tv After Words with Seymour Hersh CSPAN August 26, 2016 11:53pm-12:56am EDT
i think some people are at different stages in this marathon that i am. everybody starts at some point. we are setting up a political battle that our kids and grandkids will be fighting still. that is the privilege of living in a free society is that you must constantly attend to this. we're just getting it to the next level. this is not one to be decided in our lifetime. were not going to get everything we want in our lifetime. it's a generational battle. a generational battle. progresses have been working on for generations. as a result of anything some people are at a different point in the marathon than others. when i first really got involved in politics it was before 2001. i was not for george bush i was raised in a family of hard-core democrats. as pro-life and i have always been unequivocally pro -- i have my life protected by god. >> host: to a is the second
amendment rights. >> guest: the more educated i got the more mature i became in my eyes open and i realize the need for responsibility. i threw myself into it. i was angry because i felt like i have been betrayed by the ideology that brought me out. i went out there with a focus fist of fury. you might remember this. i think some of the people that are out there right now are where i was eight years ago. because of that i want to give them grace. they're going to see, in time that is just the way it is. i remember being absolutely unrelenting in going after some of these elected officials. i went i went to their offices, i organized people to bomb them with phone calls.
then i think when the longer you're doing it and you realize there's better ways to go about this, maybe mark alkylating ways to go about it, you grow in it. i think think that is what some of these people are experiencing as a result of that i give them grace because i've been given grace. there are people out there who have every reason to hate me because some of the reasons i let against them eight years ago. yet, they they don't. i think that comes into it. >> host: many conservatives, traditional, hard-core, conservatives will agree with a lot of the content of flyover nation. in a 20. in a 22nd sales pitch, why should somebody who might be what you disdain is a coastal, elite lefty who doesn't get it, why should they buy and read the book? >> guest: if ever want to win an election or debate they need to get the book so they understand the people they need to convince and where the people are coming from. what issues these people price
and why they feel the way they do about these issues. how you can talk to these people without condescending. you can find some common ground. i do get into that in the book. there is water, ground and the book that they might actually have any can build a lot of stuff out of common grime. it's not compromise, it's building a coalition. that's, building a coalition. that's why they need this book. >> host: thank you very much. >> guest: thank you so much, i appreciate. >> throughout the month we're showing the tv programs during the week in prime time. he kissed not familiar with our weekend features, book tv on be on c-span2 takes our public affairs programming and focuses on the latest nonfiction book releases through author interviews and discussions. her signature programs are in
depth, the life three-hour look at an author's work from questions via phone, e-mail and social media. afterwards is a one-on-one conversation between an author of a newly released nonfiction book and the interviewer, either a journalist, policymaker, policymaker or legislator familiar with the topic. we'll take it across the country to book festivals and book parties where authors talk about their latest books. book tv is the only national network devoted to nonfiction books. book tv, on c-span2. television for serious readers. >> now afterwards, the killing of osama bin laden and the official accounts of bin laden's death. he was interviewed by bob dreyfus. this is one hour.
>> host: let's start by talking about osama bin laden who has plays the title role in your book which is called "the killing of osama bin laden" you challenge every detail of the story, both the official narrative and the media reports. can you start by summarizing briefly what you found in this piece? >> host: one reality is the president did authorize the execution, if you will, of osama bin laden and the seals to carry it out. that's a fact in it was done in a resort town about 50 or 60 miles uphill from the capital. it it is a place that in the summer, it gets 220 degrees. it degrees. it is the martha's vineyard of islam -- it's an upscale area.
after that, it is what i described as a lewis carroll story. the white house said this is all done, he had gone there the last time heat we heard about bin laden we were looking for him in the mountains between pakistan and afghanistan. it was sort of a no man's land. we are looking for him and could not find him. this is late late in 2001 and 2002. we went on to attack iraq and moved away. we're still in this for 15 years now and how are we doing to that? that's another question. >> host: give it another 15 years. >> guest: oh my god. there is no wind. were doing the same policy. my essays in the book were mostly written for review books and not that will known here.
the argument is that osama -- the president of the united states, barack obama followed the cheney bush policy too much. anyway the story is the white house story is that oh my god, we had wonderful carriers, people in the basement of the caa tracking carriers and been on, once he left the area while he was active he was the energetic runner and sending messages and directing traffic i guess worldwide guess worldwide for al qaeda that sort of the application, and then the with the amazing skills in the use of torture, if anybody has seen the
movie, zero dark 30, it begins with torture. enhanced interrogation, waterboarding and we got the evidence we wanted and we didn't tell the pakistanis and we went by yourself, to choppers could ebay the radar of pakistan they went and did the mission, caligula and in the initial story they had an ak-47 when they confronted him in order to protect themselves the seals had to shoot him in a room, on a a compound and then we flat out and we had a chopper that blew up it accident and crash landed in the two squads, actually for squads of six, this navy this navy seals, even though they had not been on water and years, they still move in groups of six which is how many fit into a dinghy. the seals have gone crazy with the fact that the not going into the water anymore. many of them leave because that's not what they were trained to do.
not just run on the ground and trip kill people. but the seals one and it had to kill him. he took the body out of the back. meanwhile a rescue chopper came in which was a twin engine chopper i forgot the name of it. it carries 55 passengers and travels about hundred ten or 13030 miles per hour at most. they took that out with the black hawk because they didn't have enough room in the one black hawk. they flew out that way without being detected by the reader, that's the story. the american press went gung ho for. it was a great night night when the president announced we got in. that was the words basically. he was killed in the war on terror is over and americans march on the street and i celebrated it too. i was happy to see them dead, although i knew this guy have been out of business for ten years. this is a going to end the war. but in but in the next week or so the american press that's what
happens when you get a story like this, the white house controls the narrative. they. they are begging for briefings. everybody wants an exclusive. they're dealing out facts they had to recant after a little while that he did not have an ak-47 and then they went to he had two women with weapons protecting him. and then there was a firefight, firefight, a lot of people were shot up and killed they haven't really backed off that. that sort of diminish. if. if you remember his wife and children were taken away and we are going to interrogate them, that never happened. therefore not by the pakistani intelligence service mother so later back to saudi arabia. all of these stories disintegrated over the next couple of weeks. nobody paid attention. the press was was still tell us more. the favor story was one of the seals brought a dog and on the mission and they described how the president at the dog in one of the stories was that when the chopper crash they had to blow it up in a big explosion and
people came and neighbors came in this elegant area of pakistan, resort area. if people came and wondered what was going on the dog was put outside to town to stay away. i remember thinking, my god we have a talk that parks in urdu. so there is no story that wouldn't go. the the fire department in this area which was very skilled did not show up at all. even though the time of the mission which was supposed to be 20 minutes ended up being 40. the seals seals had to fly in a rescue chopper that was a also parked in pakistan again without pakistani knowledge. so that's a bad story. the me me just tell you a few things. one of my chronic complaints, when i speak to journalists in schools and more in europe on investigative journalism than here, but still the annual
meetings of the ira, the investigative reporting group. i speak to a lot of schools. the first thing i have always says you have to read before you write. you have to read. one of the things you need to do is take a look at the radar system pakistan have. i will take take a second to tell you about it. we know that bin laden work for us in the early 80s when we decided, carter decided that we are going to drive the russians and have a proxy war with russians in afghanistan. the russians were stuck as though we had that we were in vietnam. we were going to use bin laden and other fundamentalist to help fight and win a war. we also brought in and began paying a lot of money to the pakistani intelligence services which is known as the isi. and now the pakistani isi's like the u gypsy military, they own
thing, they buy property in australia, they have a huge housing complex in osama bod. the big, tough, very skilled. we brought them in to help fight the taliban and other groups inside afghanistan. to help us win the war against the russian. the pakistan's very wisely, the one thing that happened was when isi garcia, to go back there's log history, when the russians began to move into pakistan the indians moved in. they set up consulates. when isi began to fight on our side, one of the things they did which was reported in press and you can find it in news clips, they invaded some of the consulates and began killing pakistani diplomats and even hanging some. that kind entity exists. then in in the early 85 or so when they
are active in all the anti- india inside afghanistan to help drive out the russians at that point the indians had nuclear weapons and could deliver them. pakistan had a reactor going of enriching uranium but they cannot website it so they said help us. what do we do? we put up money over eight or ten years to build a very sophisticated 3d audible which means you can erase it signal system. i think ray kamm was the contract contractor of it. we built a built a great radar system for the period between -- there's one or two flights a week now about 350 miles or so. so i god, all you had to do was look at the kind of radar system they had in the basic story that
are two black hawk helicopters could evade radar was ludicrous. so start from there. i began looking. >> host: so what you said in your article in the book is that it was not brilliant intelligence that discovered where bin laden was, it was a walk in, tip from a pakistani officer and we took that to the pakistanis and said, now we we know where he is so either you cooperate or or else. they cleared the decks for the whole u.s. operation. we moved into pakistan knowing there are basically standing down in and around the compound and in the skies of pakistan. there is no firefight as the administration says. it was really just one old guy who is not just shot once or twice but as you say obliterated by the fire. they even allowed us to set up a
command center in a nearby pakistan facility to guide the operation. so this is really a complete myth created by the administration in order to protect pakistan from the consequences among other things. is that about right? >> guest: that's a good summary. the man that walked in, i could be less quiet about it now because the pakistanis know who he is, he is the pakistani colonel and not in the isi but military intelligence. he was disaffected and there is 25,000,000 dollars on the table. we offered that much money about information from pakistan. he came in 2010. to show you how naïve i am, i made a point early in the piece of writing that he went directly to her station chief, to a guy named jonathan bank, and what i
did in the article is that i wrote that bank was there because big had been mentioned earlier in the year two -- your press. i mention him by name. for the simple reason that i thought the way you can go after in the story it was a long story, 10000 words and it was checked very careful just as carefully as i work for the new yorker. in fact the london review hired some of my new yorker checkers who did the checking. it took weeks of this stuff. it costs a lot of money to do this right. which new yorkers are famous for doing. in any case about him leaving his name in there. i know it's going to jeopardize him because there many people who immediately think because he was
named he was the source. but the way i could -- i knew there be attacks by the white house. if they could somehow convince john banks who i knew had a reputation of being honest to go public 34 days after my story which attracted enormous attention as we all know what. and go public and say i don't know what he's talking about, he said nothing. and i thought the press would appreciate the dog that didn't bark was really important but they didn't, they're too busy chasing the white house briefing to really pay a fact that who wasn't talking about it, the one guy directly involved. >> host: go ahead. >> guest: the other point is, of course the underlying port, the critical point is that when all of this is being planned when we confronted the pakistanis we were enraged at them and of course their answer, the whole
point was they were gonna look the other way, we're going to go take him out, we had to take the body of how we are not going going to talk about it. not for a week or ten days. with all the greed the president would then announce that we had a drone rate, we do it all the time in the hindu kush mountains on the afghan side on and we hit a house and we did a check afterwards and my god, we got him. but that night, and i remember this this vividly because is a sunny night in washington in by 730 or 8:00 p.m. there are reports on the media that the president has a special announcement to make. by 10:00 p.m. their stories it might have to do with bin laden. but he didn't go public until three hours after the first word read what was going on was a fight. there is pressure, political pressure on him from political advisors not to wait the seven or ten days. they're very angry at robert
gates, the republican secretary of defense who he had been reappointed but allowed to stay he replaced rumsfeld by george bush. he was very close to the bush family. one of, came in he reappointed them. two and half years later there is tension and five, republican doing things and gates was very much against some of the things that happen in the operation. he thought we should bomb the place and let it go and not jeopardize the seals. if something had gone wrong and they been captured they had no protection. they're basically basically committing a war crime. he was a prisoner of war. they executed a prisoner of war. they went into a country without any notice to the authorities, that theoretically what happened. so here's what the issue was for gates basically for me as a journalist. what is so important about pakistan, what do we spend so
much time closing up to the generals who run it, because they control -- when i wrote about in the new yorker in 2009, more than 100 nuclear weapons and we worry about their weapons and their safety. there's a huge of fundamentalist population of pakistan. in fact the reason pakistanis had never said anything publicly since oh six, isi found them in 2006 according to the walking which may or may not be correct, you think might be earlier but that's with a walk and told us. pakistanis kept him secretly because the public would go nuts. the public loved bin laden. many elements of the public, 50 or 40% of the country saw him as a hero. so as long as they had bin laden they can privately tell the iconic groups and tele- band groups in both pakistan and
afghanistan, we have her guy. pay more attention to us, keep us informed. the second argument they made her explanation for keeping is that the saudis paid a lot of money. the saudi arabia government, he's a saudi and he came from the elegant very wealthy family. the bin bin laden family was a big construction family. and they were building a very wealthy. the assumption assumption we make and i make is that nobody wanted an american interrogation team to talk to. once -- what we get do for them, you want a armored car yeah, yeah, you want to go play golf with jack nicholson? we'll fix it. we did that stuff for them because we wanted them to trust us enough to let us know where
the bombs were. it was a cat and mouse game going on. of course we did not tell them what we planned and they didn't tell us everything to. the intelligence committee the fair was that some of the bombs that they were telling us about where they were in igloos or under the ground some of the grounds were hidden in the tall grass along the runway. they always kept a few. there is a natural suspicion. this is what is on the table. so that night when the president decides to violate the agreement, he is really jeopardizing a relationship that has not been fully resolved. there's still bitterness among the pakistani leadership about being hung out to dry. >> host: if they are holding captive public enemy number one in not only holding him captive but protecting him and using him for their advantage, they obviously have a lot to answer for. your story in the book and in the london review has been disparaged by a lot of people but there were other people,
steve, steve, nbc that confirmed details of what you reported. are you surprised that there has been so little follow-up. so future no sense this piece first came out have picked up one or another piece of it and tried to confirm or disprove what you wrote? are you concerned or surprised by that? >> guest: when i was at the new york times for seven, eight, or nine years i was a hotshot lead investigator reported. i want a lot of prizes right about prizes read about watergate, vietnam, the cia in chile and all that stuff. in domestic wire, domestic spine that led -- somebody at the times if they had said there is a great story that was published for the l.a. times, we want you to follow, i would've essay me come i don't follow other
stories. i do my own. it's a busy business. but the good investigative reporters and the times in post, they don't want to follow someone else's story. it's just a reality. the thing that really got me was within a week of the story there was an interview show, i don't want to embarrass anybody but there is a senior reporter for the foreign-policy reporter and one of those reporters who don't like following other stories in this reporter was asked about my story. the reporter said well, he said what we all knew right away, this was within five or six days. we all knew that the pakistani military intelligence services were he was, did make sense they did not. that part of the story doesn't work.
so what was being said essentially is that we had that. that's i get rid of a story. based work for the ap covering the pentagon in the 60s. on-the-job training and learning how to hit the vietnam war. if anybody had a good story they would call me at wake me up at 1130 at night sometimes at overseas desk. the first thing i would do was call the press secretary for robert who i concluded was a psychotic liar. after dealing with him i really did. i thought he was lying about everything. didn't even. didn't even know how much he was lying. there's a wonderful movie maker -- anyway, i would call up and take my heavier denial. and i say the pentagon denied today. that's a bit bit she we are in the business. it's funny, you cross the water, this book came out in london at the same time it did here. i went for a few dates in london and did a couple of big events.
one case was a senior editor of a major newspaper there. there are people there we talked about the bin laden story. i turntables on them after a few minutes and i said you're closer, as a set it's a world colony you guys go to india and pakistan. you you have more ties and are sophisticated about that part of the world. we have all that water between us and he said yes. and i said so what did you think? and he said, i'm not exaggerating. he said well we had movies and concluded right away was impossible for the pakistani isi because you know how confident they are not to know that he was there. because among other things this area happens to be in the center of not only the secret base you mention about and where we work with the cia, also a base in which the pakistanis trained the guards for the nuclear arsenal to reactors. they they now have a plutonium reactor and also a
major airbase. if you draw a circle in the middle they parked him in a place with total coverage and they made it clear that in the early reporting and you have to go back to the first things that reset, he had he had no internet, he had no electronic medication. he was completely isolated. in fact our guys, guys, when we landed we were walking to his prison by an isi official. if you remember, we had to blow to steel doors. if there are two steel doors, he he was a prisoner, clearly a prisoner of war, not a prisoner of love. anyway -- >> there's been a lot of criticism of the story not just lack of a follow-up but i put down a few quotes as i'm sure
you've heard them it's fake moon landing territory. these are they called it nonsense. the washington post talked about it being even kind of crazy, their media guy. what is is all about? why was why was there so much, not just failure to follow but this nastiness of accusing you of being a conspiracy? >> i've had this must my career. most of my story has been an enormous amount of criticism. when i did a story, if you look at the original story i wrote about the domestic cia spine in the new york times.
it was late december 2004, my god, the washington post for three months was attacking manson that wasn't right. there were not files, the cia was not given files on americans, et cetera. all that stuff eventually, you tell me. i don't want to describe what it's about. it's pretty obvious in some cases what it is because i've been doing this a long time and writing stories that often people should've been written by others much earlier. part of it is in the case of mark bowden, he wrote "black hawk down ". >> a new quarterman your book a couple of times. >> guest: a quarter and because first we have to know something in the cia when you have a walk-in, so here you have in the basement a bunch of people working on tracking couriers. you want want to figure out
where they are. if you pay attention to the intelligence community which they published a major report on terror and torture. if you remember that it was a 60,006,000 page report. only 500 pages were cleared. the 500 pages were published. if you read those, as i did there i did there was a section on couriers. it described how the cia was trying to track couriers and got nowhere. could not make any sense of the couriers. we have so many problems within ena and a name. a name. it spelled differently in the west. it's literally impossible to track but that is okay. according to the cia, not so much in the initial statement, a day or two later, a senior intelligent officials even the head of the cia mr. brennan it was in the white house the deputy for counterterrorism.
john brennan went to the cia and gave briefings and how we tracked it by couriers and got into this torture business. they fought bitterly against it saying to not start line about torture because the cia is worried about the fact that there may be congressional hearings and there may be legal findings about what we did. the cia was killing people and torture. that happened much more than anybody knows. there's a lot of murder going on. they torture people, they bled to death, whatever. and in some cases there were murders and no prosecution. and there are some places where nobody got punished for anything. so you have that issue. you're trying to justify using the couriers and the problem was, in order for him to be using couriers you had to contradict the earlier stories that this guy was isolated. at one point
they talked about him sitting around watching video, porno. there is an old man hunched over watching photography, you can say whatever you wanted in the first two days. the couriers and the people doing said by god you helped us, you helped us find it. you wanted to think so because then reporters could talk to them and people giving briefings were convinced they had, you don't tell them about a walking, you don't tell anybody about it. that's a secret, not even inside the agency. the other element is that bowden had written a piece, five months later the president and all of those people, oh my god, he wrote a piece about the operation. at the end he included photographs, he described it
vividly. i knew mark and liked him and i did not want to embarrass in. i waited until the piece was published. i knew a lot. i know where bin laden was taken to a forward base in the hindu kirsch mountain. they only use choppers at that time. the aircraft carrier they went to was 800 miles when the indian sea. the indians see. how do you get him there was a problem. secondly, i knew from wayzata want to talk about because i don't want to get some navy officers embarrassed, but i knew everything that was reported on a navy shift. that night the aircraft carrier never turned around to recover anyone. never said were picking up a chopper now or airplane. that's very import, that's very important, they had to do that. there was no report in the logs. it the logs since have been classified. the third thing, did not know they were imams on the carrier.
i knew it was impossible that happened. so call markup teaching at the university of delaware and i said to mark, i'm going to ask a question to which i think the answer before asking us know. here's the question, did you actually see those photographs you describe so vividly in your article? he described how they women and how they looked and he said, no. and i said how vigilant about him? and he said i was given a said i was given a briefing about someone i trust. i said why did you say you hadn't seen them. and he said something to the effect that he was she had her the editors said it would be more vivid if i just left that out. i'm telling you, that's what happened. i can understand, it didn't
happen, i'm sorry, it didn't happen. they did. they didn't know what to do. the body was a mess. the seals were only supposed to fire a few shots. as i say there are groups of six, and a dinghy, one guy guarded the door, and by the way when they use it to blow up the still covered doors, they had learned from the isi in advance exactly the dimension of the thickness of the steel. because being 6-foot four inches, if you use too much of it it will kill you. one of the questions was, how do do they know just enough to knock the door down without a big getting hurt. all because the pakistanis were given is that intelligence. there's a lot of back-and-forth once they and forth once they decided to play ball with us. what they did was fired a lot of bullets into them, you don't have to do many but each of the
quotation from her that in pakistan, i find a hard to believe nobody in your government knows where osama addition motta and is. i don't think she would have said that in 2009 in pakistan dishy did not have the assurance from the intelligence committee that the package sienese did know exactly where he was. after the raid in 2011 said there is absolutely no evidence anyone at the highest level of the pakistan eight government so she went back after what she said not to enter politics politics, but where does that say about secretary
clinton claque. >> is complicated as politics play house the night that is the simple question she says it was then cheeses that. >> may be somebody is biased in the questions about what happened in that is an uncomfortable thought. i will tell you something more in the initial statement with the political people what out and made a political statement and made a lot of assertions i read a lot to. to be thought everything he said was not true i don't know how much but he described him as confronted with the weapons or documents you are on the run. sometimes they said they
took out the box. some of them are very bright. after having the chopper crashed in a panic which one should i take first exit is comical say you have to buy into the story president also said a one to cover those intelligence forces. but the president misspoke but by this time within one week i knew the day after there was troubled there were real problems for the. i did know that from somebody high at the the white house. but people what they don't
know is what i wrote about the bomb and i did that three or four times before that. but then i got into some interesting stuff to the point you do a story you come in with some issues and the white house denies everything. whenever i said that that role was to make sure that pakistan could without our approval. to knock off whole system. to knock out the command system and so after denying all of this to call but my editor to say he got a call
from somebody ashley government that must have then a thursday night somewhere in tennessee and one of the things we did at that yorker is redo share writing to give the match chance to talk. they said the american government just because of that position to close the embassy immediately and the consulate for fear of riots because the of fundamentalist alleging a that we toned down the story quite a bit. quite a bit. so i have contacts with
contacts in pakistan i heard there was problems in inner-city with bob gates. and i heard then from somebody close that had the three pager e-mail that pretty much describes what i wrote. i waited until the of middle of the week her got sorry i have contacts. as a journalist, we all have to depend on briefings coming into the white house you cannot fall off the wagon to much there are many
wonderful people in our government in not to the president with somebody like that on the inside with that misdirection leaving the two senior generals leave them with two options to tell everybody to the people to have their children not walk to school by the fundamentalist the other option is do what they did the raiders system didn't work. on a half to do is cellmark go take the look at what is on line. even the top secret
contracts have to be announced. behalf to be announced somewhere in the government. lawyer laugh to do his research of the radar networking. but the national defense's of a nuclear attack that is capable to be so easily defeated in the gates position was all along that you are messing with the two guys that control the ball with the faith and confidence. to me that is the reason why the real power behind what i writing in the real issue to
jeopardize that relationship is there. go-ahead spin mecca i want to shift gears a little bit because several chapters of your book talk about syria that has very difficult to see to the hall of mirrors but the united states support some rebels and not others and it is a mass. did he talk about syria and the gas attack but the chapter you call military to
military pet essentially on its own initiative the joint chiefs calendar took to sabotage or undercut so you say on page 101 without through political channels and the next page you say it isn't a sinister plot but if you pages later to say i understood the message of the residential policies and use say it doesn't sound like military independent thinking and action by the sounds exactly like that. think about the old policy area policy. isn't that kind of scary
what they undertook to provide intelligence while u.s. official policy supports the overthrow of a side? >> i think this happened and it's a close read and you are right. >> but you say directly without informing vow white house. i know what to call him an enemy. >> for the military that is very complicated. there is a tremendous amount stuff of the american policy. it was the shipping of weapons and now we know just
in the last day the u.n. is raising questions about the murder of the opposition kurds going on daily. della question we have intelligence on that. submitted from the military's point of view for whatever moderate existence by the end of 2013 were overtaken. with the group supported by saudi arabia and now through the alleged moderates and many of them in with those
now was 60,000 troops this is before the august event where he murdered his own people. so be issue was we had the intelligence that he needed. the germans for their helping him and they asked for help to give them the ire rationale then but was understood. from the military academy and was quite skilled as a student that is renowned among his friends and that
treason to you? to undercut the president's policy? you can quit if you are a general but really you have to salute to say yes, sir,? i find it pretty refreshing but the joint chiefs tried to express that view ended the same article to call them by name. with former head of intelligence cycle him by name. >> michael flynn said in mecca was going to ask you because you cite them as a source one of the few the record and you portray him as a truth teller. but he was fired a couple years ago.
but here is the thing. he has recently emerged as one of the top advisers of the neutron and has written a book instead they're writing that now. >> is published. >> i did not know that. >> how we can win the war against radical islam and its allies. fled has clearly put himself in the camp of the extremist to fight islam in the global war against terrorism. i don't know why he was fired by the sounds like he was insubordinate and dar radical wanting to go after these guys and then accusing the president not wanting to fight hard enough.
>> you quote him as a truth teller. but one of the issues about him as you know, he also worked as the head of intelligence for the joint special operations command for years to begin to work with crystal - - makers still in iraq with the most dangerous times they were fascinating people by the hundreds with the counterinsurgency effort. >> absolutely all what was going on that was considered to be wonderful but crystal always got a great credit - - press the he was head of the war in afghanistan and flan was always there very active with the press corps of lot of people had e-mail
how i got it in the issue for me was of course, use subscriber is somebody who was conservative and is pushed out but the fact is what he said was consistent with everything nine new. he was willing to say that on the record that there's a whole series of reports that summer. and that i cissy merge very early and how dangerous they were so on that basis that all, was shoved out when you get a source on the record from the documents that you have if you make it up point
so in this case somebody on the record that he and the chairman of the joint chiefs was simpatico on this issue but there were many they were not. and was reorganizing things reorganizing on the inside. >> but in all fairness. >> with that document that demonstrated with the israeli intelligence and go on with the nerve agent potential before what
happened in august in the suburb of damascus. that somebody was alleged to be killed. but believe me i and checking. and with that issue those political views are way off the charts. but he was very conservative but if you go look back with all the major media despite the fact to be hard on the right wing type of guy at
don't want to talk about that. and to recognize what is reported and that is reported consistently. >> but the chairman of the joint chiefs made a call that makes some sense to me. they're always be holden to the lighthouse -- the white house and to the constitution so old, for better or worse when you have fared time to get stuff through him. >> not too many generals are
constitutional lawyers so that is what i was getting at when i asked the question i know of the generals know what the constitution says or mean it is not their job to interpret that but let me ask you dash you mention in the introduction of a your book about his legacy on foreign policy. at least i guess it starts with the iran deal ending with the wars in iraq and afghanistan? maybe he tried his best tried to avoid getting entangled in syria with their pushing for a much greater escalation he has a drone program what about the legacy on foreign policy? >> we just tad an article by
one of the aids from "the new york times" in which he was bragging about manipulating the press with the iranian deal. it is wonderful what he did in iran it was about pressures but the fact after 12 or 13 years of consistently telling the iranians we would discuss a nuclear deal with you if you stop in richmond that was the requirement to return years ago we made it known to others keep enriching and that is when i got going there is nothing wrong to say that in the case of the deal were reached still accuse them of and when the attack took place they knew with intelligence galore