Ron Paul and Glenn Beck on the CIA and Foreign Policy

Show: Glenn Beck Program (Radio)
Date: 01/25/2010


Glenn Beck: Now, we always have Ron Paul on when we talk about the economy, because Ron and I are … well, he’ll probably disagree with and so would many of his supporters … but I think we’re pretty close to lockstep on many of the things that he believes in the economy. The Fed is absolutely just evil. We have gone away from the gold standard, we’re spending money like crazy people, and we’re destroying our nation. We’re just destroying it.

I also think of Ron Paul and I as in the same territory when it comes to progressives and the idea of the big government, and he is probably closer to our founding fathers than probably anybody else out there right now, as far as the understanding of limited government goes.

However, sometimes we go off the track and that’s why I wanted to talk to him today. Because I’d like him to explain it to me. Ron Paul, welcome to the program, sir. How are you doing?

Ron Paul: Good, good to be with you, Glenn.

Glenn Beck: Would you say that what I just said about our viewpoints is accurate or not?

Ron Paul: I think that’s pretty good. It seems like you’ve nudged your way a little bit closer to what I’ve been, so maybe you’ll come over these things we disagree on.

Glenn Beck: Ron, I am not a guy who’s afraid to admit when I am wrong. I am not a guy to … I think anybody who stops growing is dead. And I’ve come a long way towards you, you know, I didn’t really understand the progressive movement up until I’d say two years ago I really started to get a handle on it. And I really started to look at the history of our country, and coupled that with the context of the founders. And I’ve come a long way towards your way of thinking.

Ron Paul: Glenn, I might say that you’re one of the few that will interview me. A lot of other times they don’t interview me. They ask me a question, and if they don’t like the answer then they start shouting. But you, over these last couple of years, have been willing to interview me, and I really appreciate that.

Glenn Beck: Well, that’s not a problem. And I want to make sure that this doesn’t sound like a giant love fest between us, because I do disagree with you. But I want to see if you can make sense to me on this. You said, in fact, can we play the audio? Do you have that? Here’s the audio clip.

Ron Paul: They’re almost like they live in a different world. The military is down, the morale is down, the money isn’t there, but they’re looking for more wars to fight. It makes no sense whatsoever.

Glenn Beck: Okay, stop it for a second. I think you’re right on this. You’re saying like the military is looking for more wars to fight. The administration, both administrations, I think, you’re saying, are saying, “Let’s go for more wars”. Morale is down. It just doesn’t make sense. You’re right so far. Okay.

Ron Paul: Because it’s not the military anymore, there has been a coup. Have you hard? A CIA coup. The CIA runs everything.

Glenn Beck: Okay, stop. Help me out here, Ron. This is where kind of go off the tract.

Ron Paul: Okay, I wasn’t able to quite hear that guy talk.

Glenn Beck: That was you. I’m sorry.

Ron Paul: Yea, but I didn’t hear the last sentence.

Glenn Beck: The last sentence was you saying, “But it’s not even the military anymore, there’s been a coup. The CIA has taken our military in a coup.”

Ron Paul: Okay, not totally and literally. But symbolically this has happened and it’s very annoying to me because, you know, not too long ago we had seven CIA people were killed over in Afghanistan. It was on a military base, and there was no military on there, it was only the CIA. And the CIA had charge of launching the drones, and the drones were going into another country called Pakistan. And some innocent people were killed over there. So you can’t separate the CIA from our foreign policy. So, the people over there knew exactly what’s going on. They didn’t go after soldiers that particular day, they wanted to make the point that they were in war against the CIA. And I think I disagree with that, I think the military should fight our wars, and they should only be when they’re declared.

Glenn Beck: Okay, I would agree with you on both of those statements. However, is it possible that the CIA is now fighting our wars because we can’t look into anything because all the weasels in Congress are questioning our soldiers on everything? We’ve forgotten that you fight a war by killing people faster than they kill you.

Ron Paul: I know, but if don’t endorse this war then you can’t endorse that whole principle and I don’t endorse the war because we don’t know who the enemy is. And we haven’t declared the war, and it’s a movement we’re talking about, not a country. But we’re bombing countries. So it makes no sense. If the military has trouble handling it, hardly should we go to some organization that has really no oversight at all. So I just think that this compounds our problem and then if you really look into the CIA and all their activities it becomes even more complex because they, at times, when they want to pursue certain clandestine activities, they might not have enough funding. The $75 billion that all our agencies get isn’t enough. So they make their own money. They can make their money in the drug trade, they can run businesses. I suspect that the Federal Reserve may well be involved when the CIA is in certain countries when it’s time for reelections or pull off assassinations. There is no reason under the way the Fed works that they can’t loan money to other central banks and other governments and you already agree with me that we shouldn’t have that type of secrecy. So all of a sudden it comes together because the CIA is doing these things that it shouldn’t be doing.

Glenn Beck: Okay. So, I agree with you, I think, in premise. However, you got to solve a couple of things for me. 1) Would you agree that we do need an organization that gathers intelligence to find out what our enemies around the world are doing? And we do need some things kept secret, not from our Congress, but kept secret from the front page of the New York Times.

Ron Paul: Yes, I agree with that. You know, the CIA is not exactly a very old organization. The founders didn’t sit around a table and say, “How are we going to create this intelligence agency that can get involved in these internal affairs secretly and do these things.” They didn’t do that. It came out of World War II, we didn’t have it before World War II. But up until that time we did recognize that you ..

Glenn Beck: We had spies. George Washington had spies.

Ron Paul: Pardon me.

Glenn Beck: George Washington had spies.

Ron Paul: Yeah, they were allowed to get intelligence, yes. And I recognize that as being proper. But today, the intelligence agencies are so bloated, there are 16 of them. They spend $75 billion, and then when they get information, they get a hot lead like a father coming in and warning them, they don’t even know what to do with it. That’s one my biggest beefs. They don’t really protect us, they don’t even act on it. And then what about the FBI making all these reports that these guys are learning how to fly airplanes but not to land them? And it was totally ignored. So it’s the ineptness and the failure for whatever reason that bothers me to no end. But I agree with you. We should have it, but so much information is readily available and they should get it and we will always have people coming to us and giving us information. So I separate the two; intelligence gathering from this intrigue of overthrowing governments.

Glenn Beck: Alright. And I agree with you. I think what we’ve done in South America over the last hundred years through the progressive movement has been a nightmare. Alright, so let me go one more step with you. Where I always go off the rails with you, and really so many libertarians […], I agreed with the premise and I didn’t fully agree with this even a matter of 3 years ago or 4 years ago. But I agree now fully because I’ve seen the error of our ways and where it has led to. The idea that we should be more like Switzerland, that’s what our founders wanted. Now, I think we differ on this a little bit. I think we should pound the bats out of anybody. You come over to our shores, you do something to us, we crush you. Then we leave. We don’t rebuild you, we crush you. And then we leave.

Ron Paul: The big question there is, who did the attacking and who are you going to crush?

Glenn Beck: I understand that, I’m not talking about anything specific. I’m talking about if somebody comes after us, they hit us, we have evidence, we crush them, and then we leave.

Ron Paul: If a missile left Cuba and bombed New York City, we both would understand, yes, you crush Cuba for doing that.

Glenn Beck: And if it was just a cell in Cuba, and we have evidence that Cuba was involved and they were hiding behind these people and having them do the dirty work, then still Cuba again.

Ron Paul: The big danger today is that if you apply that to, say, the underwear bomber, would that justify going in and start bombing Yemen?

Glenn Beck: No, not unless Yemen was involved with the underpants man.

Ron Paul: Right.

Glenn Beck: Okay, if they’re turning people out and they know they’re involved and we have evidence, then yes we do. But here’s the other thing. I believe that we should get out of all the rest of the world. But I just think we should get out slowly. We built this nightmare over 100 years. We can’t leave the world in a vacuum. Would you agree that if we put everybody on notice, “Hey, by the way, Germany, you’re going to be responsible for yourself. Japan, you’re going to have to start defending yourself”. Everybody else … that we could develop a plan to pull back and to let the rest of the world know we’ve gone awry in the last one hundred years and we’re going to change back to what our founders wanted. But it’s going to take some time to not freak out the world, and also not to create a vacuum.

Ron Paul: Yeah. I agree with that, too, and I’ve worked for that all the time. I would be willing to do that. But the problem there is it’s not going to happen and we’re going to leave in a hurry like the Soviets left in a hurry. Their whole system broke down for financial reasons, and you understand the economics of what is happening. If we have a dollar crisis on top of this financial crisis, the dollar crisis means we can’t pay our bills, and they will be coming up. And then you’re going to see the independent movement in this country, the 10th amendment people and the nullification people. And we will come home, but that will be the gradualism that you might like and I might be able to afford.

Glenn Beck: Right, I understand that. I mean, I see on the front page of the report now: Bin Laden warning indicator of coming attack. And I was just driving in this morning and I was thinking, you know, can we afford another 9/11? What would happen to us? And you’re right. At some point we’re going to run out of money and then it’s all going to change. Alright, Congressman Paul, thank you very much. I appreciate your time, sir.

Ron Paul: Glenn, thank you for having me.

Glenn Beck: You bet. Bye bye.


  • Andy

    [quote]We can’t leave the world in a vacuum. Would you agree that if we put everybody on notice, “Hey, by the way, Germany, you’re going to be responsible for yourself. Japan, you’re going to have to start defending yourself”. Everybody else …[/quote]
    Well, sure we can. These countries for Historical fact has NEVER had problem to defend themselves. It’s all pretty rhetorical bullcrap.
    There will be no vacuum, just calm and usual day.
    There is one pretty freaking definitive Machiavellian snitch to compromise any good movement: inject unstable, provocative, or plain pre-paid “agent of influence” into it. And the whole movement will became “looks” dirty and/or controversial. Just like letting Sara to join the “tea party” movement.

  • A Greenhill

    I wish Ron Paul would steer clear of hyper-partisan nut jobs like Glenn Beck. The man is unstable, in more ways than one.