This cute turtle is the federal government's representation of how wildlife in the Gulf are being affected by BP's oil spill. PR or Reality?

If you’re looking for a lot of information on the BP oil spill and what the government is doing, this site has its pluses and minuses.  For instance, you can find the disposition of some U.S. Coast Guard assets and transcripts of media briefings.  On the minus side, when you click the link for Oiled Wildlife, you’re taken to a page with no pictures or statistics of the devastation, but there is a phone number to call if you encounter an oiled bird or other animal.  Even more manipulative than the dearth of information on oiled wildlife is the cute picture of a pristine, baby sea turtle on the homepage of this PR-driven site.

One way to kick someone’s ass over this tragedy would be to put the whole truth out there for the American people.  Federal government fails with this site.  It’s so benign it’s ludicrous.

Readout of The President’s Meeting with King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia

President Obama and King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia met today and discussed a wide range of issues including Middle East peace, the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan, energy, Iran and other matters affecting the region. The President and the King also discussed the President’s upcoming speech to the Muslim world. The President and King pledged to remain in close contact in order to continue to make progress on these and other issues central to the US-Saudi relationship.

###

This came, “Immediate Release,” for God’s Sake!  LMAO.  How about if the White House just released the President’s public schedule each day.  For the 30 minutes it took some young press aide to sweat over the drivel above and the layers of approval it probably went through, is it really worth it?

Exercises like the one above are not transparency.

THE PRESIDENT: Everybody, please be seated. We meet today at a transformational moment — a moment in history when our interconnected world presents us, at once, with great promise but also great peril.

Now, over the past four months my administration has taken decisive steps to seize the promise and confront these perils. We’re working to recover from a global recession while laying a new foundation for lasting prosperity. We’re strengthening our armed forces as they fight two wars, at the same time we’re renewing American leadership to confront unconventional challenges, from nuclear proliferation to terrorism, from climate change to pandemic disease. And we’re bringing to government — and to this White House — unprecedented transparency and accountability and new ways for Americans to participate in their democracy.

But none of this progress would be possible, and none of these 21st century challenges can be fully met, without America’s digital infrastructure — the backbone that underpins a prosperous economy and a strong military and an open and efficient government. Without that foundation we can’t get the job done.

It’s long been said that the revolutions in communications and information technology have given birth to a virtual world. But make no mistake: This world — cyberspace — is a world that we depend on every single day. It’s our hardware and our software, our desktops and laptops and cell phones and Blackberries that have become woven into every aspect of our lives.

It’s the broadband networks beneath us and the wireless signals around us, the local networks in our schools and hospitals and businesses, and the massive grids that power our nation. It’s the classified military and intelligence networks that keep us safe, and the World Wide Web that has made us more interconnected than at any time in human history.

So cyberspace is real. And so are the risks that come with it.

It’s the great irony of our Information Age — the very technologies that empower us to create and to build also empower those who would disrupt and destroy. And this paradox — seen and unseen — is something that we experience every day.

It’s about the privacy and the economic security of American families. We rely on the Internet to pay our bills, to bank, to shop, to file our taxes. But we’ve had to learn a whole new vocabulary just to stay ahead of the cyber criminals who would do us harm — spyware and malware and spoofing and phishing and botnets. Millions of Americans have been victimized, their privacy violated, their identities stolen, their lives upended, and their wallets emptied. According to one survey, in the past two years alone cyber crime has cost Americans more than $8 billion.

I know how it feels to have privacy violated because it has happened to me and the people around me. It’s no secret that my presidential campaign harnessed the Internet and technology to transform our politics. What isn’t widely known is that during the general election hackers managed to penetrate our computer systems. To all of you who donated to our campaign, I want you to all rest assured, our fundraising website was untouched. (Laughter.) So your confidential personal and financial information was protected.

But between August and October, hackers gained access to emails and a range of campaign files, from policy position papers to travel plans. And we worked closely with the CIA — with the FBI and the Secret Service and hired security consultants to restore the security of our systems. It was a powerful reminder: In this Information Age, one of your greatest strengths — in our case, our ability to communicate to a wide range of supporters through the Internet — could also be one of your greatest vulnerabilities.

This is a matter, as well, of America’s economic competitiveness. The small businesswoman in St. Louis, the bond trader in the New York Stock Exchange, the workers at a global shipping company in Memphis, the young entrepreneur in Silicon Valley — they all need the networks to make the next payroll, the next trade, the next delivery, the next great breakthrough. E-commerce alone last year accounted for some $132 billion in retail sales.

But every day we see waves of cyber thieves trolling for sensitive information — the disgruntled employee on the inside, the lone hacker a thousand miles away, organized crime, the industrial spy and, increasingly, foreign intelligence services. In one brazen act last year, thieves used stolen credit card information to steal millions of dollars from 130 ATM machines in 49 cities around the world — and they did it in just 30 minutes. A single employee of an American company was convicted of stealing intellectual property reportedly worth $400 million. It’s been estimated that last year alone cyber criminals stole intellectual property from businesses worldwide worth up to $1 trillion.

In short, America’s economic prosperity in the 21st century will depend on cybersecurity.

And this is also a matter of public safety and national security. We count on computer networks to deliver our oil and gas, our power and our water. We rely on them for public transportation and air traffic control. Yet we know that cyber intruders have probed our electrical grid and that in other countries cyber attacks have plunged entire cities into darkness.

Our technological advantage is a key to America’s military dominance. But our defense and military networks are under constant attack. Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups have spoken of their desire to unleash a cyber attack on our country — attacks that are harder to detect and harder to defend against. Indeed, in today’s world, acts of terror could come not only from a few extremists in suicide vests but from a few key strokes on the computer — a weapon of mass disruption.

In one of the most serious cyber incidents to date against our military networks, several thousand computers were infected last year by malicious software — malware. And while no sensitive information was compromised, our troops and defense personnel had to give up those external memory devices — thumb drives — changing the way they used their computers every day.

And last year we had a glimpse of the future face of war. As Russian tanks rolled into Georgia, cyber attacks crippled Georgian government websites. The terrorists that sowed so much death and destruction in Mumbai relied not only on guns and grenades but also on GPS and phones using voice-over-the-Internet.

For all these reasons, it’s now clear this cyber threat is one of the most serious economic and national security challenges we face as a nation.

It’s also clear that we’re not as prepared as we should be, as a government or as a country. In recent years, some progress has been made at the federal level. But just as we failed in the past to invest in our physical infrastructure — our roads, our bridges and rails — we’ve failed to invest in the security of our digital infrastructure.

No single official oversees cybersecurity policy across the federal government, and no single agency has the responsibility or authority to match the scope and scale of the challenge. Indeed, when it comes to cybersecurity, federal agencies have overlapping missions and don’t coordinate and communicate nearly as well as they should — with each other or with the private sector. We saw this in the disorganized response to Conficker, the Internet “worm” that in recent months has infected millions of computers around the world.

This status quo is no longer acceptable — not when there’s so much at stake. We can and we must do better.

And that’s why shortly after taking office I directed my National Security Council and Homeland Security Council to conduct a top-to-bottom review of the federal government’s efforts to defend our information and communications infrastructure and to recommend the best way to ensure that these networks are able to secure our networks as well as our prosperity.

Our review was open and transparent. I want to acknowledge, Melissa Hathaway, who is here, who is the Acting Senior Director for Cyberspace on our National Security Council, who led the review team, as well as the Center for Strategic and International Studies bipartisan Commission on Cybersecurity, and all who were part of our 60-day review team. They listened to a wide variety of groups, many of which are represented here today and I want to thank for their input: industry and academia, civil liberties and private — privacy advocates. We listened to every level and branch of government — from local to state to federal, civilian, military, homeland as well as intelligence, Congress and international partners, as well. I consulted with my national security teams, my homeland security teams, and my economic advisors.

Today I’m releasing a report on our review, and can announce that my administration will pursue a new comprehensive approach to securing America’s digital infrastructure.

This new approach starts at the top, with this commitment from me: From now on, our digital infrastructure — the networks and computers we depend on every day — will be treated as they should be: as a strategic national asset. Protecting this infrastructure will be a national security priority. We will ensure that these networks are secure, trustworthy and resilient. We will deter, prevent, detect, and defend against attacks and recover quickly from any disruptions or damage.

To give these efforts the high-level focus and attention they deserve — and as part of the new, single National Security Staff announced this week — I’m creating a new office here at the White House that will be led by the Cybersecurity Coordinator. Because of the critical importance of this work, I will personally select this official. I’ll depend on this official in all matters relating to cybersecurity, and this official will have my full support and regular access to me as we confront these challenges.

Today, I want to focus on the important responsibilities this office will fulfill: orchestrating and integrating all cybersecurity policies for the government; working closely with the Office of Management and Budget to ensure agency budgets reflect those priorities; and, in the event of major cyber incident or attack, coordinating our response.

To ensure that federal cyber policies enhance our security and our prosperity, my Cybersecurity Coordinator will be a member of the National Security Staff as well as the staff of my National Economic Council. To ensure that policies keep faith with our fundamental values, this office will also include an official with a portfolio specifically dedicated to safeguarding the privacy and civil liberties of the American people.

There’s much work to be done, and the report we’re releasing today outlines a range of actions that we will pursue in five key areas.

First, working in partnership with the communities represented here today, we will develop a new comprehensive strategy to secure America’s information and communications networks. To ensure a coordinated approach across government, my Cybersecurity Coordinator will work closely with my Chief Technology Officer, Aneesh Chopra, and my Chief Information Officer, Vivek Kundra. To ensure accountability in federal agencies, cybersecurity will be designated as one of my key management priorities. Clear milestones and performances metrics will measure progress. And as we develop our strategy, we will be open and transparent, which is why you’ll find today’s report and a wealth of related information on our Web site, www.whitehouse.gov.

Second, we will work with all the key players — including state and local governments and the private sector — to ensure an organized and unified response to future cyber incidents. Given the enormous damage that can be caused by even a single cyber attack, ad hoc responses will not do. Nor is it sufficient to simply strengthen our defenses after incidents or attacks occur. Just as we do for natural disasters, we have to have plans and resources in place beforehand — sharing information, issuing warnings and ensuring a coordinated response.

Third, we will strengthen the public/private partnerships that are critical to this endeavor. The vast majority of our critical information infrastructure in the United States is owned and operated by the private sector. So let me be very clear: My administration will not dictate security standards for private companies. On the contrary, we will collaborate with industry to find technology solutions that ensure our security and promote prosperity.

Fourth, we will continue to invest in the cutting-edge research and development necessary for the innovation and discovery we need to meet the digital challenges of our time. And that’s why my administration is making major investments in our information infrastructure: laying broadband lines to every corner of America; building a smart electric grid to deliver energy more efficiently; pursuing a next generation of air traffic control systems; and moving to electronic health records, with privacy protections, to reduce costs and save lives.

And finally, we will begin a national campaign to promote cybersecurity awareness and digital literacy from our boardrooms to our classrooms, and to build a digital workforce for the 21st century. And that’s why we’re making a new commitment to education in math and science, and historic investments in science and research and development. Because it’s not enough for our children and students to master today’s technologies — social networking and e-mailing and texting and blogging — we need them to pioneer the technologies that will allow us to work effectively through these new media and allow us to prosper in the future. So these are the things we will do.

Let me also be clear about what we will not do. Our pursuit of cybersecurity will not — I repeat, will not include — monitoring private sector networks or Internet traffic. We will preserve and protect the personal privacy and civil liberties that we cherish as Americans. Indeed, I remain firmly committed to net neutrality so we can keep the Internet as it should be — open and free.

The task I have described will not be easy. Some 1.5 billion people around the world are already online, and more are logging on every day. Groups and governments are sharpening their cyber capabilities. Protecting our prosperity and security in this globalized world is going to be a long, difficult struggle demanding patience and persistence over many years.

But we need to remember: We’re only at the beginning. The epochs of history are long — the Agricultural Revolution; the Industrial Revolution. By comparison, our Information Age is still in its infancy. We’re only at Web 2.0. Now our virtual world is going viral. And we’ve only just begun to explore the next generation of technologies that will transform our lives in ways we can’t even begin to imagine.

So a new world awaits — a world of greater security and greater potential prosperity — if we reach for it, if we lead. So long as I’m President of the United States, we will do just that. And the United States — the nation that invented the Internet, that launched an information revolution, that transformed the world — will do what we did in the 20th century and lead once more in the 21st.

Thank you very much, everybody. Thank you. (Applause.)

END
11:25 A.M. EDT

• The establishment of a national cybersecurity official and office which would review laws and practices and provide leadership tying national, state and local efforts more closely together.
• National focus on a technologically advanced workforce – similar to the nation’s efforts at greater math and science proficiency during the 1960s.
• Calls for expanding the federal government’s own IT workforce and capabilities especially with regard to security and implementing best practices across the government enterprise.
• Expanded partnering among government, private sector and U.S. allies.
• Greater federal incident response focus and better communication and integration of incident response efforts across the federal enterprise.
• Harness the benefits of innovation to address cybersecurity concerns, including work with the private sector to define performance and security objectives for future infrastructure, linking research and development to infrastructure development and expanding coordination of government, industry, and academic research efforts.
• More focus on supply chain and TCOM security.

For all of you who think traditional journalism is dead or would be happy to see it die, the Associated Press reminds us tonight what the watchdog is all about.

Vice President Joe Biden released a report today regarding progress made with funds from the recently enacted American Recovery and Reinvestment Act – the stimulus bill.  I looked at it.  It’s pretty weak beer.

Here’s part of what the Associated Press wrote tonight:

But the effect of that spending is less clear. Many of the claims the White House is making are based on anecdotes selected to fit the Obama administration’s message. For instance, the report cites a newspaper article about workers being rehired at a factory in Chicago. That account is true, but is no more an accurate snapshot of the nation’s economy than a story, not cited in the report, about a Roanoke, Va., railcar factory closing. (Read More)

The Obama Administration report also says that 150,000 jobs have been saved or created.  How could one even begin to get to a number like that so soon?  The report doesn’t mention – but the AP does – that since February the nation has lost 1.3 million jobs.

President Obama is not well served by flooding the Internets and airwaves with pablum.  Every time you turn around there’s another “.gov” site out there promising real information and transparency.  What we get instead is messaging wrapped in slick graphics.  Everything seems to be a mile wide but an inch deep.

I had high hopes for an information presidency, what we’ve gotten instead is the Ronald Reagan communications team with better technology.

There is a lot of good going on with this Administration.  Creating bullshit, releasing it and then patting yourself on the back for being “transparent” is not in the category of good.  It’s in the category of annoying.

My God, there are green shoots of transparency taking hold at 1600.

Remember the health care debacle of the Clinton Era?  Hillary and Ira’s top secret health fest went nowhere.  Or, how about Darth Cheney’s creation of a national energy non-policy in secret.  I don’t think we know even now which oil companies were at the table for that one.

The White House Press Office has actually posted this list of participants, a piece of correspondence, and a “fact” sheet about the meeting.

Let’s hope this keeps up and spreads to the world of high finance and government bailouts.

With the U.S. economy performing worse than hoped, revised White House figures point to deepening budget deficits, with the government borrowing 50 cents for every dollar it spends this year.

The deficit for the current budget year will rise by $89 billion to above $1.8 trillion — about four times the record set just last year. The unprecedented red ink flows from the deep recession, the Wall Street bailout, the cost of President Barack Obama’s economic stimulus bill, as well as a structural imbalance between what the government spends and what it takes in.

As the economy performs worse than expected, the deficit for the 2010 budget year beginning in October will worsen by $87 billion to $1.3 trillion, the White House says. The deterioration reflects lower tax revenues and higher costs for bank failures, unemployment benefits and food stamps.

For the current year, the government would borrow almost half the money it takes to run the government under the administration’s plan. In one of the few positive signs, the actual 2009 deficit is likely to be $250 billion less than predicted because Congress is unlikely to provide another $250 billion in financial bailout money.

Q Make this a habit.

MR. GIBBS: Yes — keep you guys busy.
The President has obviously concluded the meetings with President Karzai and President Zardari. And as promised, we’ll give a — get a readout from General Jones, the President’s National Security Advisor.

General.

GENERAL JONES: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I’m pleased to be here to talk a little bit about the meetings that were held this afternoon that you’ve already heard quite a bit about. I’d just like to add a couple of points to those that have been already been made.

The President started out his meeting with President Karzai by commenting with great sympathy on the tragedies that have happened out in western Afghanistan, and indicating that we regret the loss of life, particularly of innocent people, and that the investigations underway will be pursued aggressively with full intent to discover what, in fact, did happen, how it happened, and how we can make sure that things like that do not happen again. And it was clear that President Karzai was moved by that — by the President’s statement, and he thanked the President for starting off the meeting with that expression of condolence.

The President also continued to offer considerable support to Afghanistan, emphasizing the fact that the U.S. would be supporting in as many ways as possible, stressing the fact that the upcoming elections in Afghanistan should be as fair and open as possible, and certainly as much as possible, beyond any question that they’re not honest elections.

He also commented on the new strategy that we’re implementing in Afghanistan as a result of the strategic review; emphasizing that it’s not just about military options, that despite the fact that we’re going to contribute 21,000 U.S. troops to help stabilize the southern part of the country; but also emphasizing that the role of reconstruction, the role of governance and rule of law are all things that have to be undertaken in concert with the security efforts, so that the security-economic development and governance and rule of law — and especially good governance at the local, regional, and national levels — has to be put in evidence. So the emphasis on civilian and military efforts is a cornerstone of the new strategy, as is the more accelerated development of the Afghan army and the Afghan police capabilities.

He also made reference to judicial reform and encouraged the President to do whatever he could to stamp out corruption wherever he found it, or the perception of corruption, and asked that we see concrete results in that regard.

He also commented to the President he was very encouraged, as we all are, by the new relationship with Pakistan. It’s obvious that the two Presidents get along well and it’s obvious that both governments have pledged to work together to cross a wide range of potential areas of cooperation to include security measures, but also economic measures and the like. We’ll continue to work on things like cross-border trade, for example.

And finally, the President emphasized that Afghanistan should be encouraged to continue to develop civil liberties and human rights. And the Afghan President responded that one of the great pleasures of his administration was seeing the rise in education and the number of Afghan students participating in higher education. He quoted the figure of 4,000 students in 2002, and 75,000 Afghan students, men and women, participating at the university level, and emphasized the fact that in 2002 there were no female students at all in the university system. So he was extremely proud of that.

President Karzai responded that in addition to his appreciation for the President’s gesture on the casualties, that he supports the new strategy fully and that — asked for more focused assistance on not only military training but civilian training for young people.

And I might say that throughout the discussion the President had with both heads of state, that the idea of doing things for the young people came up time and time again — with some emotion, I might add, on some of the participants — that this is about the future of two new, young democracies and within those democracies we are talking really about the future of the next generation. And so this was said several times.

President Karzai also indicated that he wanted to do whatever he could to restore an Afghan economy. He wanted to develop its export business; wanted focused help on agriculture; and wanted to do things where people would notice the change in their lives. If they’re surrounded by good governance, if they have secure living conditions, if they have the applied and focused help that they need in order to develop their economies, they will do better.

He recognized that they need to do more with regard to judicial reform and pledged to go after corruption wherever it existed. And he closed by saying that above all, whether he’s reelected or not, he would like to make sure that he contributes to institutionalizing democratic ideals in Afghanistan.

With President Zardari, the President started out by declaring that he wanted to be of help to the people of Pakistan not just in a military way, but to help Pakistan with a new beginning; to again help the government institutionalize democracy and make progress, recognizing that these are difficult times, and the threat of extremists to Pakistan requires a concerted action. And on that score, he emphasized that this is a regional problem and this is why getting together with both Presidents and our government for these few days of very intensive conferences are going to be very important, because we’re going to approach this as a regional problem.

As you know, the AFPAK strategy review emphasized the fact that we have several countries but we have one theater. And this is the way we’re looking at it. It’s important to occasionally remind ourselves that this is a common struggle, and we’re approaching it that way.

So the central goal here is to make sure that all parties understand that this is a united front, not only among the Presidents, but among the Ministers of Defense, the Foreign Ministers, and the various echelons of government involved with economic reconstruction, judicial reform, and all of those things that go into stabilizing a situation.

The President pledged to do whatever we could, to do as quickly — to do what we can as quickly as possible to help the Pakistani government, and said this type of aid would not just be restricted to military, but we would aid in any ways we can to help with health and education, institution-building, advisors, whatever we can do to help the government and the military resist this very serious threat. Miracles will not happen, so this won’t happen quickly. But with a common focus, we can make strides hopefully in the near future.

President Zardari responded by affirming his commitment to work within this regional context to preserve democracy in Pakistan; to want to do more economically for the people — he spoke of building schools and hospitals — but underlying all of his remarks was a pledge to meet the threat and to be successful, and assured the President that they were properly focused on it; was thankful for the assistance that the President offered, and looked forward to working with us in a concerted in the weeks and months ahead.

I think it was a very warm meeting between the three Presidents. They have embraced common themes, an intent to work together, and I think was a very good start. And we will have more meetings the next couple of days at the ministers’ levels to continue to develop these issues.

And I’ll be happy to take any questions.
Q General Jones, if I’m reading between the lines, forgive me here, but it sounds like in the first meeting with President Karzai, there was more telling him that he should be more — do more on human rights and corruption, whereas, with President Zardari, there wasn’t that tone. Am I reading that correctly?

GENERAL JONES: Oh, I don’t know. I think the — the tone of both meetings was pretty much the same. We have a longer history with Afghanistan in terms of understanding and having the ability to do more things because of that relationship having taken a number of years now.

I think with Pakistan we are learning about the things that we can do. But I think the balance of tone was just about the same and I wouldn’t say that he was more directed one way or the other.

Q General Jones, you said that President Zardari — underlying all of his remarks with a pledge to meet the threat and to be successful. Is there anything specific we can point to as far as what the Pakistani army or the Pakistani government is going to do on meeting the threat of the Taliban insurgence in the eastern part of the country?

GENERAL JONES: Well, I’d characterize it by saying that it’s clear that he and his fellow Presidents have come to an agreement that this is not a individual national belong that belongs to either Afghanistan or Pakistan; that this is in fact a regional problem. We have adopted that as our centerpiece of our strategy.

And so the dialogue between the three about not only doing things militarily to correct the situation, but politically between the two principal countries in the region, Afghanistan and Pakistan, to work on economic issues, and to do those things that show their respective populations that there is an alternative, there is a better way and there is greater hope for their children in the future. And as I said, this was a common theme.

I think this was a pretty powerful expression, a recognition of what the right attitude and the right approach has to be. The details will be worked out over time, but I think all three were focused on the seriousness of the threat and I think, in Pakistan’s case, he made a number of points to illustrate that he was focused on it and that they had every intention to do something about that in very real time. And I think there’s some evidence that they’ve started doing that, which is encouraging.

Q As part of President Obama’s message of condolence about the airstrike, did President Karzai ask that they be suspended pending the end of this investigation, or reduced in intensity? And also, did President Zardari bring up the idea that — the Predator strikes in those areas?

GENERAL JONES: The answer is no to both questions. The President was genuine in his acceptance. I think he deeply appreciated the President’s words. And the issue of — operational issues did not come up with President Zardari.

Q In the past the Presidents of Afghanistan and Pakistan have come to Washington and said, okay, we’re going to do this, we’re going to fight together against extremism. What specific steps would you seek in the next few weeks, few months so that people who aren’t privy to intelligence or defense information can judge that this time it’s actually going to be different?

GENERAL JONES: Well, as you know, in developing our strategic review concerning Afghanistan and Pakistan, we did this in concert with both countries. Both countries had teams here; they participated with us in the development of a strategy. We also extended a wider hand to our NATO allies, as well, And brought in, probably in an unparalleled way, just an awful lot of countries to make sure that we had the benefit of their thinking collectively, so that we could develop a document that other people could buy into.

And so this was accomplished. And one of the characteristics, I think the telling characteristics of the document and the agreement was that it does focus on things beyond simply military capacity. It focuses a lot on reconstruction.

In Afghanistan, of course, this is going to be a particularly important part of the strategy. It focuses a lot on rule of law and good governance. And as we continue to develop our relationship with Pakistan, which as you know is somewhat embryonic in some terms because we’ve had no mil-to-mil relations — military-to-military relations — with Pakistan for almost a decade, and so we’re trying to build these relationships up in very real time to face a very real threat.

So the fact that people recognize that this is a regional problem — that’s relatively new I think, within the last six months — the fact that we have a written strategy to address this regional problem which requires regional solutions, the fact that we’re going beyond military solutions and stimulating economic development — trade, bringing in other countries — we have a regional representative, Richard Holbrooke; we have a new ambassador in Kabul; we have a new deputy to the U.N.’s special representative in Kabul — we have a lot of things in place now that allow us to take a regional approach and a regional focus to implementing the strategy.

Q General, the President mentioned al Qaeda repeatedly, but he never said the Taliban in his remarks, and I was wondering if that was purposeful. Also is General Kayani mobilizing and deploying the 11th Corps? And if not, why should we take his efforts seriously?

GENERAL JONES: I’m sorry, why should you take General Kayani’s effort seriously?

Q No, the Pakistani President, I mean his word that he’s serious about this. Is the 11th Corps crucial to that, and what commitment have you got on that?

GENERAL JONES: I think those issues will be discussed in follow-on meetings, so I don’t have an answer for you on that as of today because we didn’t get down to that level of specificity.

The President — of course, his focus — we are focused on al Qaeda, but we’re also focused on extremism of any form, especially those extremists that want to strike outside of their borders and destabilize democratically elected governments. And that’s what we’re there to defeat. And I think this meeting was an affirmation that we will be successful.

Thank you very much. Thank you.

MR. GIBBS: Thanks, guys.