>> from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." >> we begin this evening with the crisis in iraq. earlier this week, radical sunni militants of the islamic state of iraq and syria seized the cities of mosul and tikrit.

amid mass desertion from the iraqi army, it is feared they may move on baghdad. iraq's prime minister has declared a state of emergency and the cleric has called for iraqis to take up arms against the terrorists and kurdish fighters to take control of the northern city. obama addressed the crisis earlier today. >> we will not be sending the u.s. troops back into combat. i've asked my national security team to prepare a range of other options to help support iraqi security and i will be reviewing the options in the days ahead. >> joining me now is michael gordon and dexter filkins and richard haass. i am pleased to have all of them here. i begin with richard haass for a quick history lesson from how we got from the surge in iraq to american participation to where

we are now. >> we could have a chapter with the war as well. saddam hussein's hand and we dismantled many of the institutions that provide security in iraq. that is one thing. the obama administration came in and the critique will be not what it did about what it did not do. not pushing harder for the residual force remaining in iraq to train the iraqis better. and not press as hard as we could have or should have to make a genuine national government. and thirdly the iraqis have their share. mr. al-maliki has ran a sectarian, narrow-based often corrupt government. when people do not fight for it, it should tell you something. it is mostly mr. al-maliki's government and for his cronies.

>> who are these insurgents was been so successful on the ground? >> it is a pretty amazing story. isis and syria used to be, a leadership at least was al qaeda in iraq. and they essentially have moved into syria. first they moved into syria where the rebellion there started. a bunch of guys who were part of al qaeda in iraq formed a front which is one of the big, pretty crazy groups also fighting in syria. they span the border and the border between syria and iraq is pretty much gone. 300 miles of open desert. nobody is hopeful -- policing it.

they are working both sides. if you take, there was a twitter feed, isis has a twitter feed -- yesterday, they have a photograph of a chechen fighter who was opening the door on one of the american captured humvees they had taken from the iraqi army. that kind of says it all. there is a collection -- is iraq he's in serious. syrians. and there are a lot of foreigners fighting. >> who are they? >> they come from all over the world. >> who else is on the ground? >> what has enabled this whole conflict is first, maliki's sectarian policies and the war in syria. it is a black hole right in the middle of the middle east. among many things it has done is brought in an attractive foreigners from around the globe to fight there. you have probably something like 11,000 foreigners fighting in syria right now.

a lot of them are iraqi shiites. 7000 are from places like the united states, germany, from the u.k., from france. all of these people have passports and will come home one day. michael gordon joins us from washington. having said that, tell me what is at stake here? what are the consequences and significance of upcoming history? >> well, i do think the united states has clear security interest in how it turns out. it is not one of the situations where you can say it is a civil war and fight it out. >> i think that is what the president said no. >> that is what he says now. but, the iraqis have been

raising the issue of airstrikes for months. it is what the president said. the reason we have stakes and is what dexter point, this group, the isis group which spans both sides of the borders has formed a sanctuary in a part of the world and could be a platform for terrorist attacks against western interests. let's not forget if iraq was to become a collapsed state, it is a major oil producer and has picked up a lot of slack in the fall off from production from iran because of sanctions and libya because of the turmoil. you've already seen the oil markets affected by this. it is a country notwithstanding the fact, 4400 american lives to build what iraq is today. i think there is an american stake in how it turns out. >> has it become the biggest crisis in the world today? >> the iraq situation and the

syria situation have merged together. the antagonist is on both sides of the border and they have carved out and they do not recognize this border. american policy is being compartmentalized and people working syria and iraq and they are not the same people and not a common strategy. the problem itself is an endemic problem that embraces these two countries and threatens stabilities and all of the countries in the region. >> michael, where are we in terms of the united states can do maybe having a common strategy? expand on that and others. >> one of the reasons this will came about is what america has not done in syria. they left it to the opposition, the jihadist opposition. they constituted the only real

alternative to the government. one thing we might want to do is reverse the policy. the president has hinted he might be willing to do it. it has been three years where we have been thinking and not acting. one would be to provide syria help. we could live with and work with them, their target would not simply be be assad regime. isisuld primarily be this group that is so dangerous. we want to do more to help the kurds. they are the big beneficiaries of this. they gained the city which has been involved for more than a decade. you have an independent kurdistan. we want to see it secure. there is oil and political reasons. want to help them with maybe an understanding they do not expand their reach because we do not want to bring in turkey. we want to help jordan. they are struggling with

literally millions of refugees. we might want to rethink our policy toward afghanistan. we learned a little bit of the risk. what happens when there is no u.s. presence in a state where there is pressure? -- that is in distress? the president said we would get all troops out by 2016. i would say this is a good example of the risk a you might -- the risk you run if you do this and you might want to rethink it. >> this is the thing everybody has worried about happening, crossing borders. >> look, stand back and look at the map. it is something close to a sectarian war. it is running from the iranian border all the way to the mediterranean. isis carried out car bombings in beruit. this is sucking in lebanon where 20% of the population are refugees. syria has imploded. iraq is breaking up. the monarchy in jordan is getting more unstable by is a

-- by the day. the iranians are helping to mobilize the shiite militia in iraq and fight the sunnis. the saudis and turks are already in syria. president obama has tried for both terms to get out of that region and not to pay attention to it and he will have to reengage in a big way. it is all coming apart. >> michael, do you agree that the president has to get reengaged or else? >> my understanding from officials is the administration belatedly, but at this point, he has engaged to become their priority and they are focusing on it and promising some source -- some sort of policy in the upcoming days. i believe that our reengaged. the question is, we need to see what they are prepared to do. >> and what are their options in your judgment?

you are a military affairs reporter. >> just looking at it analytically, i am not advocating a position -- >> i know. been there before with michael. >> i think there is a military side and political side. on the military side, as richard points out, -- this is a policy are former ambassador to syria has advocated -- >> robert ford? >> we could arm the syrian opposition toward increasing pressure on the al qaeda linked group from the outside. -- from that side. i think we need a stepped up perspective,tary advisory effort to help the iraqi forces. an argument can be made that air power could be helpful within certain constraints. obviously, if they are bringing american arms from iraq into syria as dexter pointed out, we could stop that if we wanted to.

that sort of thing. it is a complicated thing. you have to distinguish between mixed up forces on the ground. it is not a simple proposition, but it could be an element of military strategy. i agree with richard that there has to be a political component to it which is if maliki can not be encouraged to form a more inclusive government with prominent sunnis, you are not going to have stability in iraq. slightly disagree with richard because i do not know there's a lot of time to sort this out. and i think it is imperative to have some sort of strategy to act fast because the iraqis foreign minister first raised the option of american drones last august and it's been almost a year that iraqis have been raising this. in august by the foreign minister. privately by maliki in may. maliki raised it with the vice president biden.

and now, the chickens have come home to roost and something has to be done. >> maliki came hat in hand for support. >> we gave a lot of hardware. it is often in the wrong hands. he is not going to crate a national unity. you do not change political culture overnight. that is not going to happen. if that is a condition for serious american help, it is not going to happen. i think it is moving faster on the ground in american policy. this government in iraq will survive only if he gets massive iranian help in the short run. this is where it gets into the land of the unbelievable. we are going to be essentially on the same side of iran helping the iraqi government on their side of a non-extorted -- nonexistent border. on the other side, we would be opposing iran.

>> by supporting iran and working together with iran, we are doing with our good friends the saudis fear the most, the continued influence of iran in the region. >> absolutely. i think what is going to happen in syria -- isis is the worst -- is the best thing that ever happened to bashar al-assad. he is loving it. we are not going to try to knock down assad if the strongest force in the region is isis. >> should we say it publicly? >> it is interesting for diplomacy. as crazy as this sounds, the moment may have come to have quiet meetings with russia and iran to say we have to change. we have a common priority that isys does not win out or dominate in syria. >> use it as a base against

iraq. why can't we find a way to take the heat off assad in exchange for focusing against isis. it may be a bridge too far but that is the conversation. >> they would have to hold their nose. >> exactly. damascus gets in to survive. >> we may have reached a point. >> let me ask. what is worse, doing that are -- or watching isis in power in baghdad? with access to oil? >> this is not a good answer. when this is all over, 10 years from now, and we look back on a lot of missed opportunities and i think a lot of -- if the united states would have done all of these things years ago, i do not be we would be here today. there's a good chance we would not be here today. the same could be said of when

we pulled out of iraq rather in a hurry before the political system was ready. >> we could have been better negotiators? clearly, you do not want it to happen. >> yeah. we do not engage when we should have engaged. >> michael, speak to the same point. do we have to look at syria differently now because isis is a bigger threat than anything we have? if we have to get in bed with assad, we get in bed with assad. if we have to get in bed with iran, we get in bed with iran. >> i do not share that perspective. i think that iran the foremost supporter of assad. they have been flying arms and thatraq year space our personnel they're in is unlikely to change. given the atrocities in syria, i

do not think the americans will find it, will make an accommodation with a saw that is consonant with their values. i am more supportive of the administration's declaratory policy. i am also somewhat skeptical of working with iran and iraq. what iran will do is mobilize shiites in support of the regime. there is evidence that they did that. they did before against american troops. the real danger there is that the sectarian militia is mobilizing and will turn, instead of a conflict between insurgent organization and the government of iraq, it might be what dexter covered at "the new york times," the sectarian war. it will be between the shia militia and sunni insurgents. and i think, iran intervention could lead things down that path. can the united states, and with the political and security package that is sufficiently

robust that it could dissuade the government from cooperating too extensively with iran and going down the wrong path? >> what would that package look like? >> not for me to say, but the president has made it clear -- >> i know. i mean it from an analytical point. [laughter] >> he says he is considering airstrikes and a pumped up advisory effort. they say it has to not purely be military but a political component. clearly some degree would require replenishing the stocks. it would have to be somebody helping the iraqis plan better operations. and we need to reclaim some of our -- in turn for doing any of these things or all of these things, we need to have sufficient influence with the government of iraq that the united states did what it did when they were there. which was say to malik he you , cannot appoint this guy, he is too sectarian or incompetent. this is the right guy.

where this is the best general for this formation in northern iraq. we used to have a lot of that influence. we cannot get it all back. we need to have some of it back or this project is not going to work. >> two things. in syria nobody is talking about , getting into bed with assad. what we're talking about is dropping the demand that he goes is the first thing in the diplomatic process. it seems to me that that is not possible. >> it is changing the position. assad has to go. >> one of the problems with deposition is we were never able or willing to make good on it. it is rhetorical foreign policy it was not a real foreign , policy. we have paid for that. secondly, i am not real confident that the big deal with maliki that michael is talking about would ever work. i'm not sure it would work fast enough. i am not sure he would ever keep it. my hunch is as soon as the pressure is off he will go back

to his old sectarian always. i think we better have a plan b. it is dealing for essentially iraq where the south looks very iranian. somebody on the planning staff, had better be thinking, not how we prevent the worst from happening but how we essentially work with the next stage. >> joe biden has talked about it before. >> this is not a federated iraq. this redrawing the map of the middle east. this is 100 years after. >> it is not a pretty process. >> it was not pretty 100 years ago. it will not be pretty now. >> if president obama is inclined to reengage in a big way the level of engagement michael was talking about is

essentially the level we had before the war. we were the honest broker between the sunnis and the shiites. the problem is we built ourselves into the hard drive. the system does not work without us. and then we left. if president obama is willing to reengage, if he is, iraq had in election and there is no maliki prime minister. maliki is a caretaker prime minister. there needs to be a new government and there are lots of political jobs. if we wanted to push them out, we could probably do it. >> to be replaced by? >> lots of people there, any american official there during the war would tell you. they favor much more over maliki and people less sectarian and close to the iran then maliki. >> the president said he would be reviewing options from his

team to deal with the deteriorating situation and you would not be sending u.s. troops back into combat and he did say that current situation poses a threat and could pose a threat to america and its interest as well. laying out the american interest which demand action. >> the most likely way would be the veterans of the experience decided to return home. we are sowing the seeds of the returns in europe and here, which is going to be the most frightening prospect, not only for the borders in the middle east are erased but essentially , these people deciding they have years of experience and they learned a lot and became a more radicalized and bring it home. >> as we learn more, does this make what happened in syria or

not happened more significant cast of the success all barack obama's foreign-policy? >> absolutely. obama came into all of this and said i will get us out of this place and he is doing it. he did in iraq. look what happened. >> michael, what is your assessment and syria and what did not happen in terms of history a turning point in one of the worst decisions of by the obama administration. >> the obama administration, even in the united states, cannot control all of the events in the world. i do think -- i agree with that there has been an overcorrection. president bush had two wars going at once. there was a desire to get out of it altogether and the process,

created,y vacuum was not only in iraq. i interviewed maliki and it was clear to me he would've accepted some sort of limited american presence. limited. as long as he did not have to get it approved by the iraqi parliament. wouldicipated the saudi's kick up a fuss. the white house made it a requirement that he take it to parliament and it was a political price he did not want to make. in retrospect, it was a policy decision that one could second guess as a requirement of the bush administration did not have, parliamentary approval. i do think a vacuum was created. syria became a conflict and we addressed it very late on. if you accept the analysis of the foremost expert, robert ford, he said he cannot support his own policy. those two scenarios have combined and created a very,

a much more difficult situation that would've had it with had a modest force in iraq to assist the iraqis and played a more supportive role. >> thank you, michael and thank you to all of you. i invited robert ford to come here with you guys. i hope to get him at this table very soon. you interviewed hillary clinton. what did she say about all this? >> the most interesting thing is that she thinks that the president may have learned the lessons of iraq. she favored arming opposition elements in syria and questions the decision to tie the presence of american forces in afghanistan to a fixed calendar date.

her view is a new president in afghanistan, we should have a conversation with him and quite possibly work out when forces -- terms under which american forces could stay. >> thank you. we will be back. stay with us. ♪

>> 32 nations in brazil in pursuit of soccer's biggest prize, the world cup. the matchup kicked off yesterday. the united states began its play on monday. it faces ghana. ghana eliminated america in the last two tournaments. joining me now is franklin foy. jeff agoos is a former player. and -- ae offensive defenseman in the world cup in and from connecticut, tommy 1992. smyth, he has been an espn analyst. bennett is covering the action for espn. i am pleased to have all of them here.

roger, please lay out the land for us. i'm so envious of you being there. >> it is always a wonderful place to be, charlie. it is a very surreal place. this world cup is caught between two narratives. the narrative of football coming back to a spiritual haven and the unspooling of brazilian society which started last year at the warm-ups, the confederation cup. the brazilians decided to rise up and protest about the labor conditions, the economy, health, education. craven-like a wes horror story that is waiting in the wings. these narratives conflict and how brazil does in the world cup. they are somewhat the favorite. it determine if the country and in a party or goes up in flames. >> tommy, size of the field.

-- size up the field. >> it is a very good. i gave you lots of winners and they are hard to pick. you have to look at germany and argentina and brazil. on a dubious call yesterday, they got themselves a victory. you have to look and italy. this could come down to argentina, italy. i am on record to say that they can get another world cup. it would take a lot of winning. as we saw in yesterday's game so , much will depend on what kind of refereeing you get. every referee can make a bad call or have a bad today. my big question is how the referee from japan got the game yesterday. the croatian players said when he was the call, explaining it to them in japanese. that would be like me talking to you in gaelic. you have enough problems of me talking in english. me talking in irish, it does not make any sense.

>> what did you think of the call yesterday? >> 60,000 fans and the weight of the entire country following on this one japanese referee and he made it an extremely dubious call. any human in his place, he was probably influenced by these external factors. maybe he was not the best guy to be put in the circumstances. it is part of the whole story. going to their broader context which is you have this inflamed brazilian public that roger is talking about, which is you have, as a result of the worker's party in brazil, millions of poor brazilians moved into the middle class and they have middle-class concerns about where their money is being spent and they are upset. 11 billion dollars being spent on the games. they are upset at the governing body of world soccer for imposing requirements on them and forcing them into this direction. it is a success story because you have a new middle class but

a combustible situation. as roger says it will influence , ultimately what ends up happening on the field. >> sports and politics? >> always. >> what are you looking for? you have been there, done that. what is about this world cup that has your attention? >> you have the sports and politics side. you are looking at a real party. there are a lot of teams that come together, a lot the different styles you see at one time. what you're really looking for is a beautiful game. we did not see the beautiful game from brazil yesterday. but brazil seems to build it as they go through and will be one of the favorites. >> roger, who are you looking at to provide star power and the genius that will lead to not only increasing their stardom but the fate of their team?

>> there are a couple of gentlemen that stand out. the first is the brazilian wonder kid who works in brazil. he has had a slightly dodgy season. he is made for youtube. he looks like a japanese cartoon character. in 1950, brazil lost at the world cup on home turf. the failed to win in the final game. it is compared to hiroshima. incredible pressure on his shoulders. he has to lead this team knowing he has to heal 1950. the wrong move could lead to a nation rising up in the streets. quite a lot pressure for any athlete. the other one is argentina's messi. he has been the best player over the last decade. when he pulls on the argentinian -- his coach was rob ford

before there was a rob ford. he needs to deliver. if argentina wins in the final here in rio, it might be the end of history. >> tom, you are high on italy? >> i am very high on italy. there are only so many teams. italy happens to be one of them. they always hang around. you are always looking at them. roger is right. it will factor into these players. ronaldo from portugal will factor in and another player from uruguay you should be watching. they can score and put on a real show for you if they are on their game. the italians, they always start very slowly. italy is going to draw over england and the first game. after that, italy will win the competition. >> you think argentina? >> i do. we have talked about how there is this dichotomy between the

beautiful game and football oriented toward results that depend on hardness and toughness and defense. the italians epitomize that. -- historically embody that defensive mindset. the brazilians have a couple of other brilliant players but have shifted towards result. for me argentina has quite the , most romantic style. they have these three wonderful players up front. messi, who has been described. sergio aguerra who plays at manchester city and a very strange looking fellow called de maria who is a great playmaker. i love the way they played. my heart kind of -- despite the romance of brazil aspires for them. >> your mind says one thing and your heart says another? >> exactly. >> is soccer growing in terms of

america's interest in the world cup? >> without a doubt. you have to walk down a street or walk into a bar. i was riding in the washington metro, which is not real america. i saw it stuffed with people wearing yellow jerseys. the bar across the street from our office where we went to watch the game was packed. i do not think it was uncommon especially in metropolitan , america. you look at the viewership numbers and the way espn has gotten behind the cup. and marketed the hell out of it. in markets it very brilliantly, i think. you can see it. you can see it everywhere. >> talk about the americans and their coach. >> is a very difficult group with the ghana up front. they call it the group of death. a very difficult group. we have always played well as the underdog. i think that first game against

ghana will be absolutely critical getting three points. ,it will put us in a great position. the coach is interesting. for quitewn juergen some time. he shares it is dichotomy character of both being german and america after the same time. >> what about when he said it was unrealistic for his own team to win the world cup? probably true but should a coach say it? where is it reverse psychology? >> i think he could be using reverse psychology. as americans, you never enter a tournament to lose it but to win it. i know all 23 players will be committed to winning the tournament. juergen is a motivator and it could be a tactic in a way he motivates. i know the american psyche and culture. they want to win games. >> roger, do you want to jump in? >> i have had a recurring dream. it is clint dempsey, the

american champion, walking up the steps to kiss the trophy in the air as the confetti goes off. [laughter] i have had that dream and he patted me on the knee and he said it is important to dream a big dream. no one will be more motivated to prove that he is better than his predecessors than juergen. i believe he will have his team incredibly up for that game. i have made a movie bout the team for the past 100 days as they prepared for the world cup. juergen's take is he got rid of the best player, landon donovan, player.est-known it is like a "game of thrones," ned stark's beheading at the end of season he said, what he wants one. to do is to prove this team can

go on the field unlike the 1990's where they took the field against the big team and know they lost before they stepped onto the grass. he wants his team to believe that they can take on portugal and germany. >> go ahead. >> there is a possibility. there is a saying in my country that nothing lasts forever. the third time maybe the chart. maybe ghana will go out to the united states. it is key. like roger said, you have to get something out of that game. everybody talked about how portugal would roll the united states out of the world cup and america beat them. you could end up on the last day that the german coach and the u.s. coach might need a draw. germany will probably go through. who knows? romantic things might happen. there might be a share. the united states could go through. i will tell you when one thing, they will have to play and play very, very hard. i'm surprised that he keep saying that it is unrealistic to win the cup. my coaches would never send me out and say i could not win.

even if i could not, they would lie to me. >> they said they would provide them with a system that permits them to play with competence to break american soccer. -- break america's soccer curse. >> all of these dreamers here. the promise when he came to take this job what he would change the culture of american soccer and the way we play on the field. historically, we have been very well-organized and competent but lacking some of the creativity individuality that helps a team go beyond being a mediocre team. what he has done is set up a system built around his players. he does not have extraordinarily creative players. he has created a system that is like a refined version of the old system that in the americas have played which is well structured, built around

protecting the defense. it counterattacks decently well. it could perform efficiently. >> what does the history of the world cup tells us about what it takes to win? >> a lot of luck. i think juergen put it succinctly that we have to play at our best for seven games in a row if we think we will get to the final. thinkingthink they are pass that donna game -- ghana game. it is a knockout game. this port really welcomes teams that are better than other teens. it is not about putting 11 individuals out there. a team can always be individuals and would've had a very good group and team spirit. >> is great to have you. great to have all of you. >> thank you, charlie. we will be watching. back in a moment.

>> the wooster group is an experimental theater group for almost 40 years. they have created media from their home on wooster street in new york city. it is an interpretation of an outlaw by the descendents of a religious sect called the shakers. it is called early shaker spiritual. ben brantley of the new york times calls the piece austere and profoundly moving. joining me is elizabeth lecompte who acts in the piece and kate valk who takes a break. and frances mcdormand performs in the production. >> with great pride. >> tell me about it. >> when i first heard working with liz, she was researching the shakers and i was not sure

why. we went on our first field trip. the whole company was loaded into her van and went to the shaker community. liz had this album in her possession. we started listening to it. i fell in love with the music and i read one of the books that liz had. it always stayed with us. it was in the company's collection all this time. and then we reached a point where we had finished making a very big production with the collaboration of the royal shakespeare company for the cultural olympiad. and it was a mammoth undertaking. we were doing it back in new york called "cry trojans." as a break we decided to return to a form we had done before.

an interpretation where we take the album and use the structure, liner notes, as a structure for the evening. we had been working with cry trojans and we have worked together several times in productions. she had expressed to me a desire to play a shaker. it was just like, eureka. all of the women were together. we added a longtime company member. we just started singing the songs. the fun part for me was making up the dances. we had the album and liner notes and we discovered a documentary we made at the same time the album was recorded. it opened up a whole visual world. in the documentary, there is

gestural language that the shakers were practicing called motioning where there are certain hand gestures. i knew that just from the little bit of research, the ecstatic dancing was part of their services early on. and so, it was -- and that desire that brought us to do that. and a lot of information has come to us and people have been in touch and sending us books and content with the shaker community. it is like a whole world is opening up for us. >> once it starts to ripple, it ripples wide. because they had something going on right. it was the simplicity and purity of a lifestyle that was connected to the early agricultural focus.

when they came to america, they were escaping religious persecution but they were also looking for a real place to land. and begin a utopian community. it was agriculturally-based. that kind of dictates a certain life and pace of life and community. yeah, it is connected a lot to music. appalachian. >> it was also formed by a woman and she wanted it to be celibate sect. and so in that, that alone is extremely rare that she would be able to move an entire sect from manchester, england to new york city, a celibate sect. and it was equal. the male and female were equal

in their influence. and they also were the first sect of that kind that was integrated. integrated in the midwest and philadelphia community. >> and also new york avenue lebanon. >> equality was very important to the shakers. gender and racial. here is a look from the moments of the current production. >> ♪ we will all go home with you home to worlds of glory with the pure and holy we will all go home with you home to worlds of glory where eternal interview waits pure and holy

we may never meet in time but our love in door -- endureth ♪ >> ♪ ♪ speak with mother tongue and keep her blessings ♪ >> you love it? >> i love it. >> what do you love? >> we go into the room. as often happens in the you get tocommunity, leave your outside life behind. you go into a dark space and go over to something. in this case, a specific task that takes all of our attention for that amount of time every day. it is pure pleasure. we don't have the conflict that

usually comes along in producing something a bit like this. it is so easy. it has been really easy and really enjoyable, happy, joyous process. we look forward to it. not just the four old ladies, but the young guys as well. they are ready to work and ready to sweat to the glory of the project. >> there is an unpolished look? on one hand, early shaker spirituals is stripped so bear that it does not feel entirely finished. however, that is what makes it so interesting to watch. the performance burgeons on a weird transcendence. as we perceive a cap between the --rica's puritanical was him it got a little wordy there. [laughter] >> they were not. -- they were not puritans. music andve that

dance were gifts of pure joy and they were not to be suppressed. they think of the shakers because of the celibacy that somehow there was a pretty -- a repression of joy. it could not be more different. >> i think mother ann was thinking there was no way women and men could be equal on lesson -- unless there was celibacy practice. it was a tight community and i also think, from some the research i read, she had a very important reason. a very personal reason that thinking a community could survive without sexual congress. she saw in the early 1850's that there was not a lot of joy and sexual congress for women anyway unless you are trained to be in court is on were trained to find pleasure. it was about a lot of death in

childbirth, a very low rate of infant mortality. >> all about procreation. >> yeah. it was all about the job and not the pleasure. >> she was illiterate. she was from the slums of manchester. she could neither read nor write. she became a part of the movement. >> theater is religion for you? >> it is. i should've looked up religion before i answered that. it is my vocation and my dedication. it is what i have dedicated my life to. it is my calling. and my spiritual home has become the wurster group -- booster group. i freelanced a lot more than kate has. >> a spiritual home for your theatrical experience or for your life? >> for the combination of both. most successfully. i have done a lot of commercial

theater. what kate and liz have offered me at the wooster group is what i can combine with my life. liz raised a son. they both had lives that have incorporated their work. i need a place like that. they offered me a place. they developed pieces -- we developed this over two years. i was able to, you know, drive my son to college. do a film job. do nothing but also incorporate working on a shaker project over the last couple of years. complete security knowing i had -- it was not safety. it was home. i could go and do other things and landed here. >> and for you? >> for me, i have been with the wooster group for 30 years.

>> this is your first directorial thing? >> yes. i like to think that liz had to be in the show. i am serving as director. >> a labor of love? >> you know it. i do not know -- i do not really know, you have gotten too deep for me. >>oh, come on. you are always doing that. here is what you always do. people think of you as this very creative and intellectual -- you do not want anybody to label you that way. therefore, you say something silly to me like you are getting too deep for me. [laughter] >> i think he has got me. what do you think? about a labor of love? >> i am not sure. i would say it is my being. it is. there is no difference between what i do and what i am. >> me, too. same thing.

no difference. >> i do not know if it is love. it is complete. my life is complete. >> congratulations. >> thank you. >> thank you for joining us. see you next time. ♪

>> live from pier three in san francisco, welcome to "bloomberg west," where we cover the global technology and media companies that are reshaping our world. i am emily chang. ahead this hour, tesla motors is moving ahead with its plan to produce an electric suv next year. deliveries of the car will start in 2015. new york governor andrew cuomo has signed a bill that would limit tesla to its current five retail outlets. additional locations would have to be franchised. company reported narrow margins as it was forced to spend more on marketing to attract mobile