Charlie Rose Science Series
Click here to watch previous episodes of the Charlie Rose Science Series
07/27/2007
Tim Weiner
A conversation about the CIA with journalist Tim Weiner
Keywords:
A conversation about the CIA with author and journalist Tim Weiner.
DVD
Charlie Rose DVDs on Amazon.
Charlie Rose DVDs on Amazon.
Audio
Audio available through Audible.com.
Audio available through Audible.com.
Transcripts
Transcripts available through Voxant.
Transcripts available through Voxant.
I don't know why my original comment from July was mysteriously erased. Still, I maintain the position that Mr. Wiener comes across as self-satisfied, vague, arrogant and not very forthcoming on details, unless Charlie coaxes them from him. He also is disturbingly biased and somewhat rightist toward the CIA's nefarious actions, including the inexcusable behavior of former Director George Tenet. Furthermore, he nationalistically implies that Iran was better off under the Shah than the present regime -- which itself came from an pent-up reaction to Pehlavi's oppression -- and therefore almost seems to sanction the CIA's decision to overthrow the democratic institutions of Iran in 1953. I'd have more confidence in Mr. Wiener's statements if he had a fair-minded, equitable view about the rights of non-Americans, and scepticism toward America's purported moral authority to do as it wills.
Read CATHY OBrien Book, Trance Formation of America, tim may know os her.
When people say, "Bush lied", that seems to be a very narrow and immature view of how things work. Fascinating interview.
The office (CIA) under the President of the US seems to be at ease in overthrowing a foreign government that is democratically elected through influence or violence. And that seems to be acceptable with everyone including Charlie Rose. So if it's normal to do it over there, it would seem logical that those methods and methodology would be easily accepted in the US. So much for Democracy and freedom. Then ask yourself why other countries hate us and not Canada(they have freedom). Also I'm sure the Bush administration was very upset when they figured out all the intelligence on WMD's was wrong, so upset.
Addendum: In my previous comment failed to state that we in the United States have a tendency to think of a foreign policy in terms of how it will appeal to the voters and what Congress has to say about what the CIA is doing. We often are told about what might appear to be a reasonable need for secrecy, but if the ruling bodies or the citizens of an foreign country believe that the US, our military, the CIA or corporations operating out of the United States have done them terrible wrongs not even covered by our media, secrecy does not serve the long term interests of United States or our allies. Rather than trust our corporately owned broadcast media to give all voters an accurate picture of our activities worldwide, public television stations that carry programs like the Charlie Rose Show should actually serve the public, even those who cannot afford cable. Public TV should be available in any market served by any broadcast media, or the broadcast media should be held to a higher standard of public service in their use of the airwaves.
I spent about 2 years working in an office working with a young man who had recently arrived from Chile and who had been held for a while after the Pinochet took power in Chile. He believed that the entire brutal coupe was financed and orchestrated moment by moment by US. He assumed we were all as guilty of the deaths and torture and as corrupt as he believed the CIA to be. Even though he was here, his rage made me aware that, people as angry as he was may reach the end of their fuse and do terrible things. Because of the experience of working with this man, when Al Qaeda bombed the World Trade Center, even though I had very little knowledge of International affairs, I predicted that unless we made significant changes in our foreign policy, especially in regard to the support of brutal dictators and made significant changes in our national security, Al Qaeda would return to the World Trade Center with at least one plane. Even now, many voices are trying to tell the Bush something similar about the world situation and our self interest in it, but it seems the Bush administration is just too proud to listen or, worse yet, really don't care if the whole world burns as long as they can stay in power. What will it take before Congress says, "Nero has fiddled too long?"
Hi charlie, 7/31/7 During the interview, when you asked Mr. Weiner how the CIA Kept the cold war cold, he said something innocuous about how keeping the line open between Moscow and Washington helped common sense prevail over the desire for a Final Battle. This was quite true in a sense, I suppose, but hardly informative, because it was neither the CIA or KGB that was really responsible for the avoidence of nuclear war, but a third party - the CEMCO . Operationally, the method used they employed to accomplish this can be called "Electronic Dope" - signal processing, antenaes, interlocking grids, near range radar, feedbackloops usw. In short, they could nail you to the floor with an unseen power if you tried to push the button. For further info you might try referencing Computerized Radionics of the U.K. Tell them the parasitecologist sent you. Depending on who you are they may be helpful or they may simply say "The Fat Whut?"
To Shawn: Thanks for the heads-up about the c-span interview! I'd found a few other Chalmers Johnson interviews on google video and fora.tv, but I'll go have a look for the c-span one. I too have just finished reading Nemesis and think it deserves to be discussed here... like you I was disappointed to see that Charlie's never had him on. There's many important critical books being written about our foreign policy and I'd love for those authors to be given as much time as the Kissingers etc..
Charlie, how can you go through the trouble of getting the most interesting, important guests on the air today, and KEEP INTERRUPTING them?! Let them at least finish a thought BEFORE you go on to the next thread.
I was very disappointed with this interview and I don't think it was Charlie's fault. Tim did not go into depth at all, even when Charlie pressed him to do so, with specific examples. I did not find Tim credible at all--he danced around almost every question. I have not read his book, so all I'm going on is this interview and the quality of it. His answers were full of well known facts or info people could find on their own--Charlie seemed to know just as much as he, but it looked like even Charlie wanted more out of him. He didn't seem to have any "insider" info to offer--it felt like a generic class on CIA history...really too bad.
I thought this interview was so fascinating. Some other viewers may be familiar with the concepts of what has made the CIA tick or not tick. But the content of this interview was a total surprise to me.
Couldn't agree more about Prof. Johnson. He was on C-Span Book TV a couple months ago pimping his new book "Nemesis" and it was maybe the best two hours of tv I've watched this year. Incredibly well informed man. Then I went to the Rose website to look up shows that he'd been on and was surprised to see he'd never been interviewed. What gives Charlie? Have the guy on...
Regarding the Iran coup against Mohammed Mossadeq in 1953, the details have been fairly well documented. The coup was a CIA operation carried out by Kermit Roosevelt... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kermit_Roosevelt,_Jr. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax Another book which deserves mention is Chalmers Johnson's 'Blowback'; he too delves deep into the CIA's covert actions and the unintended consequences thereof. Hopefully Charlie will have Prof. Johnson on the show at some point.
Charlie....re conversation with Tim Weiner - it was very interesting but for some reason you kept interrupting Mr. Weiner making it in the end a little bit exasperating to follow....Love your program...am glad it will now be at 5:00 pm
Interesting hour. I basically agree with Weiner's overall assertion that in reflectively pointing fingers one should remember that the C.I.A. ultimately serves at the behest of the President. Still Weiner, at least in the interview, seems reticent to tackle or even probe the hard questions and smooths over ugly and unconstitutional episodes like Allende, Iran Contra, and the litany of alleged doings by the clandestine services portion of the agency in the 50's and 60's. Most fascinating part for me was at the 35 min. mark when Charlie asks about Cord Meyer(shady story involving his wife Mary; wikipedia them and read about it) and Weiner seems to glare at Charlie and then proceeds to clam up about the thing. Fascinating in any event...keep up the good work Rose
Very interesting hour. Mr. Rose, in attempting to build drama were none is required, constantly distracts the viewer and author early on; but later the program settles into an informative interview. The main purpose of the CIA, in my view, which Mr. Weiner never gets to, has been to provide cover for the unconstitutional, illegal accural of unchecked and unbalanced power and, at times, insane actions of executives who actually belonged in jail rather than the White House. The Allende affair is a complete disgrace to our nation, and Mr. Rose attempts to soft-pedal it with needless name-dropping to distract the viewer away from the obvious complicity of Mr. Kissinger, etc. Charlie is always weak when he panders to power. Thank you. Robert Philbin
kaka poopoo
Charlie, For god's sake.. SHUT UP and let the man talk. I could tell when you would interrupt in mid-sentence, bugging the guest. Aloke
In regards to Weiner and the CIA, along about 2000-2002, Harpers magazine ran a two part biography of Henry Kissinger which asserted that Kissinger sent $50,000 and three machine guns in diplomatic attaché cases to the assassins of Eduardo Frey so that Pinochet could take over the military and depose Allende. This does not jibe with your discussion, so is it true or not true?
Charlie: It was a good interview and I will read Weiner's book. I wish you would have pressed the 50's Iran coup issue a little further, since U.S. citizens know so little of this. Especially the details of how British Petroleum in Iran at that time was threatened by the nationalization of Iran's oil. Was this not the main reason for the overthrow of Mosadek? Which brings us again to U.S. and British invasion of Iraq and now trying to force Maliki's government to pass oil laws favorable to U.S. and British. Some things never change.
I too enjoyed this segment a lot. However,I thought Rose was too cautious and danced around the Kissinger segment. I presumed he didn't want to antagonize Kissinger and Jewish supporters.
I watched Charlie Rose intently. So much of the ebb and flow of our intellectual, political and cultural life flows thru his guests and interviews. As a political activist, as a reporter, lecturer and poet I want to commend you for the Tom Weiner interview. It was superlative from a journalistic standpoint, from a political scientist standpoint and from an American sphere of influence standpoint.It is the kind of television interview that I am looking to produce in the near future with the new movers and shakers of out planet.Again , bravo....