Cooper/CIA: Fallout…
Anderson Cooper addressed Radar’s story yesterday on his blog…
So an interesting thing happened today. A Web site has published an article saying that I once worked for the CIA.
CNN received a call from the Web site yesterday informing us that they were going to publish this story. They didn’t have all their facts straight, and I’ve received some questions about it, so I decided to just write this blog post, hoping to get the facts out there.
As a college student, I had a number of summer jobs and internships, including working at the CIA. Keep in mind, we are talking about nearly 20 years ago. The Bangles “Walk Like An Egyptian” was on the radio. I was 19 years old, and like many college students was curious about a variety of careers.
Radar’s Jeff Bercovici responds to Cooper’s response…
?Looks like our report on Anderson Cooper’s secret CIA summers caught his penetratingly-blue eye. The CNN anchor responded within hours with a post on his show’s eponymous blog, titled “My summer job…nearly 20 years ago.” The gist of his reply: Aw, shucks, why would anyone be interested in li’l ol’ me
And then there’s this snarky little P.S. at the end…
Of course, for all we know, he could still be taking orders to this day.
There’s no reason to be outraged by this story because there’s nothing to it. Like AC said, it was years ago. As a college kid, he wouldn’t have had access to anything important, and it’s not related to what he’s doing now.
Centanni was suspected, as his cameraman said, because of his work in Iraq and the fact that he’s with Fox News. The terrorists thought he had something to do with Saddam’s sons deaths because he was on the scene so quickly.
Also, given how all the Fox News haters try to link FNC with the Bush Admin, it’s not surprising many terrorists would think there are formal connections between one of FNC’s reporters and the CIA.
It’s also well known that reporters have been routinely used over the years as agents directly in the field, or as informal assets, for intelligence services all around the world–especially by countries with state-run media.
Actually, FNC haters linking Fox with Bush and the GOP probably do more to put reporters in danger–at least FNC reporters overseas–than anything like the AC article.
My guess is that someone was trying to give AC some ’street cred’ by talking about his internship, rather than ‘blowing his cover’ over some alleged (albeit hyped-up) connection to the CIA.
Comment by George — September 7, 2006 @ 11:24 am
Much ado about nothing!
Comment by cella — September 7, 2006 @ 11:52 am
George, very true, but the perception that he might have some lingering connection does have the very real possibility to put him in more danger. Just like Steve and Olaf’s kidnappers took their search results showing Steve at the house where Saddam’s sons were killed to mean that he had advance knowledge of–or even that he was the informant for–the attack, they could see this article linking Coop and the CIA–and his admission of the link–in the same light.
Comment by OverHere — September 7, 2006 @ 11:57 am
OverHere: It’s just too remote. Besides, I think CNN’s coverage, and AC’s, of the war would remove all doubt that there’s any sort of “lingering connection”–perceived, implied, or manufactured out of whole-cloth–with the CIA. Lou Dobbs probably has more to worry about walking the streets out there.
Comment by George — September 7, 2006 @ 12:16 pm
Slight change of subject; there is a story on Drudge about AC becoming host of the CBS “Early Show” along with Campbell Brown. He probably would do a good job; but, if CBS seriously wants to move beyond a distant third in the mornings I don’t know if Cooper is the best choice. With all the hype for his CNN program, he only occasionally beats Greta.
To get back on topic, Radar (or whoever they are) owe Cooper an apology for this story.
Comment by Scott — September 7, 2006 @ 12:41 pm
It’s a fallout? Really?!? I must have missed smoething, somewhere. Much ado about NOTHING!
Comment by Stud — September 7, 2006 @ 1:52 pm
George, you are thinking logically, something I’m not sure such a kidnapper would do. I don’t think there is a GREAT chance of anything happening to Coop either way, but seeing an acknowledged link, should he already be captured, could possibly create bigger problems. Do I think it makes him any bigger a target than he was before? No.
Comment by OverHere — September 7, 2006 @ 2:58 pm
I disagree. George is not thinking logically. The terrorists/islamofascists don’t know how to speak English, much less the difference between CNN and FNC and CBS and NBC. They know one word: “PRESS.” And that’s what the Fox News crew had all over their van. And if you watched or read any of their interviews after they were released, their interpreter didn’t interpret very well.
Comment by erljr — September 7, 2006 @ 4:31 pm
erljr, I meant that George is thinking as a logical person who knows the full story would think, not that he’s thinking logically in the way you meant it.
Comment by OverHere — September 7, 2006 @ 5:10 pm
This is getting silly… and stop talking about me like I’m not here (and never associate the word ‘logical’ with any of my postings–I have a reputation to uphold).
In all sincerity, I would never discount the intelligence level, awareness, or capabilities of terrorists. They might be fanatics, but they’re not stupid. Remember, their forefathers advanced math and medicine, built beautiful cities in deserts, and preserved Archimedes’ writings, while Europeans were eating gruel in huts across during the dark ages.
The Islamic Fascists take advantage of our inherent societal weaknesses at every turn. They do a pretty good job of pitting us in the West against ourselves, playing factions off one another, and using the media very effectively to advance their agenda–all the while continually gaining strategic objectives. (And the West is supposed to be the most sophisticated society in history?!)
Unity and commitment (and oil money) are their advantages. Internal divisiveness is our natural achilles heel. Hopefully, it’s not the source of our downfall one day.
Comment by George — September 7, 2006 @ 9:12 pm
OverHere: point taken.
George: I think the kidnappers were looking for western journalists; all the better if they get Americans. When you break it down into liberal/conservative, they actually hate liberals much more, and here’s why: Conservatives want to kill the terrorists, and stop the radicalization of Islam. But liberals: they want gays to be married, they want abortion to be free and legal, they are seen as wanting necklines lower and skirts higher(basically more skin showing). Conservatives generally believe in a God, and liberals generally don’t. Now I’m not saying all liberals and conservatives can be catagorized this way, but that is the impression I would get if I was a Muslim visiting America. Or a Muslim watching any of our American news networks. I think they would respect conservatives for wanting to kill them because they want to kill us. But liberals would appear to be the worst infadels of all.
Comment by erljr — September 7, 2006 @ 9:36 pm
Great analyses erljr! I agree to a large extent. But the strategic equation shifts over time and circumstance. The old ‘enemy of my enemy…’ principle.
Islamists get in bed with secularists like Communists China/Korea and Tsar Putin’s Russia, along with ‘lapsed’ Moslems (Syria, Pakistan), to further their immediate goals—military tech/transfer, nukes, Security Council vetoes, etc.
While Liberal/Left Culture might be more decadent to them, in the short run, they’re quite amenable to the L/Ls gaining power—L/Ls haven’t done or proposed to do anything substantive to oppose Radical Islam. The Right is the greater tactical evil, for both L/Ls and Islamists.
And if L/Ls get power after the fall elections, Islamists know Pelosi et al (rather than advocating UN sanctions for Iran) will be more focused on having ’show trials’ on the Hill, trying to bury the GOP deeper than the Federalist and Whig Parties combined.
Islamists appear to have the perspective that this is very much a protracted conflict, and are willing to focus on knocking off one ‘Satan’ at a time—with the other ‘Satans’ more than willing to help them along the way.
Comment by George — September 7, 2006 @ 11:27 pm