >> game two of the four-game set. what is your key to the game? >> oh, my key to the game tonight is you've got to stop the train! the choo choo train himself. he has .301 batting average with the tribe, but he is leading the club in rbi's, so he is a guy we have to be real careful with. >> let's get the "o's xtra" challenge back and going. who is your player to watch? i'm closing the gap on you. >> you are starting to close the gap, but it's got to be

melvin mora. he is starting to pick up the pace lately. three hits last night a home run. i think he's found his swing again. once melvin gets hot, it is tough to slow him down. he is my boy tonight. >> i'm going to go with brian roberts. i have a lot of confidence for brian after a day off. here is the other reason, he is only one for his last 11. that is un-brian roberts like. he is going to have a break-out game. he is going to be the guy is that gets it done, my player to watch. >> let's make it a battle. that's all i want to do. >> tonight we're going to have a delayed start. the tarp is still on the field. gary thorne and buck martinez will bring you up to date on that. we're back with the post-game following the game. it is game two of four--game series against the indians. gary and buck are next. enjoy the game, everybody! we'll see you on the post-game show!

i my first dollar. where is that dollar? i got it out to show you... uhh... was it rather old and wrinkly? yeah, you saw it? umm fancy a crisp? geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance. at some restaurants when you get boneless wings... what are you really paying for? whoa! ha ha! i say "happy," you say "birthday!" happy... birthday! who's hungry? why pay for flair when you can get all the flavor for just $3.99 with wendy's new boneless wings. tender, juicy chicken, hand tossed in our signature buffalo or bbq sauce. it's waaaay better than fast food. it's wendy's.

i'm just a skeptic so i don't necessarily believe that anything is ing to work but, i was like, hey, this actually works. (announcer) only rogaine® foam