>> we have osamabin laden dead, we have our troops being pulled out of iraq. if things go right which afghanistan which i think we will know pretty soon, that we are able to support a government there that can do the job, then i think we have a chance here to have an entirely different mid east in which we have a policy, in which we have a set of countries we can work with, we can follow our values and not have to deal with these unsavory governments. so there's a real opportunity there. >> charlie: pakistan's ambassador to the united states, and admiral dennis blair when we continue. funding for charlie rose was provided by the following: every time a storefront opens. or t midnight oil is burne or when someone chases a dream, not just a dollar. they are small buness owners. so if you wanna root for a real hero, support small business. shop small. additional funding provided by these funders: captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> charlie: pakistan has come under intense scrutiny since osama bin laden was killed on sunday. it's not far from a military college and a military base. questions have been raised about how bin laden could have escaped unnoticed from pakistani authorities. we have the terry advisers john brennan express those concerns. >> we have, you know, many questions about this and i know pakistanis do as well. investigation is ongoing, they're pursuing their leads in this investigation. i think they are trying to determine themselves, whether or not there were individuals within the pakistani government, military and intelligence services who were knowledgeable about bin laden's residence there and whether or not they were providing support. but at this time what we're doing is pursuing the leads and engaging the pakistanis and its too early to tell what type of support system he has. have you seen anything yet inside the pack government. >> the information is going and we're going to look at it very carefully for threat reporting, plotting might be under way, leads to other al-qaeda officis. >> charlie: pakistan has defended its role. it was written in an up he had in "the washington post" that our country has as much reason to hate al-qaeda asnyther nation. he's ambassador of the united states, i am pleased to have him back on this program. welcome. >> thank you. >> charlie: let me read from the "new york times" today which identify happen to have here. quote, and this is from, i'm sure you saw this. bin laden's presence was not known to pakistan's security agencies when he was located close to important military installations, it will be viewed as their incompetence or overconfidence. incompetence or over confidence. military analyst said in an mail message, "if they knew about his presence and did not ta action, this will raise questions about thegenda of pakistan's security agencies for faithing terrorism. ." >> one is complici whi i will object because it is not in his interest for osama bin laden ordering terrorists attacks, killing benazir bhutto, killing several pakistani military officers, actually blowing up isi officers in some towns. the second as you read is over confidence quite possibly, something we need to look at in pack to be -- pack to be and the third is the focus of pakistan's national security strategy which has always been the per perceivd threat from our eastern neighbor. they jt did not take trying to locate osama bin laden as seriously as ty should have. and we are glad that our american partners were able to piece together the information that they did, to focus on this information much of which they gotfrom us. so we would not have been able to make the right conclusions but we certainly were sharing with the americans bits and pieces of intelligence that the americans with their better intelligen and better skills were able to put together. >> charlie: you clearly knew this was in america's interest and america's passion to do, to find osama bin laden. you clearly knew that there were stories that he was in pakistan. so therefore you had to appreciate this was impoant. >> the arany people in kistan who did apeciate that. i don't know if you notice in the "new york times" story, even the people who helped the cia, the people who actually idtified from where on the whole story locating him finally and getting him was built were people from pakistan. you have to understand is that every nation has its own preoccupations and we have a military and intelligence, there's always been concern about the threat from the east. so they have a perction which is not always, which is not always the perception that you and i may v -- may have. now for me as ambassador, and i've done interviews with you before i became ambassador. eliminating terrorism has been the principal call for this generation because terrorism is a threat. it was just 9/11, it was before and after. and there are people in pakistan mitary who thought this was eir job to do it. it's obvious because if they had they would have found osama bin laden and eliminated him instead of the americans doing an operation in pakistan. >> charlie: i can imagine that the american ambassador, pakistan ambassador to the united states, you, knew the questions that you would be asked that i am asking. so you're calling back home and saying what happened, how come you didn't know. what do they say? >> i think that, first of all let me just say that i did make those phone calls and what i'm told is we just dropped the ball. and there is going to be an inquiry of sorts. we will get to the bottom of it. how did it happen. but the most important thing here right now is to reassure people in the united states, pakistan and pakistani as a nation did not look upon osama bin laden favorably. i'm getting threatening phone calls. they are sending e-mails saying instead of recognizing what pakistan has contributed, the failure is being pointed out. now let' just remember intelligence failed in thease of mass destruction in iraq. u.s. intelligence and u.s. has sat -- satellites in the air, pakistan has none. is there someone in the food chain that should have identified osama bin laden in pakistan earlier? definitely. but was it malice on theart of e state of pakistan or the government of pakistan ooze a whole or the institution or th-- >> charlie: how aboutthe leadership. >> i think the president of pakistan does and will intend to ask everyone. he will ask the leadership to o a complete inquiry and find out what happened who dropped the ball where. and was it just a dropping of the ball and not reading the right sign. >> charlie: competence. >> that's competence but there's another aspect which is, do you know what, our image of threat comes from another direction. that's what we should focus on. >> charlie: but take this example. it is widely believed that omar is in pakistan. do you believe that? >> after what happened yesterday, i have no reasono doubt that if the american intelligence community believes something, it's something that needs to be taken very seriously. >> charlie they do belie that >> y, i know. and so i would, a week ago if you'd asked me that question, i would have said we have no knowledge. today i'm going to say since the american intelligence is so convinced about osama bin laden's location and they do have the means, much better and superior means of finding things out, we have to take this intelligence more seriously and work together with the americans to locate omar, and everybody else connected not only to the 9/11 plot but also to the whole concept of the terrorism. >> charlie: part of the problem here is the absence of trust between our intelligence service and your intelligence service. they want to tell you because they believe it's real. they been corrupted that's part of the reason. >> i am working very hard and my friend is working very hard and of course we haven't been able to finish the mistrust. but it is something that we have to dea with because you know what, pakistan in the united states cannot be partners, and at the same time not trustach other. so there are hard questions that are being asked, charlie. it's not just here, there are hard questions being asked in pakistan. pakistan's own media is being very introspective and very hard asking tough questions. on o government and on our leaders and on our former leaders. people are asking why did you repeatedly say that he was absolutely convinced that osama bin laden wasn't here when he was eventually found in pakistan. >> charlie: i'm told by american officials that in meeting afte meeting they wer to either we don't know where osama bin laden is or he's not in pakistan. >> y. and with hinight, the first of the answers is a mited aner. if you don't know, you don't know. but the second part of the answer definitely saying he's not here ... in a coupl interviewsver the lea few years i've been asked questions about osama bin laden and i called saying i really do not know where he is. we do not know definitely and if he is in pakisn, it's not in our interest to keep him there or to protect him. look, having him there protected by the government or our intelligence service just could not have been good for pakistan, period. and so we couldn't have done it deliberately. all that is possible is that there are individuals within pakistan who provided a support network for osama bin laden, and mr. brnan has said that and it's a valid question. pakistan has to get worried about whyid he choose pakistan as the place to live. obviously he felt comfortable there an that is something that has we will deal with the question and find the answer. >> charlie: john brennan's point that there had to be a local support system is true. >> absolutely. i mean charlie, if you we on the lam, would not you want to be somewhere where you had a support system. absolutely. that's something we have to see. >> charlie: will pakistan give us an answer to tt. >> i hope we will work together to find that. >> charl: that is a support system and who knew about it. >>bsolutely and there are some people who have been detained. look, e americanteam just came, conducted the operation and left. the rest of the pieces are now in pakistani hands. we want that information, and we willhare that with our american partners. we understand, we understand that americans have trust issues with us. we also have trust issues, our internal service has trust issues with americans because of other reason narcotics but -- factors but it's time for everybody to sit down and talk. president obama reache out in his speech and made it very clear that he appreciated pakistani cooperation. bruce strider written now throots greater need for the united states to help and support and strengthenhe government so they can exercise -- >> charlie: but did pakistan appreciate how important it is, never more than now to prove that the isi is not complicit. >> oh, absolutely. >> charlie: with, wit-- >> absolutely. charlie taliban, with om. if they had more trust, it might not have taken so long because they couldn't, finally had a name and they finally had a person. i suspect they couldn't tell you any of this because they didn't trust you to communicate to somebody. >> they did not trust the system of our intelligence operations, and very fraly, it is something that we have to work pound. in this particular incident has serious implications, and we will work on those issues now. of course. there are people in pakistan and the pakistani foreign office has expressed that, coming without notifiation and essentially was -- >> charlie: invasion. >> absolutely. my point of view is i have publicly stated today both in pakistan and to the u.s. media, i have said yoafs ma -- osama bin laden is from mac stink. comes from another country and sets up shop in our country. it's time for pakistanis as a tion to wake up and stop making excuses. as far as the government is concerned, as fa as the president of pakistan is concerned, the prime minister pakistan is concerned, i myself, i dropped military leadership, we get the message and we understand the need of what we need to do. >> charlie: you want to go get omar, go ahead. >> i hope we have the mutual trust where we can actually do it together. >> charlie: if they don't have the mutual trust, can they go get him anyway. >> i'm not going to saywhether they ought to or not that's not for me to say. but they're already demonstrated the ability to do it without asking us and only notifying us later. so i don't think that one can actually debate reality. >> charlie: tell me this. this is one of the missing pieces in this. when did the pakistani government know this actionwas taking place? >> well, when it was happening, obviously the local government or whoever was in abbottabad knew what was happening but they didn't tell any clue what was happing. there was exosions. >> there was a helicopter in the air. >> helicopter and everything. but the officl word came when president obama spoke to president musharraf and then the head of the isi, the counterpart and then admiral mullens spoke to the head of our army. >> charlie: this is after the helicopters had lifted up from the compnd, while they were still on the ground. >> no, no, no. according to the time line that i ha understood -- >> charlie: i'm not asking you from what you know from the newspaper but from the pakistani -- they were gone, they were worried they could be shut down. when they heard, they were scrambling. >> they haven't notified earlier and there could have been some incident. but then we also have to look at the displacement of our air -- after all, we have always assumed that any area intsion into our sovereign territory will come from the east so the integration of our entire -- >> charlie: from afghanistan. >> no from india. >> charlie: india, i'm sorry. >> so we've always had that configuration. and actually, all of this, all ofhis, the fact that bin laden was found in pakistan, the fact that the americans were able to conduct this operation without us bng able to act in time. the fact that the america chose not to tell us beforehand, even though we are allies and partners and secrery clinton is going to be traveling ain soon and we have a strategic dialogue going on and have the high level contact and all of that. in the presence of all those facts, we really have to do a lot of hard thinking. now you know that had a prior life before bei ambassador, and in that i wrote extensively on the subject and i would just call -- >> charlie: military for the mosque or something. >> pakistan between mosque and military and i always made the argument that pakistan has to reconfigure what i call the strategic paradigm. and i think this has definitely become a time for us to dohat. >> charlie: reconfigure. why should it take us. >> first of all, we need to face the fact that terrorists are present in pakistan. there would be no excuses for any of them, irrespective of what their call is or what is is -- >> charlie: some of them -- >> whoever it is. >> charlie: we have -- >> absutely. those of benazir bhutto and those who killed -- look, thousands of pakistanis have been killed, more mac -- pakistanis have been killed by terrorists. yet there are still people in pack -- pakistan -- as i said, the americans certainly did not respect our sovereignty by not informing us beforehand, but at the same time pakistanis also need to worry about the fact that why is osama bin laden not a citizen of pakistan ting refuge in our country. i was crucified for the policy -- i jokingly asked some friend there's bin laden living in pakistan. we he to do a lot of hard thinking and as pakistanis we are doing it. >> charlie: is this an appropriate time for the united states to raise the issue about the pakistani military not prepared to go after the haqqani network. >> this is the time to discuss -- >> charlie: this is a issue for them because they just poor across border. >> i understand that there have been conversations since this incident with general -- on the telephone. i understa that pakistan's intelligence service and the american are already planning to exchange notes and understand what's going on here. and of course, president has been presiding over high level meetings to try and develop a coherent policy. look, if you see the pakistani media, charlie, some people there still, it's all a question of how you framehe issue. they're all wondering about how did the americans get instead of asking why is osama bin laden here. so it's a whole real orientation, which i think this is just the right time for. rethink, which includes would pakistan's own security be jeopardid more, mo by not focusing on the terrorists or by actually taking out the terrorists. now people in pakistan has always been afraid of terrorists engaging enterprises. but here's my point which many pakistanis feel. that if we allow the terrorists to continue to act within pakistan with o without any sanction. i insist there is no official sanction. osama bin laden was not there through an official sanction. heas there with some private support network. as long as their terrorists within pakistan we will not be a part of the international community, with the rights and privileges with the stature that we deserve. it's time to rethink all tha and i think the rethinking has started. >> charlie: are you glad this is the place. >> i'm relieved that osama bin laden is no more. i think that osama bin len was a person who actually caused great harm to islam, to muslims and to every country with whom he had associated in many way. he distributed to his country of birth, saudi arabia, he has caused problems for pakistan. he was definitely not a good n, he was an evilman. his departure from this world is definitely going to provide impetus to the effort to try and pursue our lives in accordance with some standards and civilization. what was your grievance, you can't go around blowing up people, innocent people just because you say you have a grievance against the world order. so is ma billion's arguments were wrong, his beliefs were wrong and his actions were wrong. >> charlie: is your government embarrassed, is that a fair way to characterize it. >> i think that our government is seriously concerned and obviously the questions that are being asked are tough. we are having to answer a lot of questions. i in the last48 hours have probably done more interviews than i would have done if i were running for office of the united states. so there's a l ofxplation that's been sought and given. but there's also an opportunity, it's an opportunity to point out that pakistan and the united states are analyze, that we are partners, that amid a of this, these also a lot of good going . this is the time to build on the good and strengthen our partnership and bring us closer as nation and governments and partners. >> charlie: here what's interesting too. the n laden family is in the custodof the pakistani -- they were the. so after the raid, you were interviewed. you were questioned. what are we finding out? >> well, i have had no sor of feedback on what have we found out, if anything, and if the questioning has started. look, some of these people age ranges from two to, you know, mid teens or ely teens. so how do you question a two year old, really. >> charlie: first you have to -- >> first you have to identify their names, figure them out, find out who they are, etcetera. i think when the questioning about substantive issues starts, we will be sharing it with the americans. >> charlie: okay. because i'm fast need by tt. what was his life like, what was he doing? what was his support system like. >> absolutely. >> charlie: who knew. >> who knew and what did they know and when did they know. in fact, god forbid there's anybody in the pakistani government at any level who had any knowledge and did not share it for whatever reason, there has to be accountability. >> charlie: so you're saying anybodthat pakistani government determines knew about this and did not -- >> do not report it to the government. well firing is not -- >> charlie: it's the beginning. >> we have to figu out what really happened. because look, 9/11, since 9/11, repeatedly, repeatedly the questionf bin laden location has come and many officials like myself have very sincerely communicated whawas passed on to us. if this was intelligence, obviously thraw intelligence that was comingn. you know how intelligence comes, the raw intelligence. the process intelligence was billion law is not in pakistan. then obviously the raw intelligence is either flawed or tainted and at needs to be dealt with. >> charlie: i think it's fair to say too, i mean everybody has the same question and so do you and you're saying we need to find out. but it's fair to say that the united states have said they have no other. >> absolutely. and it's important to point it out. >> charlie: that your government -- >> absolutely charlie. it's important to understand. neither the government of pakistan nor the me all at large were complicit and there was evidence and -- >> charlie: you can't say they were complicit, you can s the united states has no evidence they were complicit. >> throughs no evidence of any complicity. the absence of evidence at least gives us an opportunity to try and find out what really was the reason that he was there. >> charlie: so what's happened here is they cut off the head of the snake so to speak is the languag that they used. what do yothink happens to al-qaeda? >> weli mean of course al-qaeda has, you know, has a global network and i'm sure that the intelligence of america is far superior than the intelligence we have about al-qaeda. but it's a blow to them, symbolic blow to them and also sends a strong message. when colleagues are killed in iraq, that helped the americans mop up iraq because the concept of terrorism to succeed you need new recruits all the time. you need people who can come in and you know be willing to do the things that they do as terrists. you will have less inspiration when you know that this enterprise is not going to be the success that they have repeatedly cimed it will be. bin laden, or business in a lot of years, what did he bring except detail and mayhem. so i think that his elimination is important. it gives a message in the international community and the unit states has to go after people like this and the u.s. finds them. >> charlie: is it likely, do you think, that these conversations between pakistanis and american officials will lead to a more organized pakistani military on the afghan border, to stop the flow of young men to join the taliban in afghanistan. >> first of all we have to understand that al-qaeda is a global network. and we need to go after al-qaeda in many countries. and pakistan and afghanistan are just one of many places. but in case of the war in afghanistan, this also creates an opportunity for pakistan and afghanistan and the united states to work together to find the right balance of use of force and of politicalnd diplomatic approhes that will enable those people who are the foot soldiers in taliban and at different levels in the taliban to actually come into the political process in afghanistan and bring upon a reasonable end, an end in which al-qaeda does not have the power to manipulate afanistan and it does not have the power to operate and run terrorist operations. >> charlie: ambassador, it's good to have a program. >> always a pleasure talking to you, charlie. thank you. dennis blair is with me here in washington. he's a retired four-star admiral. he served as the thir director of natnal intelligence from january 2009 to may 2010. he joins me now to continue our conversation about the raid in pakistan and killing osama bin laden over the weekend. i'm very pleased to have dennis blair back on this program. welcome. >> nice to be back. >> charlie: having understood the position that you've served both as a naval officer and then at the whitehouse as direc of national intelligence. tell meow you see this, how you see the wayother played out and who should we be talking about? >> yes, i think it was really done wel on all sides. the thinking about it that was so good was it a team effort with everybody playing this position, nobody trying to run anybody else's position. the intelligence community,cia, national security agency, national geo spacial agency, they practice, practice, practice, rehearsed more than intelligence. the president gave the go ahead. i give full credit to the president for making the decision to make that raid. >> charlie: tell us y it took a lot of sort of intelligence and courage on the part of the president. and what could be, go wrong and what are the ramifications of that for someone who is planning these kind of missions and soone o has to pull the trigger. >> i think what's good about this decision, contrasted to the decision of iran where you had a president president, brilliant, very smart guy insisted on running everything from the top and staying on top of the tactical details instead of pushing the authority back down wheret belongs, people who actually had to conduct it and all. this president to his credit made the call based on his report of the preparations, the quality of intelligenc and said okay, ahead and then watched it happen. as you saw, there was a mechanical break down. one of the helicopters crashed but the people in the planning built enough slack into the system they were able to pick up the people carried on that heal carpet, unlike desert one in which helicopter shortages were undermined. so i think the president making the call, and the choices he had were like the strike, trying to get pakistan to dot. doing with special forces. i think it is absolutely the right call. looks like very careful. >> charlie: you can say it would have been an easier call for a drone or something to go in there but a more difficult decision to call for kind of raid like that. but the consequences of the raid are much higher. >> yes. you had 7 5 americans over 100 miles of pakistan territory on an operationhat had not been, has not been approved by pakistan. so that was a cnce that was being taken with it but he had good well-placed faith in the ability of the people carrying it out. the intelligence convied him it was a good call and that's a hard piece, if you can recall, the chemical factory in sudan turned out not to be a chemical factor you have the people doing the raid and then you go andou get on your hands and watch them do it. i give him credit for doing it. >> charlie: is this the forerunner when you have the military cia combination special ops troops. >> i hope so. back when i was director of national intelligence, i talked about the need for a thing called title 60. now title 10 is what military operations are authorized under title 50 is what intelligence operations are authorized under. there's a ve sharp distinction, what you can do, whether it's deniable. i think that's irrelevant where we are now with these groups like al-qaeda and ungoverned parts of the world where host governments cannot enforce law and in order. we have togo in and do actions like this. i think we need to build a team like we did, the best aects of the special forces, cia, the other intelligence agencies and go gethe job done. so i think it's a wonderful modelnd hope it continues. >> charlie: does the issue of sovereignty have any part to play here? >> i thi the issue of sovereignty does have a part to play but i think that previously in our relations, we know that pakistan is withholding some infoation with , activy working against us in other cases for their own purposes and i think it's important for the united states to say that there are certain things we just have to do. and pakistan has to realize that there are limits to how far we will go. >> charlie: do you assume they know that and you understand they have to say what they have to say publicly and they know it has to be that way. >> i think it's deeper than saying it publicly. they honestly believe and i know you've talked with pakistani representatives. there have been previous occasions where the united states seem to be cooperating with pakistan and then withdrew and left them high and dry and most notably after the first avenue began war -- afghan war ended. we know in the past we've agreed to sell them weapons and not come through. so there's a lot of distrust between the united states and pakistan. i think we need to work through that but i think it can't be all just the united states job owning and offering money of which we've offered huge apartments in recent times. i think pakistanis have to realize we should act and they should act with us. >> charlie: first of all they ha to figure out this pakistani relationship in the context of what happened. >> i think that's right. and this changes some things but not all things. if you look at it, if you're a man from mars and look at the unitedtates and pakistan, we have many of the same objectives here. we want to stable afghastan. they want to stable afghanistan that doesn't threaten tir western border. we want to put down terrorists groups that are living in the northwest frontier area that are plotting against the united states. they want those groups plotting against pakistan. we want them to have peaceful resolution of india, they want it too. so why can't we work this out since there's so much we want in common. >> charlie: but we haven't. why haven't we. >> because of this like i said distrust and the fractionated nature which pakistan share the army and elected government and the isi. so pakistan has not really pulled together to make that decision. >> charlie: when you've been on meetings when youould meet the pakistani officials in whatever capacity, high level capacity, wod they lie to you? would they just say information understanding where bin laden was? >> let me tell you one incident without naming the person i talk to because i think it's kind of instructive. ias talking with a the pakistani official about a tribal leader in pakistan calle massoud who had been resnsible for benazir bhutto's death and was also leading against the united states. i was thinking we've got to take this person out. the official i was talking to said you know i think you're right. i'm working a few months ago, i think it's time that he dies. so you have a pakistani attitude which is quite different from our attitude. they have a combination of working with some of the sworn enemies and feeling that they have to go against them. and they thread their way through that s of relationships. we have an attitude that if a group fundamentally against you, you need to telewith them. so there's that ambiguity of main there's an ambiguity of as i mentioned oftrust and that pakistanis feel if they lean too heavily in the uned states and we leave again, they'll be left holding the bag and they cant carry it out. it's a legacy of trust that can't be overcome. in my relationshipith the pakistanis, you see that fly out. you think you're talking about the same subject on the same wavelength and they go another direion. i think from their point of view we go in another direction. >> charlie: do you think the knew that bin laden was there. >> i don't think they knew he was there cause there's nothing to their benefit that i can see from not telling us that they d kno where he was. now there are leaders of the taliban that i'm convinced they know the location of and they choose not to tell us for their own purposes. >> charlie: omar for example. >> for example, or some of the other pakistani taliban leaders. osama bin laden is of new benefit to them. there are great within fits to them telling the united states where he was. so i think that at the higher levels they did not ow. i don't think so. it's interesting where he had the house. >> charlie: where it was and how close it was. >> to me th has a difference significance. the significance of it was that he was out of any sort o operational ro whin al-qaeda. i mean, he wanted to be sort of war time al-qaeda leader that i think most of his followers expected, he would have been somewhere there or close to the border, close to the training cas trying to help his people out. we had complnts even when i was dni that some rank a file in al-qaeda was thinkingthat osama was too detached. so he checked out of trying to be a leader of aqaeda. he went to alace that was safe. what could be sar than being in the midst of a militar area. but that also means you've checked out of any operational leadership role. >> charlie: no telephone and nothing. >> nothing going on. >> charlie: other than a courier. >> right. he was doing multiple cutouts. it would take him about three weeks from the time an event would happen unl a video cassette or a dvd in which he gave his spin on it would be shown on some net. >> charlie: what was the last thing you knew about bin laden before you left government. >> last thing i knew was information a couple years old. in terms of real information. >> charlie: but at that time, 2009, we were operating on the basis of0 10, we then knew there was a courier and that courier might lead us. the cia knew and if the cia knew i assume therefore you knew because you would tell the president. >> we knew he was using a series of multiple -- it's classic trade craft. you set up a set of communications so that if one person is rolled up, that person doesn't know the whole chain to be able to get back to you. so he was using these thing. unfortunaty we taught him over the yearof the way that we had of tcking him and his information through press leaks and so on. he was cagey about communication and making sure the was a trusted inner circle and trusted outer circle and he developed all of that. >> charlie: there was some information that came out of the cia detention places or later with guantanamo and that that might grifn a -- give a lead to identify a courier. were you aware of all that. >> do you know charl, what i learned is the people who know the whole story aren't talking and the people who are talking don't know the whole story. i'm not going to tell you the whole story here on national television. >> charlie: you understand the people who are curious trying to get it from the people who do know. >> i thi that what you will find is that there are a series of tantalizing information, we had a lot of them when i was in government. but then we got a good break, again to sne a light, able to put them together and lead them to a place and then once you have aerso at a place, then you can really conntrate on the intelligence to get the timing on it and take action. without having read the intelligence, i'm absolutely positive that's the wa it happened in this case too and good for the people who put all of that together. they deserve a lot of praise. they're thenes who know the whole sty and dedicated enough to not be talking. >> charlie: at some point we hope so. >> yes we hope too. >> charlie: the policy for pakistan and the united states. this is a relationship that has to take place. >> right. >> charlie: pakistan is too crucial because of everything, because of terrorism. >> yes. >> charlie: how do you rebuild it? they say they'll do this own investigation. we have questions. how do you get past the moment of disbelief. >> i think that is really one of the hardest things and the, as we said earlier, there is a continuation of talking that has be done. but i think from the american point of view i think this raid, successful raid shows we have limits to the tolerance and the patients and carrots and that the united states need to use and i hope that has an effect n the pakistanis. >> charlie: tell us what you think thmind society president is about this and why he thought it was so important. >> i don't think there's any al about thiss the guy who killed 3,000 americans, we have to hunt him down and ke him out. i think the president reflecting what his predecessor and all americans feel. >> charlie: was there a different tactic than before. >> no. >> charlie: it was the same thing. >> it's the same painstaking gathering of intelligence with al-qaeda we've been pursuing all along. >> charlie: this is a continuation of a mix not necessarily some new urge see or some new mission or something else. >> i don't think the urgency -- also there's a burn among those of us who worked in e intelligence agencies from the top right on down. we wanted this guy, we really wanted him because of what he did. and so there was, it's one of those things, you don't have to tell any of it. >> charlie: why did it take so long? >> you know, many friends have asked me that question and i can only think of things like how many americans have been missing for periods of time who wan stay missing even though police forces family and friends joy. >> charlie: this is a guy with the highest profile target and turns up that he's what, in the surbs of islamabad and he's got a big house. >> he has a lot of money and a lot of lol flowers and he's survived over the years to be cagey. it's a tough job. >> charlie: frustrating but harder than you imagine. >> i think it's harder than peop think when they say why couldn't you -- >> charlie: had he been particularly smart about evading capture. >> he was pretty smart, yes, yes. >> charlie: insightful. >> i doubt if he took out the lease in his own name. i think he used all the techniques that would be used by someone who was deeply concerned about hiown security who has a lot of money to spend, who has loyal followers who are willing to do so thing for him and he can set upn aangent of the typehat he had. i'm sure we'll learn more about this in coming months but it's not beyond my igining that he could have stayehere wowft being detected. >> charlie: his says a lot for the morale of intelligent services. gives a lot of confidence. what else does it do. >> it gets the monkey off our ck. but i think as i sa we, you know, i learned ear on, thing are never as bad or as good as they seem. this is attack cull, great tactical success, splendidly done by all concerned butust one step. al-qaeda had been reduced really to the fact of an inspiriona leader. look at the people who he actual me come cse to successful attacks recently. now -- who came back and had a planner to attack the new york subways. or who left his car full of malfunctioning explosives in timequare. i have a nigerian w had a about five days training in yemen and put a bomb in his underwear and went over to detroit and tried to detonate it. hassan who was inspired by the internet to kill 13 soldiers down in fort hood. so i think actually they will probably, those kind of it's will probably be given a boost by the martyrdom and people twisted enough to think this is a good idea. we'll be subject to th same level of talks. i think we've taken apart the ability of al-qaeda to cover a month and planning aack like they did in 2001 . but they still can do these smaller attacks. >> charlie: hat can you might imagine have bee in th treasure trove of the stuff they brought out of osama bin lad's house. >> a lot of people would like to get to the cell phone i'm sure. >> charlie: did he have a cell phone. >> the records that were kept there, now, they have been canny enough not to keep any records there but if they had any records there, that's cool because it's the stuff you pull out of headquarters. >> charlie: what's interesting is that there was a not a lot of secity. >> no, you're right. there was not at that moment security. so i wasn't quite as smart. on the other hand that's arade off too isn't it because the more security with a company. with ak-47's. >> charlie: at some point you become cplacent. at some point y believe nobody sees me soherefore i'm invisible. >> i think there's a lot to that. so i think, you know, good that he was captured in this palaceial and sharing all of the burds of his leaders is shattered and they'll see him for the sort of person that he was. >> charlie: how do you take the next step having achied this success. >> you have to take the succe and raise your strategic level. what are the opportunities we've been given recently. the arab spring. allof a sudden these autocratic regimes. remember a large part of al-qaeda's success was because they were tapping popular discontent with autocratic regimes supported by the united states for a combination of oil that came from the region and helped in the war against terrorism. that was what was providing these recruits that would go to pakistan and be trained. so arab spring now can give representative governments in places like egypt and tunisia, maybe libya and maybe yemen. now in order to improve your life and to have dignity and freedom which the protesters were calling for, you can work in yourown country. you don't have to go into al-qaeda so you have that opportunity, would have osama bin laden dead, we are pulling our troops out of iraq. if things go right in afghanistan which i think we'll know pretty soon that we are able to support a government there that can do the job, then i think we have a chance here to have an entirely different mid east in which we have a policy, in which we have a set o countries we can work with. we can follow our values and not have to deal with these unsavory governments. and so there's a real opportunity ther and i think at's what this administration should be looking to trying to take advantage of. >> charlie: what today has begun, in other words be responsible. >> and to be bolderrer. >> charlie: what's bold. >> bold is embracing the democratic reform in these countries. boldereans addressing the palestinian issue in a new way. bolder means making sure that we succeed in afghanistan. >> charlie: should we welcome the fact that the palestinians are getting together so they can speak with one voice. >> i think we should. i think that we should be working on the, working on the palestinian problems and i d't see how a few little separate enclaves like that can be a successful over a lg term. we needome newhinking there, we need some new approaches so we have to b bold. >> charlie: it's extraordinary how fast the world can change. >> isn't it wonderful. >> charlie: it's unbelievable. >> this is our stuff, we're for democracy. we're against groups that kill innocent civilians. we are not for groups that press eir own people. thpeople in tehran should be quaking, the people in syria should be quaking, the peop who want to kill innocen should be taking. we've got opportunities in the area of the world that's a devildust and the contradictions, we've been there so long heading in a new direction. i think a series of new events gives us that opportunity. >> charlie: thanks for coming. >> charlie: thank you for joining us from washington, a program note come up later this week, a conversation with actor james franko from the brown university campus. >> you like the idea of sort of contradictions. you like the idea of somehow bridging all of these arenas. well, i do for several reasons. a lot of energy is generated. you know, this was a huge response to that. whether it was good or bad it was a huge response when people perked up and you mixed up high and low. i really full that pop culture had become a major fabric in our lives. you cannot escape it. so we're way past the age of romantics where you can wander around the woods and that is your source material. our source, i grew up watching television every day. now people grow up engaging with the internet every day. and that becomes part of our lives. that is part of our make up. it's just what you're engaged with. i feel like that is part of the material that i'm going to use for the work that i do. and so in this autobiography piece that i'm talking about, i have used films, other people's films, but in a way i feel like they're just part of my life too. i am in exextricably absorbed with that stuff. other movies, other books, other television shows, internet content whatever, is now part of my life and i feel free to use that whether people consider it low in culture or not, that is what everybody knows. and part of the artists or some artists job is to tell us who we are. so i need to use that material.