Tom Ricks from the Washington Post got Admiral Fallon to 'reject' Tom's article. The pertinent quote from Ricks:

Asked about the article yesterday, Fallon called it "poison pen stuff" that is "really disrespectful and ugly." He did not cite specific objections.

I wonder: did Fallon have a chance to read the whole piece, or did Ricks read him the part about being at odds with Bush/Cheney, like maybe this one:

Well-placed observers now say that it will come as no surprise if Fallon is relieved of his command before his time is up next spring, maybe as early as this summer, in favor of a commander the White House considers to be more pliable. If that were to happen, it may well mean that the president and vice-president intend to take military action against Iran before the end of this year and don't want a commander standing in their way.

Because, here's the question: why 'reject' a piece that is so laudatory, quotes Fallon himself extensively in a positive light, and was reported on a trip where a lot of access was given?

Hopefully we'll have a more extensive reaction from Admiral Fallon in the near future. It'll be interesting to see how this one plays out.