Transcripts For CSPAN2 Scott Anderson The Quiet Americans 20240711

50 when your specific would like to thank all of our supporters, supporters of Scott Anderson and Julian Sancton and everyone for their pouring of love for our bookstore. We had to adapt again so we are bringing you the things you love the most about Left Bank Books with these virtual events. Also our operating Curbside Pickup which is scheduled to resume this coming saturday seek an order scotts book and pick it up and started again on saturday or if you were anywhere in the country you can have it mailed to you. We offer a variety of mailing options and we can get the book in the mail to you where ever you are. We are happy to be able to bring ive been series personal. We believe its a way to expand your mind and make the world a better place. We hope you enjoy this event and we hope you support Scott Anderson and Left Bank Books by purchasing a copy for you and for all of your friends on a website. Which think a cop with the book is what keeps our events series door and keeps our doors, weather they are open or you know, its what keeps us getting you books is whats most important. When you buy books you keep your money here in st. Louis and it helps up as he better book store. Im the Events Coordinator and help produce our hundred offer this feature was a fantastic team. In st. Louis. We will be taking questions from the audience so be sure to type your questions as as a commentd well get to those at the end of the day. You sure to follow Left Bank Books on facebook to be notified about all of our fantastic virtual events. From the bestselling author of lawrence n arabia, a gripping history of early years of the cold war the cias covert battle against communism and the tragic consequences which still affect america and the world today. At the end of world war ii the United States dominate the world militarily, economically and immoral standing. Seeing as the victor over tire in the and to champion the freedom, but it was clear to some of the soviet union was already executing a plan to expand implement revolution around the world. The American Governments strategy in response relied on the secret efforts of a newly formed cia. The quiet americans chronicles the exploits of four, Michael Burke, a charming former football star falling on hard times, frank weiser, the science of a wealthy southern family. Peter, a sophisticated german jew escape the nazis come and edward lansdale, brilliant ad executive. They ran operation around the globe trying to outwit the kgb in berlin, parachuting command in Eastern Europe, plotting coups and directing wars against communists insurgence in asia. A time and again the effort went awry. Forded by, nation of stupidity and ideological rigidity at the highest levels of the government and more profoundly, the decision to abandon american ideals. By the mid1950s the soviet union had a stranglehold on Eastern Europe, the u. S. Had begun its disastrous intervention in vietnam and america the beacon of democracy was overthrowing it democratically elected government and earning the hatred of much of the world. All of this culminated in an act of betrayal and cowardice that would lock the cold war into place for decades to come. Anderson brings to the telling of this story all the narrative deep Research Come skeptical eye and lively prose a Major International bestseller. In intertwined lives of these bn begin in in a, purse of defendg freedom by the ravages of the cold war led them to different fates. To equip the cia in despair stricken by the moral compromises they had to make, one weekend architect of the duplicitous and distracted americans by edwin would be so heartbreaking he would take a selectric to quite american system of these four men confessed with how the United States at the very pinnacle of its power managed to permanently damaged its moral standing in the world. And patrick okeefe, the author of say nothing, says in this sweeping vivid beautifully observed book Scott Anderson unearths the devastating secret history of how the United States lost the plot during the cold war. Its a hell of a book with themes about the unintended consequences of interventionism that still resonate powerfully today. Scott anderson is the author of two novels and for works of nonfiction including one on radium and International Bestseller which was a finalist for the National Book critics circle award and a New York Times notable book. He is a poor writer for the New York Times magazine and tonight Scott Anderson will be in conversation with Julian Sancton. Julian is a Senior Editor at parker magazine and has worked at publications including vanity fair, esquire and bloomberg. He is author of the upcoming Nonfiction Book the end of the world about an illfated 19th century antarctic expedition and i will be providing a link to that in the comments so if you want to preorder that you can too. I am so happy and thrilled to be able to welcome Scott Anderson and Julian Sancton to lefthand books, today is publication day which is a very important day for officers authors when they get to see their book in the wild for the first time so if everyone at home would help me in celebrating by giving both scott and julian are hearty round of applause wherever you are loud enough so we can allhear it. Thank you so much thank you so much. And for everybody tuning in. Scott, this is such a critical training of history youre covering, such as brawling book in terms of geography even though it is a couple decades that you cover, its so much about that period. You dealt with sprawl by focusing on 4 people who are extremely influential though maybe not household names. First of all, how did you settle on thisapproach and more importantly how did you settle on those four guys . I was a product of the cold war. I grew up in east asia in south korea, taiwan and indonesia and theyre all military dictatorships in americas pocket so the defense of the cold war was inexorable and i grew up with that. I always wanted to explore that in writing and in doing a Little Research i came to the conclusion that so much of what was to come over the span of the cold war of almost 50 years, so much of what was to come was set into place at the end of world war ii and the 1950s. And in 1944, fdr was talking about world war ii being that end of populism with the british and french and america was going to be this herald of democracy around the world and from 12 years on say from 1956 and now the United States is paying for the maintenance of the British Empire and theyre not raining democracy, their overthrowing democrats so i wanted to understand how that happened but also what occurred to me was in my reading people on the front lines. Its not generals or statesmen sitting behind a desk its men who are really on the front lines. And when it comes tothe cold war , these frontline soldiers were stuck by both sides. Each side fueled the race and uncovered spying so i guess youre right about spies. And theres a process of finding these four men and i sort of love to establish narrative unfortunately, about all the operatives. Two of the men frank wisner and sichel were wellknown. The other two were not at all. And it took a lot of, i wanted to find some people who had things that happened to them during this time. And also who left a paper trail showing that change and really looking at dates, i got 25 different potential people to focus on. I ended up with these four and the last thing ill say is on the proverbial shaft of letters and attic. But sichel is still alive, the last surviving member of the cia of the early postwar period and hes completely lucid and even better he agreed to do this so i think he was excited bythe book. Speaking of the paper trail, one challenge im sure you face that you are writing a history that is dedicated to secrecy and deception. So i assume that first of all youre not going to, it must have been hard to find people writing reliablestories. And second of all, how did that, how did the cia must have had a hand in redacting whatever they were able to put out. I understood how you were able to get the unredacted memoir of Michael Burke in particular, tell us about that. Yes, theres this censorship but fortunately in the United States, the censorship tends to befairly compact. Literally, i found theres a page thathad been redacted it was that. Sometimes you could take up the name and with a black chart. With these names that the redacted and you also triangulate information. This happens all the time so too were in the topsecret meeting , wrote memorandums of that meeting. Goes to one of their memorandums and it would almost be all blackout andthe other would be barely touched. And in the case of Michael Burke, he wrote an autobiography and because he was in the cia, he had to go in front of the cia board and they completely gutted the book. It was published, but all the best parts have been excised. But funnily enough it was a cia official who said i happen to know theres an uncensored manuscript at boston university. And so sure enough, there it was. And unredacted manuscript that i could fill in all the details. In the case of peterson shell and there were a few other groups thatstruck me as people , that could have made for a great character to focus on. Phillips would have been a great one or anyway, in the case of peter sichel, you spoke to one other 90yearold guy, i forget what his name is but what did it take to get him to agree to talk about this or was he just sort of waiting for somebody to happen. Probably somewhere in between. Guys who were still around. They live under a lifelong, not a band but there are certain things they can talk about. But what i really wanted to talk with peter sichel about was he was the station chief in berlin. Thats from the end of world war ii to 1952 so he been in ground zero of the competition. During those years. So i wanted to tell these were stories and what was it like or what werethe pressures he faced. These people have amazing stories, early on one thing there were clear about is how clueless the americans were going up against the soviets and deception and disinformation , down to a fine art. And the other thing i should add is a sign of just how clueless the americans were on this, when peter showed up in west berlin to become covert operations chief, there were certainly thousands of soviet spies operating in berlin and peter headed up a nine man career and he had just turned24 and thats what was coming next. The soviet model. And he told his story in 1936 that they were all from east germany area and they were all being run by former German Militaryofficers. And will talk about with german arrogance they were concerned about how long these were running and how many people were involved. And he talked about how one night, one who appeared in 40 hours, everybody got rest and there were probably about 300 people, they had had their chains completely wired whole time. And i tell the story, 67 years later he got emotional about it,. It just seems the kgb that you talk about just had their act togetherin a way that america never did. It sounds like america is sort of waiting at the entire time but the kgb is almost gets smart little sting operation and there is this elaborate poster. Has that always, is that still the case that there, they just have their ducks in a row and there the internet and herders of the katie vieira. We are prettily to allthis in our elections. Are there consequences for the continuation of the period youre talking about. I think so. Two things, one and i think you can see it today but certainly from the date world war ii ended even before world war ii ends, the soviets understood the next enemy was the west and specifically the United States and we were absolutely goingto be adversaries. You see that from stalin all the way down. And the americans werevery slow to understand that. Truman just came in right as the world was ending area and for a couple of crucial years he couldnt imagine the Wartime Alliance might be saved. And these were two crucial years where conceptually they were demilitarized while the soviets were takingover all of Eastern Europe. Thats one thing. The secondthing is the soviets , the thing they do in the field is to western mines, one thing i note quite frequently is will dangle across the west so youll come across and say to build up his own units he will grant out other russian or soviet agents inthe field. These are his colleagues and these guys would get arrested and thrown in prison and sometimes one guy could write out a dozen of his own colleagues. But theres this coldblooded is that that that the cia couldnt see it in another way but this is something that western Intelligence Agency could see, you dont sacrifice one of your levels of 12 in order to help. You make the case that that mentality stems openly from the analogyof one man. That this whole idea is first of the paranoia basically to behave that way and is that an exaggeration to say that he kgb mo and the ruthlessness of the soviets at the beginning is an extension of his own ruthlessness and paranoia . I think it adds to this feeling of paranoia and even panic on the west. Already we had no look behind the iron curtain. I was stunned by that, i had no idea that in the 1950s the cia didnt have a mold anywherenear. Not even in the fifth layer of the ministry of agriculture let alone the kremlin. Everything was in the dark. On top of that you got a figure like stalin who is essentially a paranoid sociopath and how do you ever predictwhat hes capable of doing next . It sounds kind of silly but it reminds me of fargo. The geopolitics immediately after the war, i havent seen it and its been a long time but part of the story is this gardenvariety crime where no ones supposed to get hurt but this hapless person get throwninto the middle of it and all hell breaks loose as a result. So much of whats coming next in world war ii revolved around stalin was this utterly unpredictable character. In one way it seems like the cia had some success and that the soviets as far as i can tell right behind the idea of psychological warfare. First of all, is it correctto say they were doing on the level of the americans and the second of all , tell me about the sort of story of edward lansdale. Lansdale is one of the four i saw he was operating in asia, hes was an ad executive and he came out to asia with just this at the time when a lot of common uncertainties werejust starting up in the philippines , malaysia and he just kind of had thissimilar concept that if you want to be a communist , if you want to be popular you have to give this population of government a different system and how thats really what lansdalefirst day. And the country have been ruled for a decades by a corrupt oligarchy. And great things are happening now and his idea was you need to reform the government, you need to put in somebody thats not to rob the country. As far as like actual fighting against communist insurgency, you need to get them out of their barracks and not just to fight the communist but to be seen as a source of good. Rebuild schools, build bridges and actually bring in a harbor. And lansdale, he had a huge role in defeating the communist insurgency in the 1950s. He was so successful that by 1954 when vietnam was occurring, the cia sent an up famously and the cia director said just go do the same thing youdid. So he goes out there and he actually tries and he comes close to being successful. Like he did in the soviets, the kind of handpicked the president to come in. He had a Prime Minister in vietnam and he kind of had his whisper and stuff like how to be a communist, how do the bureaucracy and unfortunately it got to be in vietnam it was this kind of small hearts and minds psions idea that got stuck away by this huge military and military drop. So in 1954 he had it up the First American military mission to south vietnam. And as they were fully in balance of power for two years. That course eventually would be followed by aryan culture. You talk about that as sort of a an intervention of what could have been an intervention in vietnam and how that might have led out of the crisis. You mentioned several other possible exit plans that could have used the coldwar , tell us about those. These moments where things could have gone much better or could have done differently and they didnt work. Ill mention two, oneof them i mentioned early on was 1944. His idea was the resolution of world war ii was supposed to be. He died three weeks before. And truman comes in and truman is just way in over his head. And he first meets stalin and he famously at his first meeting with stalin 1945, he said to stalin, hes honest. Hes smart as hell but hes honest. He was sort of had this selfassured and hes pretty much so i think thats where he sees stalin, fdr is his depth when it came was in this kind of he had this president longer, he was over a year, he didnt know how to deal with stalin. He was reacting to the soviets usurping of Eastern Europe. That in a way where truman was a deer in headlights. The other great turning point was the book on hungary and revolution. Theres this spontaneous revolution as people rose up in the, the hungarian government and military joined the revolutionaries and there was this key moment where chris jeff one night said you know what, we have to let somebody go. We cant do this to stalin momentarily so the tanks were leaving and literally november 1, 1956 chris jeff changes his mind and says the americans wont do anything to help the revolutionaries, they have done it by now. Theyre not coming. And if we let hungary go where going to, the cancer is going tospread throughout europe and were going to lose all of Eastern Europe. The really incredibly sad thing is the administration had been talking about a roadblock against communism and encouraging them to rebel in Eastern Europe and finally that was happening and all of a suddenthey said we cant do anything. And so they were crushed. All of the guys who talk about started out with such good intentions. Leading up to this idea of america as this morally right , upstanding postwar savior and then all of it went pearshaped after a while. And it ended up participating in some pretty horrible things. Theyre backing up dictators and you know, letting down legitimate movements. Did you end up judging any of the movements that you write about . No, i dont. I dont. I see it as, its very easy to do that. Its very easy years of hindsight to render judgment of people. I think also what happened to almost all of these people that i write about, its a gradual process. So say in germany the cia in germany, after the war they Start Talking with former German Military intelligence because theyre the ones who know whats happening in Eastern Europe. And then it becomes people who are members of the nazi party and you can go on and on until youre working with bona fide nazi workers but it doesnt spread out. Its a kind of gradual process. The other thing is i think for all of these people, theres stuff happening every other day. This was an exit stencil crisis and existential as in world changing and having come at this, these were all world war ii veterans. [inaudible] they felt at the end, all four of the men i write about had been in various social issues but they all said it would be wonderful if we can foster democracy but things are crashing so fast we dont have the luxuryof time. We have to find allies. So i tried to resist passing judgment on them and i think all of them were kind of pained by this moral decisions they had to make. One thing you talk about is whats going on in the home front of america, the reaction to the red scare and you know, the perpetual enemy of the cia, J Edgar Hoover and this fbi was resisting mccarthy and his witchhunts to ferret out communists. And it ended up just leaving nowhere but you do mention that at that moment was the origin of a schism inamerican society that we are still seeing now. You make the case that the rift between democrats and republicans before but where you stood on this question of for example the alter his case and the existence of the fifth column of soviet spies in america, where you stood on the question determined whether your kids or grandkids would be a liberal or conservative. Its very true. Basically, the way people, it was the first great schism in this country, the whole red scare where people if you bought into this idea that there was a vast communist conspiracy and the state department wasriddled with red spies , your politics went a certain way. And if you felt that joe mccarthy was full of it and that he was a puppet of J Edgar Hoover which history has shown that wasactually the case , then your politics went another way and politics is also inherent, youve got to be fairly close to what your parents tended to be so from that schism in the 1950s and of course it wasnt called red and blue back then we march around in time so that people of the red scare where the same people who were against the vietnam war, whose grandchildren were against the iraq war. Who remember voting democratic in the selection and the same on the other side but this was really the great schism in american politics. It started in this period and it had a direct effect on what i write about. Wisner was kind of the grand wizard, he was in charge of operations all over the world. There was a time when he was going to becomethe next cia director. There was a moment he looked like he was going to become the director, J Edgar Hoover lost another round of investigations. This relationship he had with seven years, this was a recurrent pattern in franklins life. He was investigated by the fbi, hoovers investigation for most of his entire life and its kind of an amazing story. He had all these infiltration operations and behind the lines of theiron curtain, almost all of them were staff. The kgb saw what they led on the ground so they reached a point where he started scrubbing his operations. The success rate was zero. The more operations he canceled, the more the field officers who were sponsoring his program wanted him to go forward. The more they got angry with peter and wondering why he kept these operations so his peers wereinvestigated for being accused. So along with what was happening, there were all these things looking over their shoulder being investigated as unamerican, as a deterrent but the idea is despite all that they missed the spies were certainly operating on our shores and in this way for example the most notorious one was the one that you focus on in thebook. What hoover would do, its kind of funny. [inaudible] in 1945 with this woman courier that came in and confessed and she made all these names and hoover had 250 special agents on the case. In 1945 the fbi still didnt have a dress code. You had a real dress codeback then. Suit and tie, short hair, theyre all white, all men and so 250 guys are tracking bona fide soviet spies. These guys realized they were being tailed and then they all stopped, got no convictions out of it at all so hoover would constantly be chasing the wrong people and thats a pattern you see going right through the cold war. To get back to the failed attempt at nationbuilding and other dictators, you mentioned lansdale and what happened in the philippines. Would you say there were any sort of successful american interventions in politics or nationbuilding around the world . Yes, thats a great question. I would say at the end of the day some of the countries in east asia and south korea today, that said its certainly during the years i was director there were hardcore military dictatorships and im not sure they would become democracies i believe without the pressure that america was putting on. People were rebelling against those institutions. I think youd probably find a few bad apples around the world. But what kind of works against that is all the places where they infuriated those people. Certainly a new very successfulnationbuilding job in guatemala. They had 25 years of blood he wore. They didnt do a great job in iran and were seeing the residue of that today. One last question. If you were to see a movie made of one of the core characters who would you prefer . Thats a great question. Part of this is that its a dramatic story because its such a tragedy. Michael burke is kind of comedy. Hes this wonderful, sort of james bond beforejames bond existed. When he was running things he was running this program in albania and operating out of rome and for his cover he comes off as a Film Producer and hes hanging out with these cascades during the day and meeting with his albanian coconspirators. He was just a fabulous character. Youve got tragedy, youve got drama, youve got cops. I think its such a all these four stories weve together and seeing the interactions its just so perfectly stitched together, its a fantastic book. The thought occurred to me i wish it kept going and iwish there was a prequel. Why stop there . I should have started it at a younger age. You got world war i and you got the postwar decades. Theres only like eight left. Thank you man. No problem. If you have any questions you can type those out in the comments and we can connect those to scottor julian as well. And a reminder that the book is available for sale and your support is what keeps this series going but i want to ask a question about you did mention the continuation where we are now a little bit. I was wondering if there are any pages in the playbook from that time that maybe shouldnt be in the playbook still that you think are. Do you know anything more about that, other dastardly things that were happening there that were deeply encouraged, these tactics that the cia arguably uses today. Not so much the cia but the russians. I think we saw how amazing it was watching rushes, not russia but Thesoviet Union , how much that playbook is changing and they engage in this game of disinformation and deception that americans embarked upon. I dont see it that way but one thing ill say is in talking with people in the cia, there had been talk of the Prior Administration being part of the deep state and i understand that from politics. What really based on them seeing russia as an adversary because they are not our friend and everyone ive talked to is deeply concerned as to why our president seems to be refuse to see it that way. So i kind of answered your question in another way but thats to my mind what really jumps out at me. In seeing the parallels that i was writing about. Its really frustrating. I want, i listened to the interview today and if it didnt come up ill wanted the story about the woman getting killed, i forget where you were. I was wondering if you could tell that story as well. Sure, yes. It was in el salvador in 1984. By 1984, the socalled great wars in Central America were primarily guatemala the both of those countries we had rightwing governments were being supported by theReagan Administration. And basically all of these wars were being fulfilled by rightwing people who were essentially part of the government but the Reagan Administration happened maintain the restriction of somehow these death squads in the government were two separate entities. Oh i was in the capital of el salvador in 1984 and in those days i was walking down the boulevard in downtown san salvador and i just happens to be the only person walking on the sidelines but then there was a curve about 100 feet away and the body of a young woman wasthrown out on the sidewalk. Her hands tied together in front of her, shes been shot in the head. And then he pulls back into traffic and drives away and i started walking towards her and before i got there, maybe it was 100 feet, this other than pulls up next to the body, three people jump out, one points a gun at my feet and says stay back, the other to get the body and throw it in the van andthen they drive off. Its this very apparent attempt, this death squad drops this body and this second slate of the military comesalong to collect it and this happened routinely. Theres something about the incident that struck me as utterly fantastic and i remember thinking how is it the American Government can support another government that is murdering people in broad daylight . How has the idea become so squalid that you can do Something Like this. You see this is something thats going to happen and i think for me personally that was a turning point. I remember thinking of revolutions and accused the American Government pulled off and that was so much for that afterwards. Question is for both of you is would you in that time period rather be a spy or a writer . Julian, you first. I rather be one of the many ones who stayed in the game long enough to have a lifetime source of material. Good answer. Spy for a while and then spied through the20s and 30s and then slip back. So barbara is asking i wonder if you want to be americans and how how realistic you but it was about spies living in the us. I didnt want it and so many times when i had mentioned the americans or whatever working on this book , so often i deliberately didnt. Like when i was writing lawrence of arabia, how many times have you seenthe film, ive seen it once i didnt see it again the whole time i was writing the book. But from what i understand of the series , its based on a true story that happened 15 years ago where russian story spies came into the United States and live normal lives but they were all set up with fake names and spying in different ways. I had not seen the show, i dont know what happens but theres lots of violence and betrayal and deception, that seems kind of far from the course of the russian secret service. Are there any spies like movies or tv or anything like that that you have seen, even documentaries where you feel accurately portray . Im thinking you feel like is there anything like that that you feel portrays that realistically . I think mccarthy comes closest to capturing what a spies like his life spies life is like. Its not james bond, itsnot robert ludlum. Its a lonely business. Everybody i know goes for divorce, becauseyoure living a lie, youre living the double life and its very lonely. Your friends, your lying to your friendsconstantly. Theres a british series, i think this episode, i think thats quite brilliant. I think that the spy world is so complicated and theres so many twists and quadruple twists within real life, i think its really hard to capture the whole nature of it in a single movie. Im trying to think of one ive ever seen that portrayed it but i would recommend that. This person recommends i lead three lives back in the late 50s or early50s. So do we have any other questions from the audience . Or do you have another question that you dont want to ask. I do want to second that recommendation, especially the Alec Guinness George Smiley for me. I think we picked up characters for the movie but youre right. Its sort of intentionally conspicuous like that he leads the opposite but then you contrast that with a Michael Burke who is living this filly needlife. These dining and cafcs and by morning hes plotting and thats what people think spying was. Frankly sometimes it is. And i think its especially true in this early period. Thats the big historical reasons for picking that part aside, but im fascinated by is people who are able to affect change through their own force of personality. And the fact is in the cia youve got there allowed the circumstance to see what works. A lot was not true certainly by the 1960s, it had changed quite dramatically. Its that period before things become bureaucracy and thats the period im fascinated by. You mentioned burke, i wrote about him. He was a drunk and he moved into newyork, he wanted to be a writer. And learned to become a writer and he wrote this story before. So he so down on his luck at one point he had struggled and he had this money to buy a store so you get this call out of the blue from this guy who wants to have a conversation with him. You wont identify what there with but lots of policy coordination which was the unit of covertoperation. Thats the name alone whichis an incredibly boring name. The coordination was classified. You couldnt utter the name out loud. These two guys, from washington and at one point they rebel and. [inaudible] but its a country in the Southwest Corner of greece and southwesterneurope. And so these two guys say we want you to start a revolution there and burke is thinking where do i sign. Sure, ill go. But he has to come up with a cover story that most of the refugeesfrom albania or rome , he throwing around a lot and he thinks, what kind of cover story can i come up with where, the military hangout in cafcs a lot. So he hooks up with a Film Producer and he ends up hanging out at a movie scene in rome on italian cinema and at a certain point he meets with these albanian conspirators and a certain point, im not actually producing, the one thing that suspicious but as it turns out the italian film people are just as selfabsorbed. All they do is talk about themselves. He could be a Film Producer. [inaudible] who knows if they were evenproducing anything. They were just smoking and sitting out back. So scott is, a different scott, is there anything they chose to tell you or had the statute of limitations run its course . I think this is a free event conversation. Know, with people i talked with not all of them but most ofthem are retired. And i think that with the period im talking about its a long ago that its somewhat classified, its kind of ridiculous really. Theres a sense in the cia and other Government Agencies , everything is topsecret. Everything is supposedly a matter of National Security and i think theres this kind of resistance and disgust of how they do that read one thing ill mention with the clerks, he described the scene where hes in berlin with eisenhowers secretary of state and. [inaudible] so a year later john depositing in berlin and he meets burke and he says id like to create a disturbance in east berlin and basically what hes asking for is a repeat of what had happenedin europe before. People getting machine gunned in the streets. These are separate stakes in the United States and burke says what purpose would this unfold because its going to fail. He said yes, but it would embarrass the soviets. So hes incredibly coldblooded. That story that burke had in hisbiography , when he went to the ciareview board , theres no mention of that story in the published version of this book. So this is something that happened in 1964. Basically youre protecting the reputation of the secretary of state who died 60 years ago so whats the point, how isthat National Security . Dont get me started about censorship. I think unless anyone has a quick question i want to thank you both so much for this book, happy birthday to you scott. I hope we get to see you in st. Louis or hopefully maybe in as a realworld person for your book because that would be really exciting. I know a lot of people, we have a lot of fans of these books. If the vaccine is before may fourth i will be there. It will just be you in a bubble. Thank you both so much. Congratulations on the book and for the audience, thebook is available for sale as of today. Thank you so much andthank you julian. Thanks for having me. Have a good night everyone, we will see you later. Youre watching book tv on cspan2. Every weekend with thelatest Nonfiction Books and authors. Cspan2 created by americas cabletelevision companies as a Public Service and brought to you today by your television provider. Weeknights we are featuring book tv programs as a preview of whats available every weekend on cspan2 and tonight we focus on history. First, Johns Hopkins University History professor martha jones explores the efforts by black women to win the right to vote and journalist david davis provides a history of the first Wheelchair Basketball Team comprised of world war ii veterans. A book about the federal government forcedmigration to native americans to territories west of the mississippi in the 19th century at 8 pm eastern. Enjoy book tv this week and every weekend on cspan2. Good afternoon, my name is Karen Greenberg and im the director of National Security at Fordham Law School and im delighted to be joined by the author of the new book the black bannersdeclassified. The war on terror after 9 11 area i think you probably know ali from some of the events weve done together. Hes a former special agent with the fbi and investigated highprofile terrorism cases before, during and after the 9 11 attacks. In recentyears ali has