when one bank would build a skyscraper the other bank would build a bigger skyscraper. back and forth. helped build the skyline over time. they've helped build arenas and attract sports teams. it has a lasting effect on the city, and we will see how everything goes forward. the democratic national convention is coming here, and the leader of duke energy was actually the leader who helped bring that to. we had an energy company instead of a banker sort of doing a big stick if -- a big civic event. been covering the banking industry since 2001, a big deal for these two big north carolina banks merge together. saw a lot of the deals they did over time. we were kind of in the thick of it when the financial crisis was unfolding in 2008 and 2000. we are still paying close attention to bank of america. just last week warren buffett decided to invest in the bank, and so that was a boost of confidence but sort have an

expensive investment. .. >> next on booktv, benjamin runkle presents a history of manhunts launched by the american military and intelligence agencies. mr. runkle recounts numerous campaigns including the death of osama bin laden which ended the longest manhunt in american history. this is about 45 minutes. >> okay, welcome to the tattered

coffer, and thank you very much for supporting your local independent bookstore.supp benjamin runkle is a former paratrooper and presidential speech writer with a harvardpa ph.d. and a wrons star fromhe operation -- bronze star from operation iraqi freedom. he has work inside the department of detention and the national security council and is currently a staff member on the house armed services committee. he is here tonight to discuss and sign his new book, "wanted dead or alive." a recent review in the washington times stated, in "wanted dead or alive," mr. runkle accomplishes two feats. his colorful, fast-paced accounts appeal to those who enjoy a good adventure story, but his keen insight provides ample material for further reflection.r his writing is readable without being breezy, mr. runkle's bookb deserves attention from both policymakers and the general f public.

please welcome benjamin runkle. [applause] [applause] >> thank you for that kind introduction it is great to see some old friends here tonight and i appreciate that so many other were willing to miss the broncos' season opener tonight. i promise i will be brief to catch the second half but the scheduling conflict i could not think of a more appropriate time within the day after yesterday's tragic anniversary out of curiosity how many people remember where they were third tuesday september september 11, 28 -- 2,001 that is a surprising but how many people remember where they were exactly tuesday september 182001? nobody raise their hand is also not surprising it is a

cliche and the understatement to say 9/11 is a day that will be etched in those americans who lived through it but in comparison in september 18 seems relatively inconsequential. america was still in a state of shock and also desperate to regain -- regains some small measure of marvell say but where rescue crews were still searching for life, the nyse-listed open for business and later play ball would replace the more rigid silence that whiz over the mtv baseball stadiums in washington d.c. president bush went to the pentagon to be with the secretary of defense to review the decision to activate 35,000 it reservists. the smell still lingered and the zero air from where 577

slammed into the building out during. after meeting with some survivors and a 188 people killed a spontaneous rendition of god bless america broke out the president spoke to reporters. one member ask the question, do you one bin laden dead? bush replied i want justice. there is an old poster out west that said wanted dead or alive. the president's supporters included large majority of americans it was a symbol of the resilience of unspeakable tragedy and with the critics the ranks was well with the war is dragging on with afghanistan and iraq. it will lead epitomize his simplistic cowboy diplomacy. even president bush would

express regret over his choice of words that day. and then with the fate of one man osama bin laden but the statement was not as dramatic as it seemed although documented that day to authorize operations capture or kill he was not the first u.s. president to do so. august 1998 president clinton fired tomahawk cruise missiles to kill bin laden also authorized the use of legal force if necessary. more over bin laden was up the first individual singled out with a strategic objective of a military campaign. may 3rd come 1886 more than one century before the 125 leu dollar reward of the whereabouts of bin laden

there is a joint resolution "authorizing the president to offer a reward of $25,000 for the killing or capture of geronimo. 30 years later in response to the raid across the border in march 1916, president wilson announced "inadequate force will be sent out wants with the single object to capture and put a stop to hear is forays. within hours of the invasion of panama did mr. schmidt george to be bush to clear the capture of merrell noriega was the ultimate objective. the united states has deployed military force with the objective of killing or capturing an individual, one man dead at -- one dozen times since 1885. "wanted dead or alive" is a history of the strategic man hunts. it is a reasonable question to ask but with bin laden dead why should we care of

the pursuit of geronimo? and more than 80 years ago what does that have to do with our lives today? and then to be a corrective to u.s. policy makers as colin powell noted reflected on of the hon for noriega "the president has to rally the country behind his policies. when that is more, it is tough to arouse public opinion against abstractions. but beyond that tendency to personalize conflict american sensitivity to non combat casualties and the individuals levying road states or terrorist networks have been magnified by the evolution of technology especially the growth of the international media and the

infusion of weapons of mass destruction and dual-use technology you. the same time the ability of u.s. forces to target individuals will make such operations increasingly tempting. rather than make war on populations, there's a strong motivation to kill or capture leaders to threaten our national security. given the probability of future strategic man hunts it is important to draw lessons learned why some campaign succeed or fail or why it took 13 years to get a bin laden when the average manhunt was only 18 months. based upon 125 years i come to counter intuitive conclusions. although the forces and enjoy a technology it is really decisive ever since general nelson had ideograph

stations around the drum a campaign u.s. forces have attempted to leverage their relatives advantage in technology project even in recent manhunt we have incredibly sophisticated intelligence and reconnaissance assets, a technology is only playing a peripheral role. and with that of al qaeda and iraq and their voices are never captured. the reality is fervor technology there is a counter measure that is argued "the reality and complexity guarantee there will never be the all-purpose technological panacea for finding people. my second conclusion is more troops too not guarantees success. probably my most surprising a controversial conclusion that the reason bin laden

escaped from borrow borrow was because the bush of frustration failed to deploy enough troops. if strategic shows that it is not a guarantee of success. pancho villa deployed twice as many troops and thousands pursued him over the toronto kick -- geronimo campaign which was 5,000 troops but it was the earlier smaller manhunt that was successful and only because the party of five track down the apache leader and convinced him to surrender. the hunts for noriega and also in somalia pursued the individual and the urban environment where the other failed suggesting it was the variable also to point* out the smaller advisory team, not large supply mince

instrumental for the possible escobar or shake rivera. the doubting that it would increase the chances of capturing bin laden but the cia official in charge of the afghan campaign told president bush early december that no one has enough troops to prevent any possibility of escape in a region like that. if we applied planners to operation anaconda with the exception would take between 90 and 100 troops to block each path in the valley, it would have taken between 9,000 and 1500 u.s. troops too completely cut off the 150 passes and escape routes out of 44 that was logistically impossible asian possible more over the delta force commando of the -- commander confided the afghan forces would either turned on additional

forces or just gone home levying u.s. forces operating wind. to the store operations conducted over similar terrain hopes to discredit the conventional wisdom. march 20023 months after bin laden escaped, roughly 2,000 troops were deployed to eastern afghanistan to attract several al qaeda fighters and a senior leader but as noted the. >> has many al qaeda leaders escaped as died despite the reliance on conventional forces. were the bush should lustration has been faulted for not applying an additional 833,000 forces, in the 1930's and '40's, a rebellious religious leader in waziristan and had 40,000 troops but never caught the parade.

because of the need for operational surprise smaller is often better in man hunts and goes counter to what we think for a lot of people to box them in. when general miles warned them not to approach the past sheikh -- apaches they disobeyed sang i got anywhere near drawn well with 25 soldiers but the officer from 1927 noted all large amount of troops were not necessary to overtake the bandits to convince them for device -- of by some action also with five helicopters and navy seals and the "national enquirer" allowed a measure of operational surprise that was critical to the raid that killed a son of bin laden. the third conclusion is although terrain is a factor

in whether a tank battle, no single type of terrain predicts success or failure. they track down jungles jungles, mountains, urban environments and have failed as well. with regard to bin laden all of that terrain complicated the pursuit not as decisive in then it was relatively stationary with intelligence problems, not terrain problems. more important in this physical terrain is refers to the attitudes of the local population especially where determines the availability of indigenous forces that troops can rely and which the target can escape intelligence provided

by local sources was then the network almost always proved more important than satellite intercepts or photos. is a day target perceived as a robin hood figure? or the pashtun from the protection from the local operation if it makes them detested in this area as sin noriega, of pablo escobar and this last finding it is deeply unsatisfying you don't get to blame someone that some are easier to catch lo that is true but it suggests some variables are

critical to operational success are not under the control of the military commanders but the nine states has been much more successful than is commonly realized and it is a great state testament and i had the idea back in 2003 did us are writing until 2008 but at the time they were still out at larger black hawk down was just down on dvd and five of 10 manhunt seemed haphazard endeavors. despite the record of success it is sound i wanted to write something to say this is important but i found capture or kill the individual correlates with

strategic success because those that target to go to ground all i can be strategically successful even of pancho villa never again threaten the border despite being on the loose for six years but also create space for other actors that the strategic threat can continue the nexus of cocaine trafficking in the capture of all solidary is this turning point* that was held for at the time but ultimately the campaign strategic outcome hinges is the man had disrupts the support network that was the key to strategic success over the hunts of geronimo and part of the apaches singh it the

ability and counter insurgency strategy and also noriega before they elicited his surrender out of the vatican embassy. as i noted, beyond the policy implications the heart is the adventure story behind the man high. these campaigns were like a tom clancy thriller but drama, a tragedy encourage and then to apprehend that. i would like to read three excerpts from the book and three episodes to demonstrate. my favorite bad guy as it were. >> historical revisionism has been kind to many individuals with the strategic manhunt. geronimo and pancho villa how sandino and che are the

icons of the left throughout the world even though some of the monegan had a significant portion of the islamic world despite the large amount of ms. slums attack despite david battling goliath it is highly unlikely history will be so kind to general -- general noriega. with other antagonistic having to share physical courage or a cause the matter how misguided is difficult to have any redeemable trades. an alcoholic with a reputation for sexual violence noriega was stock with a pineapple in reference to his acne scar face. yelas it hatred and almost everyone he encountered former secretary of state recall the dictator a remarkably ugly man whose true nature has shown through.

colin powell not normally given to hyperbole remembers he was an appealing man with a pockmarked face the i's and arrogant swagger i immediately had the growing sense of was in the presence of people. war as james baker put it, noriega was a case of what we call bad chile. he enjoyed a productive relationship with u.s. intelligence agencies and served as an important conduit but yet to even as noriega helped the contras he shipped arms to marxist rebels and also known to be passing classified information to a cuba and libya and by 1987 noriega was dealing with our right terrorist organizations such as the plo and colombian groups and despite the

pattern, the great quote to the secretary of state george sold schulz you cannot find him you can only lend him. but prior to the invasion noriega was constantly tracked by the members of the delta force aided by the national security council but the surveillance and intelligence and then with telephone to vacations directed a network of informants tracing the dictators movements. the last known location on december 19 when the u.s. invaded, shortly thereafter leading toward panama city part of the convoy turned off all the other half headed toward the panamanian pentagon.

although the joint special operations command was confident noriega had not returned to the headquarters they could not say where he was and each share u.s. troops raided noriega -- noriega and a department sell this was a great puzzle we have every intelligence asset and why could we not find those under circumstances? and then headed to the panamanian defense forces club he dismissed the possibility insisting of true globalization was designed to scare them and proceeded to get drunk. eventually another form of entertainment was needed and resurgent was dispatched to pick up a prostitute who was at a rest area and the

italians was interrupted at 1:00 a.m. with fed gunship can and poking at the assault ship. noriega bodyguard went outside to see the sky filled with 750 parachutes descending and he reached inside to collect the boss and the entourage piled into that hatchbacks. the reason why u.s. intelligence could not find him is because he was hiding from his wife that night to get a prostitute. the avenues of this gave for slam shut the various special operations forces. that act of hunting for noriega was given to the delta force. delta force could go from tip to take off in 30 minutes. launching 42 raids on every

safe house but it for this skill they could never catch up with the elusive dictator. often they thought they were getting close u.s. forces found lit cigarettes and warm coffee cups and other locations they found soldiers but no matter how rapidly they kick down the doors there were be told he had either just left or was at another location and. as the cycle repeated itself-- later troops made us series of bizarre discoveries in finding pictures of hitler and extensive pornography collection a which his diary and 50 kilograms of white powder initially believed to be cocaine but later was

identified as or to make tamales. and at his home delta uncovered hard-core pornography and to religious alters one of which was decorated with him then it internal organs but still no sign of noriega. you could not make this of then but yet when they have muammar qaddafi palace, and not quite in this weird but he has his own large collection of very weird things and that is one of the things that drew me to the project. nonfiction but you cannot make up. also one of my disappointments, whereas a lot of the targets of the intervention has been much and a lot of the military hero's have slipped into obscurity one was handed a

lot in who was an 18 year-old when fort sumter was fired upon and immediately dropped out and enlisted in the army and fought 20 battles and eventually rose from the rank of private to colonel over the course of the war. in may 1886 some he assembled the company of what they described as the 100 best athletes in the calgary and he was 65 venturers 230 pounds only about average college linebacker but back then he is described as "a gigantic beowulf of the man" in the 1880s i think i would have been a linebacker. [laughter] over the next two months they march nearly 1400 miles in the 120-degree heat in the mountainous pursuing

geronimo and although they never caught him it help to convince geronimo to surrender 1886. consequently, because it was his company that escorted geronimo's band across the border he became famous as the man who captured geronimo but fast four did 13 years the united states army was bogged down fighting the counter insurgency in the philippines. like the iraq war capturing the leader was seen as the key to victory by u.s. forces were led by the cautious group that was just like general mcclellan but without the good looks. meaning that he did not do anything and not very good looking but in in the early 18 teenine the rumor buzzed through the corridors even

the most battle hardened veteran there we're confirmed when a 655 binge officer with the mustache and hair over his handsome face stepped off the transport. henry law and had arrived in the philippines. as one historian noted, he was enjoying tremendous popularity with his fellow officers politicians and the press and in addition to his reputation as the indian fighter and national hero for leading the attack the previous year. looks and ability he was a model officer known as the fighting calvary man unlike the otis disliked red tape where he jealously guarded his resources lawton was vigorous and energetic thought to be the ideal commander for the war and the near times declared "

that puffed up crack brain egoist had two realize they were no match for the man who captured geronimo and even douglas macarthur helped otis would be recalled and replaced all the lawton carried a dark secret. he had a drinking problem and that produced a violent fits of temper when intoxicated although he was usually able to control consumption he felon to head the drinking and cuba and relieved of duty. before leaving the philippines he was summoned to the white house to meet face-to-face with president mckinley and lawton promised he would refrain from drinking and deployed with two battalions. lawton honored his promise and set up to live up to that invitation he had

earned. although never leaving when a lot lawton lead without regard for his personal safety cohmad he looked like a hero and talked and acted like a hero walking erect even as he paced back and forth wearing a white pith helmet before each battle. the reporters that accompany him see that he instill this down tremendous energy into the men whose preservation endangered him. may 17 discounts captured the relocated leader but yet when he sought permission to continue, otis refused terminating lawton expedition and he stormed into the office and if all this would give him to regimens to allow him to

provision him to suit himself to turn them loose and staked his reputation and position in the united states army and 60 days he would end the war to deliver zero diss ag and although dead or alive in then he laughed. lawton left the office even more livid then when he arrived. that was caught store by the monsoon and in the fall otis launched another offense and they were always one step behind him. filipinos held off 900 infantrymen known as the battle to hold the mayor can as long enough to allow him to slip into the bonds lawton requested permission to cross the mountains into the valley before aguanaldo got settled and against otis

orders and then there was a reduced version of the plan. he met with surprising success when they surrendered to him with 1100 men and 800 raffle -- rifles. zero diss recalled lawton and took charge of the campaign to mop up the residual resistance around the capital. of less than glorious duty for a high-ranking general. 33 lead us small group to san mateo and the driving rain u.s. forces encountered an insurgent force awaiting them near the river. lawton pays back and forth behind the firing lines and the filipino general searching for a clear reference point* to direct

fire directed the death shooters to concentrate on the dark figure wearing a helmet and the yellow slicker and then fades was hit lawton was carried to shelter despite his promise to retire he returned to the firing line then made an awkward motion in front of his face. wide is the matter general? i am shot. where? through the longs. with blood pouring through his mouth and within minutes the most beloved officer in the philippines or in the united states army was dead his head resting upon the leg of his staff officer. an irony he was struck down by soldiers led by geronimo. and then finally, strategic man hunts, one other thing that i've learned that strategic man hunts are

significant because they witness some of the most important and technical innovations in international military history and given the proximity to colorado springs is to be noted that expedition marked the first american deployment of the military aircraft it was the first use of dive bombing and the decade prior from a first spanish civil war and the first stealth bomber residues and also looking at the mechanized infantry assault which i will recount. in the first two months of the punitive expedition and forces missed capturing pancho villa who were shot by his own men and evacuated from a the city to the north just as troops for coming in from the south but by me increasing tensions between u.s. forces and mexican

their reinforces led president wilson to halt. where but the punitive expedition enjoyed some success. may 14 and commanded an expedition to buy corn from a nearby hacienda. already renowned as the best pistol shots when he learned his regiment would not be going to mexico patton literally begged him to take him along the matter how menial. that noticed a group of 5460 nr to mexicans one recognize a number of old friends among them and all but villa was still hiding the commander was believed to be hiding in the vicinity and has said corporal, private

and another civilian interpreter went where pat in interrogated his uncle and arouses suspicions and on a hunch ordered his convoy to drive 6 miles to the ranch where his family was rumored to be residing. as patents cars sped toward the house he saw three old man and employee scanning a cow. one man ran into the house but quickly resumed and patten's car halted at the corner and two other cars took up positions along the southwest record he jumped out carrying a rifle and pistol, a two soldiers made a similar negative while the private cover the windows encased in a mexicans jumped out. he moved toward the gate when he was 15 yards, three men on horseback burst out of the house.

patton with the pistol drawn they went into they saw soldiers coming from this out the mexicans turned and rode straight at patton. one bullet through gravel me i fired back five times for range of 20 yards. to hit their targets one entering the horse's belly the other broke the writers' rights to harbor could they began to fire from the southeast corner and he ducked behind a corner and covered them and consequently he did not did not receive a shot but when patton came around the corner was nearly stampeded by a horseman and heaved broke the horse's head bringing it crashing down when the mexican and disentangle himself patton cut him down at a range of 10 yards. the third rider made it 100 yards before fired back.

two of the three mexicans were now dead. the first was could re-enter the patio spotted driving from a gate to the nearby fields the man held up his left hand but then raise the pistol and shot common this and then a he blew out his brains. a search of the hacienda returned of no more only the family. nobody will identify the bodies of a corpse were strapped across like hunting trophies he's some 40 men on and it course back and outnumbered and was the first man that pat and shot was identified as a bodyguard.

trying to keep the saddle to referred to him as the bandit promoted to first lieutenant. it quickly appears and they were thrilled to have been attracted beyond hero. this was the beginning of launching of patent. and then with a rapidly of the blood red sunset and eulogy ashes to ashes and dust to dust if he won't barrier then uncle sam must. that struck me on every case and avid student of history cannot quite decide if it would be a policy book to read like a novel or a cool book with some policy lessons to it and so for the feedback is that it has

achieved both and with better look forward too any questions you may have. >> do you know, why? >> >> he was very sickly, he could barely stand up to the rigors of all the riding they had to dote but accepted the mission of going, they could never catch geronimo, to go and try to -- because geronimo trusted him, to go and try and convince him to surrender, and he was successfuo in this. afterwards general miles, who was outwardly, who was incredibly, shall we say, ambitious to be generous to him, his uncle, william tecumseh

sherman said that we could never satisfy your am bigs unless we made you general of the armies and president of the united states at the same time. army at. teddy roosevelt when he was chief of staff late 1890's he called him a striding peacock. basically with those he cut date one out of the credit as to who captured date would he lived day fairly tragic life. his health never recovered from the expedition's but the miles new when he transferred miles was effusive in his praise for him so it was a very mixed bag. date would does not get enough credit. although in the movie, which is not historically accurate, the gate would character receive full

credit and lawton does not even appear as a character. that is an excellent point*. i discussed that very briefly at the end of the geronimo chapter. >> the fbi and the united states marshal service are in the business of tracking wanted criminal fugitives. do have a message how they could be more effected if? >> i look at said different phenomenon to make a conscious decision at the beginning and look at the stories but it looking at a very hostile environment, at the moment i think it is

comparing apples and oranges >> dodi do concentrate on a manhunt where instead of noriega and add up past relationship weather hasn't been one? >> with a lot of the manhunt that was surprised how many we did have and cooperated with aguanaldo for the first four months after the battle of manila, he came aboard in me admiral dewey gave him arms then told him to continue the revolution and we worked with them at in the siege of manila and permitted u.s. troops to come aboard and allowed the u.s. troops to land on the

island than the came from very well thought of to a bad guy. the same as possible bella because -- pancho villa because of the policies of the mexican revolution, he had a lot of supporters of the wilson cabinet but did things leading up to that columbus raid massacring 16 american miners january 1960 that caused the opinion of him to change. simile with noriega so there is a history but there was a relationships. i hate to say the united states can be fickle but i would like to think we are better now o 10 more steadfast now but in some cases in the international

politics to vocationally make accommodations with the fall less than perfectly clean hands and circumstances can change that past transgrestransgres sions come to act some point* but that is an excellent point* that have been surprising we've frequently in the history of strategic man hunts. >> is there as rich a history of of their country's going after the individual's three have lessons to learn or to teach? >> strategic man hunts, as i mentioned are almost as old as civilized warfare. alexander had the persian empire but did not considered a victory complete until he caught the emperor dar es of a way to the eastern border similarly

the romans spent 20 years after the second four chasing hannibal because they feared hannibal so much. even in the 16 40's the militia chased someone with about 20 letters i cannot pronounce his name but a tribal chieftain from southern virginia that they feared and spent two years chasing him. the british of the more obvious examples chased a man in somalia i cannot pronounce his name either so with british colonial rule there is a lot of examples of such man hunts. it was the american centric book but would be a very interesting comparison to see if they have other

experiences. i can take one more question >> adding a strategic perspective, i do think there grounded? may have been criticized for writing a clancy novel based on true stuff? >> it is an interesting question. my doctorate is on political science. you can take the boy out of academia but not taken out of the boy. that is my career in policy last 15 years and maybe difficult for me to think of things with pure entertainment fashion without what is the policy lesson to be learned but the broader point*, i don't think that policy writing needs to be dried lowered dole when writing about history. it is very interesting and episodes such as this that i

think there is value to show the continuity between those who go into 200 miles into mexico or 100 miles behind enemy lines with the s.e.a.l. team >> this e event was hosted by tattered cover bookstore in denver. for more information visit tatteredcover.com. >> this month in partnership with our local cable affiliate time warner cable, we explore charlotte's history and literary culture. next, we talk to david goldfield, the author of "america aflame: how the civil

war created a nation." >> david goldfield, in your book, "america aflame," you say the civil war is america's greatest failure. why is that? >> it was a failure because we went to war. it was a particularly great political failure because the political process could not accommodate differing view points on the major issues of the day. the major issues of the day were, of course, primarily slavery, particularly slavery in the western territories and, secondly, immigration. believe it or not, americans were fighting over immigration in the 1850s just as much as we're fighting over immigration now. and the fight over immigration concerned the influx of about one million irish catholics into america between 1847 and 1857. now, most historians when they talk about the coming of the civil war, talk about the issue

of slavery. but, in fact, what i found in my book, "america aflame," these issues are linked. that is anti-catholic, particularly anti-irish catholic immigration and anti-slavery. because both of these issues came together in a new political party in the 1850s called the republican party. now, the republican party initially was founded as an anti-slavery party. one of the important be things that -- important things that i like to tell my students is don't confuse anti-slavery with pro-black because the republican party advertised itself as the white man's party. that is, they wanted to ban slavery from the territories primarily because they did not want black slaves competing with white labor. because if that were the case, then, of course, free labor, slave labor would push out the

working man because you have to pay wages to the working man. you don't have to pay wages to the slave. so the republican party advertised itself as for the white working man. and it was very popular in the midwest and in the cities of the northeast as well. now, the second strain in the republican party was the anti-catholic movement. in the early 1850s, a new political party appeared called the know-nothing party, and this was in response to the irish immigration. the irish imgreated to -- immigrated to america even beginning before the american revolution, but it accelerated as british policy tended to impoverish and otherwise reduce the irish to peasants. and the irish seeing absolutely no future for themselves in

ireland, many were dying from famine, in fact, many towns in ireland were just decimated by the famine, they decided to emigrate to america, the land of the free. when they got to america, unfortunately, they found there was a great deal of prejudice against them. why? because they were roman catholic. well, what does catholicism have to do with the prejudice in america? well, it has, according to some people, irish catholics owed their allegiance to the pope in rome, not to the president of the united states. and secondly, in a democracy individual voters have to have the freedom to make up their own minds on political issues. and the feeling was that irish catholics would look to their feast priests, to their archbishops and, ultimately, to the pope in rome for their marching orders on what to say and what to believe and who to vote for. and this was considered un-american. of course, it was totally false,

but nebraska the less -- nevertheless, sometimes americans believe things regardless of facts. and that was the case. and this new party, the know-nothing party, was dedicated to limiting immigration, particularly from ireland, and secondly, to limiting the civil rights of immigrants once they were in the united states. they were called the know-nothing party because it was a secret organization, and be you had approached one of the know-nothings, they would have said, oh, i don't know anything about that, that political party. so, hence, they were called the know-nothings. the formal name was the american party. the american party was fairly successful in the early 1850s, but ultimately they thought that they would be much stronger if they combine with the that new party that i mentioned earlier, the republican party. and so these two strains, the

anti-catholic/anti-immigrant strain and the anti-slavery strain came together in the republican party. many people in the republican party were strong evangelical protestants, and they opposed irish-catholic immigration, and they looked upon slavery as a mortal sin and slave holders, in fact, as sinners. and what this did is it tended to polarize the political process because your enemy or your opponent was no longer merely misguided or misinformed on the issues, your enemy was evil. and if you believe that america was a godless land and that the western territories were the province of the lord extending not only democracy, but protestant christianity across the land and ultimately across the globe, then these two evils had to be vanquished. in fact, in 1858 when abraham lincoln who, by the way, was not a religious bigot, but he certainly was anti-slavery, when

abraham lincoln ran for the u.s. senate in illinois against steven a. douglas, the democrat n1858 and precipitated those great lincoln/douglas debates, the republican party slogan that year, the slogan under which abraham lincoln ran his campaign was vanquish the twin despotisms, catholicism and slavery. and those two strains of the republican party were essential for it success. in fact, in be 1860 -- in 1860 when abraham lincoln went to the white house and was elected president, the 16th president of the united states, many of his votes came from protestant working men in the cities who could care less about the slavery issue, but they knew the republican party as the evangelical christian party stood for the rights of

protestants over the rights of roman catholics and wanted to restrict the rights of roman catholics. the problem was, of course, by injecting evangelical religion into the political process, it polarized the political process. our system of government governs best from the center. our system of government governs best from moderation. if you look at all of the great legislation that we had in our history, the new deal legislation, the civil rights legislation, they have been the result of compromise. they have been the result of moderation. moderation was much less possible in an environment where your opponent was the devil, and you were the saint. religion, actually, was brought into politics before the civil war. in fact, it was building and be climaxed with the civil war as early as the 1830s. the evangelical movement known

as the second great awakening started to intrude in the political process. i opened my book "america aflame" with the disappearance of a nun. now, viewers may ask, what in the world does that have to do with the civil war? well, the outcome of that disappearance was the burning to the ground of a con event in charleston, massachusetts, in 1834. and fomenting that hatred and fomenting that arson was the father of harriet beecher stowe, the author of "uncle tom's cabin," who said that roman catholics were of the devil, that they had no place in america, they were a foreign power, and they should be dealt with as such. and, of course, that led to the burning of the convent. but it was an early indication of the power and the bigotry of northern evangelicals. and so we have these great books

written on the civil war where the north becomes the republic of virtue and the south becomes the evil empire. and what my book does, my book changes that equation and says they were both at fault, they were both wrong in precipitating the bloodiest war in american history. because what happened during the civil war? it was 620,000 men died, untold losses in treasure and property, and the men who came home were often maimed in mind and body, not to mention the millions of people at home who mourned the loss of the people who lost their lives. now, historians say, well, wait a minute, wait a minute, the war ended slavery. four million slaves were liberated. the war saved the union. i want readers of my book to ask two questions after they read my book. one, was, first, couldis