National Suicide
federalexpression
5.41K subscribers
http://FederalExpression.wordpress.com
National Suicide - Antony Sutton
00:10
just one week after the release from the
00:13
publisher
00:14
of mr sutton's latest book national
00:17
suicide
00:19
in bringing mr sutton to you we would
00:21
like to give you
00:23
a little background of him as well as a
00:26
statement from the preface of his new
00:28
book
00:28
written by himself anthony sutton was
00:32
born in london in 1925
00:35
educated at universities of london
00:37
gottingen
00:38
and california and in 1962 became a
00:41
citizen
00:42
of the united states formerly a
00:45
professor of economics at california
00:47
state university at los
00:48
angeles he is now a research fellow at
00:50
the hoover institute on war
00:52
revolution and peace at stanford
00:55
university
00:56
mr sutton has written for human events
00:59
the proceedings of the u.s naval
01:00
institute
01:01
triumph ordinance and national review
01:05
among his several books are western
01:07
technology and soviet development
01:10
1917-1930
01:12
wars and revolutions a comprehensive
01:14
list of conflicts with fatalities part 1
01:16
1820 to 1900 and two forthcoming titles
01:21
the soviet merchant marine and
01:23
collectivism and war
01:25
mr sutton is married and has two
01:28
daughters
01:29
and now we would like to take just one
01:31
moment to read to you
01:32
a brief notation from the preface to his
01:35
book
01:37
the evidence and the argument in
01:38
national suicide military aid to the
01:41
soviet union
01:42
will come as a surprise and perhaps as
01:45
an unwelcome shock
01:46
to almost all readers it is a first
01:49
attempt to penetrate what may ultimately
01:51
turn out to be
01:53
one of the most tragic stories in the
01:55
200-year history
01:57
of the american republic
02:00
and now we join the program as mr
02:04
sutton is being introduced to his
02:06
audience
02:08
i'd like to introduce to you tony satin
02:11
professor tony sutton thank you very
02:22
much marion
02:24
this is the most quite the most unusual
02:26
layout
02:28
i've ever encountered where i have
02:29
people on three sides
02:32
and i hope you will excuse
02:35
if temporarily i seem a little uh
02:39
little vacillation from left to right
02:42
what i'd like to talk about this evening
02:44
is my latest book national suicide
02:50
truly is hot off the press because it
02:54
i think is only due to be released this
02:56
week
02:58
now it should be easy for an author to
03:01
talk about his own book
03:04
and usually i think it is but this one
03:08
is difficult because if
03:09
ever an author did not want to write a
03:12
book i am that author and that is this
03:16
book
03:18
the book itself is a book of facts
03:22
there's an introduction there's chapter
03:24
13 where i draw together some threads
03:26
and conclusions
03:28
but essentially it is empirical
03:30
observation
03:32
and in my experience i've worked on this
03:34
thing for 15 years now
03:36
nobody has yet to challenge me on the
03:38
basis of fact
03:39
nobody and my visitors include include
03:42
visitors from the soviet union
03:43
from poland from the pentagon all over
03:46
no one has yet said
03:47
something is wrong on a fact and if you
03:50
ever hear of anyone i'd like to talk to
03:52
that person
03:54
now how can i summarize 15 years and
03:57
what have you given me one hour
04:00
i'll do my best let me first go back
04:03
15 years and tell you how i came to
04:06
write
04:06
national suicide in other words paint
04:08
the background to this picture
04:11
and then very briefly i'll tell you what
04:14
the book is about and if we have any
04:15
time left perhaps i'll try and fill in
04:18
some of your questions
04:22
now the threads of the story i can
04:24
pinpoint the source
04:26
quite exactly 1958 salt lake city
04:29
i was in a motel it was a snowy weekend
04:32
i had nothing to do i went down to the
04:34
only bookstore i think in salt lake city
04:36
the only book that to me looked
04:38
interesting was a book by leontotsky
04:41
probably been sitting there for 15 years
04:43
because no one else had bothered to read
04:44
poorly on trotsky
04:46
well i bought the book and i read it and
04:49
i was intrigued
04:52
because trotsky was writing about soviet
04:54
russia in the 1920s
04:57
and trotsky was in charge of foreign
04:59
concessions
05:00
in the soviet union and i had never
05:03
heard in standard history of foreign
05:05
concessions in the soviet union
05:07
it's just not in the history books
05:10
this is where western firms went into
05:13
the soviet union
05:14
and built the first five-year plan
05:18
the second five-year plan and so on
05:20
right down to today
05:23
there's nothing in the history books
05:24
about this it was directly opposed to
05:27
everything i thought to be true
05:30
now trotsky of course is a communist
05:34
liars can be truth to a communist but
05:36
there was something about
05:38
the book that rang true
05:41
i know because i had a technical
05:43
background that you just don't
05:44
just do not build steel mills and nitric
05:48
acid plants from scratch
05:49
there's got to be a technology there's
05:52
got to be a lot of technical work design
05:54
work
05:55
preliminary work you just don't start
05:57
and build a five-year plan
06:00
obviously they got the technology from
06:02
somewhere so i started to dig into it
06:03
and that's a long story by about five
06:06
years by the early 1960s i knew that i
06:09
had something
06:11
which had not previously been reported
06:16
but there were gaps in the picture that
06:17
i was beginning to outline
06:20
what broke it was i managed to get
06:22
access to the state department files and
06:24
i think they've regretted the day
06:26
that they ever let me into the state
06:28
department files
06:30
and the story that i was developing in
06:32
the early 1960s
06:34
was that all soviet technology or at
06:37
least the greater part of it
06:39
came in fact from the west it was the
06:42
product of western ingenuity
06:44
of western enterprise of free enterprise
06:47
systems
06:49
this had been blacked out and that's
06:52
very easy to check
06:53
because if you take a look at my
06:54
argument you'll see nothing about it
06:56
in the standard history books the soviet
06:58
union was actually built
07:00
by western technology by western firms
07:02
and by western enterprises
07:04
now 10 years ago i was a professor of
07:07
economics at
07:08
what is now cal state university
07:11
los angeles and as you know being a
07:13
professor of economics beats working for
07:15
a living
07:17
and consequently i had quite a
07:21
fair amount of time to spare
07:24
the students kept out of my hair
07:29
going a couple times a week and give a
07:30
few lectures so by 1966
07:33
i had the first volume written it's
07:36
called western technology and soviet
07:37
economic development 1917-1930
07:42
the second place i sent it to was the
07:44
hoover institution at stanford
07:46
university they accepted it right away
07:48
it was published in 1968. this by the
07:51
way
07:51
is the all-time i'm not bragging but i
07:54
want to fill in a picture
07:56
because this becomes important later on
07:58
this is the all-time best seller in the
08:00
hoover
08:00
in the history of the hoop institution
08:04
up to that point i had not been able to
08:07
get backing from
08:08
anybody i was even naive enough to ask
08:11
the council on foreign relations i
08:13
thought this was a research outfit
08:15
and they were they were very polite and
08:17
said no we can't help you
08:18
uh so that was my money that went into
08:21
that thing
08:22
but but i'll give credit word is due
08:24
hoover institution picked it up
08:26
and ran with it and brought it out in
08:27
two years
08:29
then i went to work on the second volume
08:32
which was 1930 to 1945
08:34
i was still teaching the last part of
08:37
this was written
08:38
at the hoof institution again it was
08:41
brought out very quickly
08:42
by 1971 that the second volume
08:45
was in print then i went to work on the
08:49
third volume which covers the years
08:51
1945 to 1965.
08:56
that was finished three years ago it was
08:59
accepted for publication three years ago
09:04
it is not available today
09:08
it was scheduled for publication early
09:10
1972.
09:12
if anybody wants to challenge it i have
09:14
the page proof
09:16
and i can send you a xerox copy of the
09:18
title page with the copyright date 1972.
09:23
in other words volume 3 has been ready
09:26
for publication for three years it has
09:28
not been published
09:29
to no fault of mine you can make what
09:33
you like of it i just state the facts
09:36
so what i've got then are three volumes
09:38
published at stanford
09:39
they are a precise technical examination
09:42
of soviet technology and industry
09:44
i take each a soviet process in turn i
09:47
trace back the technical origins i'm not
09:49
going to bore you with
09:50
it but just to give you an example i
09:52
will take the iron steel industry
09:54
the classical blast furnace process i'll
09:56
look at the soviet blast furnaces
09:57
i'll trace back the origin to the west
10:00
it's this kind of thing
10:01
very precise let me give another example
10:04
i know that exactly 68 percent of the
10:07
soviet merchant marine has been built in
10:08
western countries
10:10
i know that 82.1 percent of the marine
10:14
diesel engines in these ships have been
10:15
built in the west and the other twenty
10:17
percent were built in the soviet union
10:19
at brienne scanned leningrad under
10:21
western technical
10:22
assistance under western license they've
10:24
got six thousand ships
10:26
i probably know more about their ships
10:28
than you you know about your automobile
10:30
i know the cylinder diameters the piston
10:32
stroke the model numbers
10:34
of every diesel engine every engine
10:36
every service ship
10:38
i didn't get the information from
10:40
washington i had to get it from the
10:41
soviet union
10:43
a socialist country with
10:46
apparently complete censorship now you
10:49
can be the judge
10:50
because what i did in one national
10:53
national suicide i have
10:55
reprinted the list of soviet ships
10:58
used to supply iphone 96 of them
11:02
and the list is here and i've list the
11:04
name of the ship and it's soviet
11:06
register number
11:07
and the where the engine came from and
11:10
who built it it's all that
11:12
that's appendix a so you can judge
11:14
whether i'm
11:15
giving you a fair story or not
11:19
in general then i found that
11:23
if you want a ballpark estimate i found
11:25
that about 1995
11:27
of soviet technology came from the west
11:29
there is some
11:30
soviet technology for example medical
11:33
sutures
11:34
they have a little wound stapling
11:35
machine which i think sells even in the
11:37
united states
11:38
there is some about uh not too much
11:41
their best work i'm not saying the
11:42
russians are stupid
11:44
their best work is in pure science
11:45
mathematics science
11:47
they cannot innovate because of a
11:50
statist
11:51
centralized central planning system it
11:54
is the system
11:55
that stops innovation not the lack of
11:57
russian ability the russians are just as
11:59
capable as you and i
12:04
now my first two volumes were reviewed
12:07
quite widely
12:09
again i'm not saying this to build up
12:12
myself i don't have to
12:14
it's part of this picture
12:17
reviews from france and germany and
12:20
holland but i can't read dutch so i
12:21
don't know i think i think it's good
12:22
because i know not german
12:24
i think i know what they're saying those
12:26
are from france and germany are
12:27
excellent they're enthusiastic
12:29
for example i've just read one from
12:31
france which says
12:32
if all american scholarship can maintain
12:34
this standard
12:36
then it is from america that we will see
12:39
the definitive works
12:40
on world communism they don't know quite
12:43
what the american academic institution
12:46
is doing to me but we'll get into that
12:48
later
12:49
those from the united states are much
12:51
less enthusiastic
12:53
and of course those from the marxists
12:55
are a bit sour about the whole business
12:58
oddly enough uh some of my most
13:01
interesting visitors come from behind
13:03
the iron curtain
13:05
and not one of them yet has challenged
13:06
me they accept what i say they know what
13:09
i'm saying is the truth
13:11
now here we get to the crux of the
13:13
problem
13:15
why we're here tonight by 1968 it was
13:19
obvious to me that the soviet
13:21
military-industrial complex also
13:23
originated in the west not only the
13:24
economy but the military aspect
13:29
and this military complex was integrated
13:31
with the so-called civilian economy
13:34
now what they say in washington is quite
13:36
different they say no
13:37
there are two separate structures you've
13:39
got a military structure and you've got
13:41
an economic structure
13:42
and if you deal with the economic
13:43
structure this has no effect on the
13:45
military structure this is nonsense
13:47
and i think they must know it because i
13:50
quoted in national suicide
13:51
examples where the soviets themselves
13:54
say
13:55
that the two structures are very very
13:57
closely united
13:58
and indeed that imports the
14:02
first priority and imports goes to
14:03
military goods
14:05
but there's another point here all
14:07
military goods
14:09
need industrial products you don't just
14:11
have a machine that turns out tanks
14:14
you make a tank out of steel out of
14:16
aluminum
14:17
out of nylon out of plastics
14:21
these products are also used in the
14:23
civilian sector
14:25
you don't have separate steel mills for
14:27
tanks
14:28
of course not you just buy your steel
14:31
from the civilian so-called economy but
14:33
use a slightly different
14:34
somewhat different specification so your
14:37
civilian
14:39
i'd call it civilian your civilian
14:41
structure is actually in any country
14:44
the basis for its military output and
14:46
this is the core of the problem
14:49
now let me bring this right home to you
14:51
uh very very quickly i use what i call
14:53
the bullet
14:54
example this is a bullet it's been fired
14:57
it normally it has
14:58
a back end on it which has a propellant
15:00
charge
15:01
but it gives you an idea of how you can
15:03
pin this thing down
15:05
a bullet has a jacket which this one
15:08
happens to be cupola nickel copper and
15:09
nickel
15:10
and it has a little back end of it which
15:12
has a propellant which is normally
15:14
nitrocellulose
15:16
all right take the nitrous cellulose
15:18
first and most men by the way get killed
15:20
by bullets or shells which are just big
15:22
versions of this
15:24
what is where do the soviets get their
15:26
natural cellulose
15:28
well it's in national suicide i've got
15:29
the names of the companies
15:31
dupont hercules powder company
15:35
and the hercules powder company knew
15:37
that the plant they were putting in was
15:40
for military purposes because in the
15:41
state department files i found their
15:43
letter
15:43
in which they said they hope they get
15:45
permission to ship it even though it had
15:47
military potential
15:50
i've given you in national suicide a
15:53
list of the ammunition
15:54
used in vietnam i given you the
15:57
propellants
15:58
used whether it's the tubular cells the
16:01
different types of nitrocellulose
16:04
and i tell you in there where they get
16:05
the nitrocellulose from
16:07
in other words you can pin this thing
16:08
precisely back to you to hercules powder
16:11
company and and the dupont company
16:13
the front end of this thing is is
16:15
basically copper and nickel
16:17
their nickel technology comes
16:19
essentially from the international
16:20
nickel company and in my second volume
16:23
western technology that that is pretty
16:25
well shown their copper
16:27
the mines were developed by as a matter
16:29
of fact by a los
16:30
angeles company southwest engineering
16:32
company which used to be i think down on
16:34
figaro street they went in the 1930s and
16:38
developed their mines
16:39
so anyway you can take a thing like a
16:41
bullet i could go on just on a bullet
16:43
for a couple of hours but we just don't
16:45
have that time
16:46
you can trace this back precisely to a
16:49
western origin
16:51
now this is the core of the problem you
16:54
cannot separate
16:55
industrial technology from military
16:57
technology
16:58
it's it's it's intimately integrated
17:02
now when you sell to west germany or
17:05
great britain
17:05
or australia you don't worry
17:09
whether the product has any military
17:11
application because these countries have
17:13
no hostile intent
17:15
and intent is the major word what is
17:18
soviet intent you first got to look at
17:20
that
17:20
if it's peaceful then it doesn't matter
17:23
you can ship the machine guns it doesn't
17:24
matter
17:25
if it's hostile then you don't ship them
17:27
anything
17:29
you just leave them alone now back in
17:32
1968
17:34
this was the position i was in to pick
17:36
up my story again
17:38
we had a war going in vietnam which was
17:40
being supplied by the soviets
17:45
we had an administration in washington
17:47
that was repeating the 50-year myth of
17:49
peaceful trade
17:50
and i've shown here a brief history of
17:52
this 50-year myth
17:54
in other words washington was stoking up
17:56
the war
17:57
indirectly it was shipping into the
17:59
soviet union
18:01
the soviets were using this technology
18:03
to manufacture arms going to vietnam
18:05
completing the circle coming back and
18:07
killing vietnamese and americans
18:10
let me give a couple of examples
18:13
american pilots over the ho chi minh
18:14
trail
18:15
they made comments that the soviet
18:18
trucks
18:18
run by the north vietnamese look like
18:20
american trucks they look like ford
18:22
trucks
18:24
what the american pilots didn't know was
18:26
that they were ford trucks
18:28
made by gorky gas is the is the symbol
18:32
gas 69 the whole series of model numbers
18:35
with that prefix
18:37
gauke was built by the ford motor
18:39
company
18:40
the equipment has been consistently
18:43
brought up to date since the 1930s
18:45
and what worried me very much was in
18:47
1971 while
18:49
gorky trucks were on the ho chi minh
18:51
trail i could trace a shipment
18:54
out of a new york company going into the
18:56
gorky plant more machinery
18:58
in other words i could precisely
18:59
identify even without government
19:01
information because obviously i don't
19:03
get that past a certain point
19:05
i can precisely identify the circle
19:08
you stoke it up at one end it comes back
19:10
and hits you at the other
19:11
and you wonder why you can't stop the
19:13
war of course you can't stop the war
19:15
the more you stoke it up the more
19:16
they're going to keep it going
19:20
so in 1971 i could say that
19:24
there was a very real problem here i
19:27
suspected that
19:28
perhaps my volume three i didn't know i
19:30
suspected that perhaps it was going to
19:31
be held up
19:33
in 1971 i worked to department of
19:34
defense
19:37
and i said will you declassify enough
19:40
files
19:41
for me to write one or two volumes
19:44
giving the military version of my
19:45
three-volume
19:46
economic study a sequel to the stanford
19:49
series
19:51
i received a reply right away asking for
19:53
a list of the files and i went right
19:55
back
19:56
mostly i asked for russian technical
19:58
manuals
19:59
uh russian reports they've got all this
20:02
stuff
20:03
nothing secret didn't want anything
20:05
later than 1965
20:06
i can figure out the rest of it i didn't
20:08
want anything on laces or anything
20:10
esoteric
20:11
just the bread and butter weapons tanks
20:13
aircraft this kind of thing
20:16
i heard nothing i waited five months
20:19
because i knew what they were up to all
20:20
they wanted to know was how i was going
20:21
to go about doing it
20:23
i waited five months i wrote him a
20:25
little letter what are you going to do
20:26
about it
20:26
they said nothing you can be the judge
20:30
because i repeat
20:31
i reprinted the correspondence with
20:32
department of defense my first letter
20:34
was the melvin led
20:35
as appendix say of national suicide and
20:37
you can judge first off my
20:38
correspondence with department of
20:40
defense
20:45
so that was my position middle of 1972
20:50
obviously i wasn't going to get very
20:52
much assistance to write the military
20:54
version
20:55
i sensed i had no proof i had sensed
20:57
that
20:58
this was not going to be a particularly
21:00
welcome study
21:03
then i had an opportunity american
21:05
conservative union called me
21:07
and said you want to go to miami beach
21:09
and give 15 minutes testimony i said yes
21:13
this was a surprise i think because for
21:15
ten years
21:17
i kept away from everybody only very
21:20
recently started
21:21
to emerge i wanted to complete the thing
21:23
before i emerged
21:25
i went to miami beach subcommittee
21:28
number seven
21:31
i made a statement no questions
21:35
the only meeting i've ever had in my
21:36
life where i had no questions
21:38
and i can tell if an audience is hostile
21:40
or not and that audience of republicans
21:42
was hostile
21:44
i won't name i won't name their names
21:46
but i can remember their faces and i can
21:48
remember their names
21:50
and i know the degree of hostility and i
21:52
know why they are hostile i don't blame
21:54
them
21:56
it's the second most hostile audience
21:58
i've ever had the the worst one was when
22:00
i tried to preach let's say fair
22:01
economics to the american trucking
22:03
association
22:04
and they did not like that at all
22:08
so that was my position uh the
22:10
republican party obviously didn't want
22:12
to know
22:13
what i was trying to tell them but i
22:15
knew what was going on in vietnam
22:19
and i thought well this is ridiculous
22:20
we've got a bunch of elected officials
22:22
here and they're plain irresponsible
22:24
that was my interpretation so the
22:27
position last august was i had very
22:29
clear understanding
22:31
don't go down that road
22:34
so i sat down i weighed up the situation
22:40
the pros and the cons
22:44
and i sat down and national suicide was
22:47
an idea this time last year i hadn't
22:50
even sat down to write it i wrote
22:52
to the book in three months i had most
22:54
of the information in my files
22:56
arlington house accepted the book and
22:58
sent me a check within 10 days which is
22:59
fantastic
23:00
any author will tell you that you just
23:02
don't get books accepted that quickly
23:04
arlington house moved with that thing
23:06
they had galley proofs out in 10 weeks
23:08
i had advanced copies by july
23:12
so i cannot fault in any way
23:15
arlington house now what's in the book
23:19
if you want to pick up the rest of the
23:20
hoover story later i rely on your
23:22
questions
23:23
we can either forget it or even pick it
23:25
up what's in the book
23:28
my theme is that one hundred thousand
23:30
americans and countless allies in korea
23:33
and vietnam were killed by our own
23:34
technology nothing less
23:38
this technology was transferred to the
23:40
soviet union under the guise of peaceful
23:43
trade
23:46
i named some of the corporations i'm
23:48
naming some of the businessmen
23:50
but i would emphasize one thing
23:54
you cannot condemn american business on
23:56
the basis of this book
23:58
because 99 of american businessmen i'm
24:00
quite sure
24:01
do not know what is going on and if they
24:03
did they would feel exactly as i do
24:06
further i think the book has nothing to
24:08
do with partisan politics it should be
24:10
equal of interest to everyone whether
24:11
you're a republican democrat
24:13
liberal conservative come to that it
24:15
doesn't matter if you're american or
24:17
russian
24:20
because to me it comes down to a plain
24:22
question of individual rights
24:24
versus the totalitarian state
24:29
so my appeal in national suicide is to
24:31
those who have open minds
24:33
who can judge facts for themselves what
24:37
i'm saying here and this came about by
24:39
accident
24:40
is what andy zachar the soviet
24:43
h-bomb scientist said a few weeks ago
24:49
and the american press picked it up
24:52
zacharov said
24:54
you are fools your trade is building up
24:57
the soviet union
24:58
the soviets are using it to build a
25:00
bigger military establishment
25:02
dayton is a phony he didn't use the word
25:04
phony but in effect he said that
25:06
i can't even think what is what it would
25:07
be russian right now but still
25:09
what i'm saying here is what by accident
25:12
what i've got in here
25:14
is the empirical backup to what a very
25:16
brave russian
25:17
tried to tell the united states
25:22
and what happened read mr kissinger on
25:26
android
25:29
he's a russian and he'll pay for that
25:34
a russian saying trade solves soviet
25:36
problems
25:38
we have no intellectual freedom in
25:39
russia i'm going to end up in a mental
25:41
institution
25:42
because i said this even though i'm
25:44
probably the best-known
25:45
physicist in the soviet union certainly
25:47
in the field of atomic energy atomic
25:48
weapons
25:49
what does kissinger say ignore zakarov
25:53
mustn't interfere in soviet internal
25:55
affairs
25:58
we might disturb the russians it's an
26:01
odd situation
26:03
a russian warns the united states and
26:05
the united states ignores the warning
26:11
so let me vote briefly tell you what
26:13
i've got in the book
26:17
i hope it won't put you off reading it
26:19
i'll take that verse
26:21
first of all i got a brief introduction
26:23
and kind of a warming up thing oh by the
26:25
way right on the purpose i i say that
26:27
why i've written the book
26:28
that i was denied the information from
26:30
department of defense
26:32
and consequently we have censorship and
26:34
i point to operation keel hall
26:37
as another example of censorship and
26:40
my hope is that the public reaction to
26:42
this book is going to blast loose enough
26:44
files for me to write
26:46
the academic version so in the first
26:49
chapter what i've
26:50
i've frankly got here i've outlined the
26:52
history
26:53
of the so-called trade
26:56
what i call the dayton aggression cycle
26:59
in other words what the soviets do
27:00
they they've you can see this going back
27:04
over 50 years
27:06
they are aggressive at one point say in
27:08
korea or vietnam
27:10
and then they plead peace and this
27:12
dayton phase is used to bring in more
27:14
technology and you can identify this
27:17
they they act peacefully they say let's
27:19
live in peace
27:20
they taunt they did this in the early
27:21
30s the united states goes in there
27:24
builds it up the american taxpayer pays
27:26
for it through credits
27:27
then they turn right around and you get
27:29
another wall going it's a cycle and you
27:31
can identify this cycle and i've begun
27:33
to identify
27:34
it in this book and then i talk about
27:37
the persecution of russian jews russian
27:39
baptists and lithuanian catholics i'm
27:41
neither a jew nor baptist nor catholic
27:43
but these people have a right
27:46
to live they have a right to their
27:48
religion and i feel very deeply about
27:49
their persecution
27:50
and so i have brought this in to show
27:54
that if you think the soviets have mello
27:56
at all
27:57
then go and talk to some of these people
27:59
then i got
28:01
a various sections on the link
28:04
between casualties and trade which has
28:06
not i think been pointed out before
28:09
they say as you trade so there's a
28:10
greater inclination to peace well i've
28:12
got a little diagram in here which says
28:14
the more you trade the greater your
28:15
casualties the black the black
28:17
uh marks are the increase in casualties
28:20
and there's a line to the increase in
28:21
trade
28:22
in other words according to my analysis
28:24
the more you trade the more casualties
28:25
you get
28:27
because this is lost in in washington
28:31
then in chapter four we get right down
28:33
to facts
28:36
how we built the soviet military
28:37
industrial complex
28:42
who built it it's very interesting some
28:45
companies are identified with this
28:46
some are not i'd never heard the name
28:50
general motors
28:51
linked with soviet trade until wall
28:53
street journal last week apparently
28:54
they've finally given way
28:56
up to now the last 50 years has been
28:58
ford a general electric
29:00
um a dupont
29:04
gleason but not up to now general motors
29:07
not chrysler not american motors
29:11
international harvester yes caterpillar
29:13
tractor no
29:15
uh radio corporation of america rca yes
29:19
uh hewlett packard up to recently no
29:21
well of course it's a fairly recent
29:22
company but bell telephone certainly not
29:25
in other words you can pinpoint specific
29:27
companies and you can trace their
29:29
association over 50 years
29:34
then chapter 5 i get into the
29:37
direct supply of weapons
29:40
in other words shipping weapons direct
29:42
and i think i have something here which
29:44
i know has not been brought out before
29:47
and this is early 1918.
29:49
the bolshevik revolution was the end of
29:52
1917.
29:54
early 1918 about all the bolsheviks had
29:56
they had petrograd and they had moscow
29:58
and they were lucky to hold that
29:59
they almost lost that in march they had
30:02
a very very tenuous hold on russia in
30:05
early 1918.
30:07
but what did i find in the state
30:08
department files
30:12
i found that american munitions were
30:14
being shipped to the bolsheviks in early
30:15
1918.
30:18
not only that they wanted credit let me
30:21
quote this is from a state department
30:22
document this i'm sure is the first time
30:24
this has ever been published
30:25
quote munitions that are now being
30:28
evacuated from archangel are sent to
30:30
moscow the euros and siberian towns
30:32
soviet government desires to take up the
30:34
matter of payment for these munitions
30:37
and expects to pay for them in raw
30:39
materials but
30:40
asks for time to organize the economic
30:42
resources of the country
30:44
that sounds like 1973.
30:48
anyway we go on like this i've dug out
30:50
some more documents
30:51
uh i'm sure not previously published one
30:53
i know will interest you i think
30:55
and that is 1938 president roosevelt's
30:57
secret agreement
30:58
with these soviets only four people know
31:01
about this in the united states and only
31:02
four in russia
31:04
and what caught my attention was that
31:06
president roosevelt was talking about
31:09
each power pursuing separate and
31:12
independent courses
31:14
about to the same objective
31:18
and i i didn't quite catch on to that at
31:20
first but it recorded in my mind and
31:22
then i dug it up later
31:24
let me read what president roosevelt
31:26
this is a report by the way by ascendant
31:28
ambassador davis about
31:30
the agreement between roosevelt and
31:32
stalin known to only four people in the
31:34
united states
31:35
and none in congress foreign executive
31:37
branch and uh four in the soviet union
31:39
quote
31:40
this is ambassador davis reporting on
31:43
this
31:43
it would be the part of prudence and
31:45
wisdom
31:46
on the part of each government to
31:48
familiarize the other with facts
31:50
which might be of substantial value in
31:52
the future by
31:53
reason of similarity of purposes and
31:56
necessities even though each power were
31:58
pursuing separate and independent
31:59
courses
32:01
at that very time the soviets were
32:04
stoking up a war
32:06
in spain they were certainly murdering
32:08
their own people that was the year
32:10
when they killed i think 10 000 officers
32:13
in the red army
32:15
and here we get president roosevelt
32:17
talking about
32:19
similarity of purposes and a common
32:21
objective
32:24
so just at random we go on then
32:28
to uh a section on um
32:32
we get down to the technical aspects
32:34
then for example i got a section on
32:35
soviet missiles the fact that they are
32:37
using
32:38
american accelerometers and how the
32:41
accelerometers got there
32:44
and how the ball bearings the
32:45
miniaturized ball bearings which you
32:47
need for a missile
32:48
uh the company that uh brian chucking
32:51
grinder company in the united states
32:53
that sold these
32:54
this equipment congress itself said this
32:57
was a
32:57
matter of life and death to the united
32:59
states it was a tragic era
33:01
to ship these there was the shipment was
33:05
stopped in the early 60s
33:07
but it was released released very
33:09
recently by president nixon
33:12
in spite of the fact that congress said
33:13
this is a matter of life and death
33:15
president nixon released the export of
33:17
these particular
33:18
machines for machining the races on
33:22
miniature ball bearings which is
33:23
something the soviets have never been
33:24
able to do
33:25
in fact that i i think there's only one
33:27
company united states can do it
33:30
so they get more missiles that way then
33:32
we go through other chapters
33:34
uh the russians at sea i look at their
33:36
navy in the air
33:39
i point out for example that the mig-15
33:42
had a rolls-royce engine
33:44
and in fact soviet jet engines do derive
33:47
from uh well the two separate
33:49
derivations one goes back to the
33:51
rolls-royce
33:52
nina and the derwent the tay
33:56
in the late 1940s and the other from
33:59
bmw and junckers two different two
34:01
different series
34:04
and then i've got a chapter here on
34:05
congress and the bureaucrats we spend
34:07
five billion a year on intelligence and
34:09
apparently we don't know what's going on
34:12
i give examples of false statements made
34:14
by congress to the minister
34:16
to congress not as far as i know to the
34:18
administration
34:21
then chapter 13 i asked the office
34:24
question
34:25
why have we done this
34:30
i don't come to a definite answer
34:31
because i don't frankly know but i give
34:33
you six alternate answers and you can
34:35
take your choice
34:38
one it's going to build a peaceful world
34:41
it's dayton if we mellow the russians
34:45
they'll come to love us and we'll all
34:47
live happily thereafter
34:50
so far as i know nobody has ever said
34:52
that dayton includes the shipment of
34:54
military goods or
34:55
includes the buildup of their military
34:57
structure
34:59
in any event i'll quote you of all
35:02
people arthur schlesinger
35:04
in the wall street journal last week
35:06
where arthur schlesinger said that the
35:08
core of the taunt is intellectual
35:10
freedom
35:12
there is no intellectual freedom in the
35:14
soviet union there is no daytona
35:16
it's a sheer illusion
35:20
so i kind of rule that one out obviously
35:22
then it could be an accident
35:23
maybe the policymakers in washington are
35:26
dumber than most pessimistic office
35:28
think they are
35:29
you know you look at the wheat deal what
35:32
did they do they
35:33
increased the wheat export subsidy from
35:34
one cent to 47 cents a bushel while
35:37
they're selling the wheat to the
35:38
russians and the russians had nowhere
35:39
else to buy it
35:41
now i don't know how much dumber you
35:43
have to be than that
35:44
if it's an accident
35:48
so anyway it could be an accident you
35:51
can make that case then i say well
35:52
there's another possibility maybe we
35:54
have no policy at all
35:58
maybe it's what i call pragmatism
36:01
policy is decided by random events it's
36:04
a kind of
36:05
a cork floating around in the river
36:07
bob's around
36:10
then i say well perhaps the time horizon
36:13
for politicians
36:14
is yesterday in the past and the next
36:16
next election in the future and they
36:18
just don't think about anything else
36:20
you talk about a 50-year spread of
36:22
history that's too much for a politician
36:24
maybe this is the problem
36:28
and then i say then i go after mr
36:30
kissinger
36:31
and i say well because he is the
36:33
architect he
36:34
he took up what uh what roster
36:37
started to develop and i said well
36:39
possibly kissinger is a mystic
36:41
now i use mystic here in a very limited
36:44
defines
36:44
uh very limited sense a mystic to me is
36:47
someone
36:48
who cannot derive logical rational
36:51
answers
36:52
from observable empirical observation
36:56
in other words he imagines things and he
36:58
imagines that what he imagines is the
37:00
truth
37:01
now i quote in here a statement from
37:04
kissinger's book in which he apparently
37:07
does operate
37:08
in this manner you make your own
37:11
decision you read what i say about
37:13
kissinger
37:13
it could be that
37:18
he just imagines in some way that there
37:21
is no possible connection between trade
37:23
and their military structure
37:25
when it's pointed out to him he just
37:27
doesn't want to believe it it's not part
37:29
of his makeup
37:30
i do know this that kissinger knows
37:32
nothing about economics and even less
37:34
about technology
37:36
so you take a choice on that one
37:40
then i look at conspiracy and
37:42
particularly of course gary allen
37:45
and there what i've done i think for
37:47
quite obvious reasons
37:50
um you're lucky to survive anywhere in
37:52
the academic world with the
37:54
outlook like mine you just do not
37:56
survive
37:57
if you say everything you think i think
37:59
gary's got a lot going for him
38:01
not about say so publicly because i like
38:05
to eat
38:06
um i quote nicholas von hoffman
38:08
washington post
38:10
you might think he's a liberal but
38:13
sometimes there was a time when nicholas
38:15
von hoffman would have me calling up the
38:16
wall but
38:17
i began to read behind him and if you
38:20
have a little patience sometimes
38:21
read a little behind what nicholas von
38:24
hoffman is saying
38:25
and i use nicholas von hoffman's
38:27
commentary on gary allen
38:29
and it was a very good commentary
38:32
and made some very good points
38:35
anyway a conspiracy is a possible
38:38
alternative
38:39
then you've got treason i dismiss
38:41
treason because legally
38:44
there has to be proof that there was
38:47
a an intent to commit treason i can't
38:50
show that there was any intent
38:53
anyway the point is and i'll better come
38:56
to conclusion now
38:58
and perhaps get your questions
39:01
whatever the reason the facts point to
39:05
one single quite extraordinary
39:07
conclusion
39:09
that our policy has been to build up the
39:12
soviet union and the military strength
39:14
of the soviet union
39:18
it could be that that we are
39:20
implementing
39:21
walt rusto's recommendations back in the
39:24
mid 1960s
39:26
where he recommended that as deliberate
39:29
policy
39:29
we reduce american power and encourage
39:32
the increase
39:33
of soviet power
39:37
now i never did understand his reasons
39:39
for that but i do understand that the
39:41
the rostow papers do make this
39:43
recommendation
39:44
kissinger of course was associated with
39:46
wasto and it could be that they have
39:48
implemented this
39:50
if this is the case you better take
39:52
another look at the walt roster papers
39:53
because
39:54
there's more to come down the road
39:58
what's to be done about it
40:02
i don't know
40:06
i feel right now that i'm sitting out on
40:08
an end of a limb i'm waiting
40:09
for the explosion
40:12
i know there's going to be an explosion
40:14
because i know the reaction of the
40:16
hoover institution to national suicide
40:18
when they first saw the proofs
40:22
i think the most important thing is not
40:24
the obvious thing
40:26
you and probably everybody else is going
40:28
to expect me to say cut off trade
40:30
no i don't think that's the way
40:33
i think there's more involved in this
40:35
than trade i think we've got the corner
40:38
of a much bigger story and this story
40:40
has got to come out in the open
40:42
operation keel hall is part of it and
40:44
there are other parts of the story
40:46
the most important thing i think is to
40:48
get the files opened
40:50
and the one strong recommendation i make
40:52
in national suicide is that
40:54
the limit of classification should be
40:56
three years after three years
40:58
all government papers all government
41:00
papers become public information
41:02
because i am quite convinced if the
41:04
public knew what was going on this would
41:06
not be tolerated
41:08
i just cannot believe uh that the
41:11
average american wants the united states
41:13
to commit suicide
41:16
so the absolute num number one priority
41:19
is information
41:20
more information and then i would leave
41:22
it up
41:23
to the man in the street the average
41:26
american
41:27
to exert pressure through congress and
41:29
i'm not saying cut off trade
41:31
i don't want i think that's a phony
41:32
fight you're not going to win it anyway
41:35
because the export control act of 1949
41:38
was never implemented
41:39
the state department never recommended
41:42
cut-off aid to those countries supplying
41:44
strategic goods to the soviet union
41:45
they always found a weasel out if you're
41:49
a bureaucrat you can always find a way
41:50
out if you want to
41:53
what i'm saying is number one let's get
41:55
the files open
41:56
let's find out what's going on
42:00
that's the most important thing i can't
42:01
do very much more i've done frankly
42:04
about as much as i can do the rest is up
42:05
to people like yourself
42:08
secondly congress has to reassert itself
42:12
there's flagrant abuse of the
42:13
constitution
42:15
you'll recognize by my accent that i'm a
42:18
naturalized citizen
42:19
i took an oath of allegiance to the
42:20
constitution and frankly
42:23
all i can see day after day are flagrant
42:26
breaches of the constitution the
42:27
internal revenue service being one of
42:29
the worst offenders
42:32
and thirdly i'd rather hesitate to make
42:34
this point
42:38
at this meeting but i will make it
42:41
anyway
42:43
because i think that you pretty well
42:45
summed me up by this time
42:47
you've got a pattern of what motivates
42:48
me i don't
42:50
tend to hold things back i think that
42:52
perhaps
42:53
our way of looking at things as being
42:56
left and right is leading us into tracts
43:00
what do we do we look at someone and we
43:02
say is he left or is he right
43:05
this political spectrum i think is
43:08
beginning to evolve in my mind
43:10
that it is evading the real issue the
43:13
real issue as i see it coming up in the
43:15
next five or ten years
43:17
is the individual trying to preserve his
43:21
rights
43:22
under the constitution as it was
43:24
originally intended
43:26
against a collective estate i see the
43:29
issue in terms of the individual versus
43:31
the state
43:33
not in terms of left and right now
43:36
this may or may not sound like heresy
43:39
i've never put this argument to a
43:40
fully conservative audience before uh
43:44
i think this is what we're going to have
43:45
to face up to
43:48
uh at that point perhaps i should catch
43:52
your questions and then we'll stay
43:54
within the time limit
43:57
give us some current information on the
44:00
on the recent
44:02
uh or the energy crisis the energy
44:04
crunch the
44:05
vast russian oil fields the
44:08
support our relationship with them
44:11
any observations you might have in that
44:13
area the energy crisis
44:15
so far as i can see it is a phony
44:19
um take a look at the department of
44:22
commerce
44:23
u.s statistical abstract reserves of
44:26
natural gas in the united states
44:29
you find they've increased by 50 since
44:31
1950.
44:32
i think this year's output of natural
44:34
gas is about seven percent of total
44:36
reserves
44:36
we have twice as much gas in the ground
44:38
the united states has been produced in
44:40
the whole history production of natural
44:41
gas going back to the
44:42
late 19th century what caused the
44:45
apparent apparent shortage you go back
44:48
to the natural gas act of 1938 which
44:51
gave the government the right to
44:52
intervene
44:53
you take the 1954 phillips petroleum
44:56
decision which put
44:57
a a ceiling on natural gas prices
45:01
and of course this reduced incentive for
45:04
natural gas producers to produce the gas
45:06
so you get a shortage
45:07
anytime you interfere with a let's say
45:09
fair economy you're gonna get problems
45:12
this this natural gas shortage was
45:14
created
45:16
obviously by government interference uh
45:19
crude oil i wrote a paper back in 69
45:22
in which i predicted almost exactly what
45:25
has happened
45:26
i i'm gonna have to dig that paper up i
45:29
even predicted i think the libyan
45:30
situation
45:32
uh so i mean i've got i've got actually
45:35
empirical proof
45:36
that my projection was right there that
45:38
uh that we should have lifted import
45:40
quotas a long time ago
45:43
that covers you two main of course then
45:45
you've got the environmentalists as well
45:48
but this this heavy influx of american
45:51
technology now
45:52
being talked about to the russian uh
45:56
area so we will develop the field we'll
46:00
put together the refinery is this
46:01
another
46:03
similar to the steel business well yes
46:06
but
46:06
uh the estimates are that siberian
46:09
natural gas is going to cost about
46:12
anywhere between two and four times as
46:13
much as texas gas
46:16
um it can only be done if you get
46:18
credits from the
46:20
import export bank and i presume that
46:21
will be done
46:24
it is a parallel to the situation of the
46:26
1930s
46:28
there's little question about that it
46:30
makes us dependent
46:31
on soviet gas uh
46:34
there's supposed to be mutual dependency
46:36
but look at it this way
46:38
supposing the soviets don't like us
46:41
making a noise for example about soviet
46:43
jews they just turn the taps and cut off
46:45
the gas
46:46
we're left high and dry without gas
46:50
sure we're dependent on them but what
46:52
about if we ship technology in there
46:55
they can use that for 20 years for 30
46:56
years you can't just pull that
46:58
technology back
46:59
in other words what we've committed
47:01
ourselves is to a very wonderful thing
47:04
in other words that our shipment of
47:06
technology there is vital to them and is
47:08
irreversible
47:10
about what they ship back is is is
47:13
reversible in the sense they can cut it
47:14
off anytime they want to so we get
47:16
absolutely the worst end of the deal
47:17
there's no question about that
47:19
uh by the way on the salt treaty uh
47:22
talking about bad deals
47:24
uh that one i've got a little section on
47:26
that that one is almost unbelievable
47:29
um each uh each country soviet union and
47:32
united states gets
47:33
two abm systems
47:36
and each capital country gets one
47:40
system and they can put the other system
47:42
anywhere they want
47:44
so the american system goes in
47:45
washington and the service system goes
47:47
in moscow
47:49
but what have you got in washington
47:52
if there was a threat of nuclear attack
47:54
you evacuate the bureaucrats and all
47:56
you've got left is a lot of stones and
47:57
waste paper
47:59
so all right drop all the bombs you want
48:00
on it but what if you got in moscow
48:02
you've got the most important section of
48:04
the military military-industrial complex
48:07
their main plants are in moscow so what
48:10
you've
48:10
what you've exchanged here it must be
48:13
brilliant to bring this about
48:14
you've exchanged defense of nothing
48:18
for defense of the most significant part
48:21
of the soviet military industrial
48:22
structure
48:23
now i can't think of anything much
48:24
crazier than that i'm sorry i got off
48:26
the track but
48:27
it just reminded me of that one yes
48:32
on what basis do you say that or do you
48:34
assume that we all divide everything in
48:36
the right place
48:37
excuse me sir i didn't know the question
48:39
is by the way on my what i said about
48:41
right and left
48:42
um excuse me um i did not mean to imply
48:46
that um
48:48
that you were individually doing it uh
48:51
frankly
48:52
how i usually use that is not in
48:54
relation to american political parties
48:56
at
48:56
all it frankly doesn't enter into the
48:58
picture here
48:59
where i would i think it's got to be
49:01
used is in the
49:03
is in a broader scale where you're
49:05
talking about national socialism
49:08
on the right and international socialism
49:11
being communism on the left it's that
49:12
broader political spectrum
49:14
gary allen in his book has got something
49:16
very similar to what i'm saying
49:18
if not the same he's got that spectrum
49:20
and i think gary in his book says um
49:23
that the left right spectrum is
49:25
misleading you've got to look at it in
49:26
terms of a degree of
49:28
centralization of power which is exactly
49:30
what i'm trying to say
49:32
those two little diagrams in gary
49:34
allen's book are exactly what i'm trying
49:35
to say
49:42
yes
49:46
no no no please don't you've made me
49:48
think that perhaps we're further along
49:50
the road than i thought
49:52
i see i'm at the end of a research
49:54
project
49:56
and the conclusion in my mind is we're
49:58
not going to solve this thing by
49:59
clamping down on trade i think we can do
50:01
it with more information
50:02
now that's a long long way from from
50:05
developing policy what are we going to
50:06
do and there's got to be all kinds of
50:08
discussion between what i've arrived at
50:09
and where you actually go
50:11
maybe we can't do it just by opening up
50:13
the files maybe we've got to clamp down
50:15
on trade and otherwise my mind is wide
50:17
open
50:18
but the point is i'm at the end of a
50:19
research stage and i have these ideas
50:21
developed
50:22
but this is a long wave if you think in
50:24
terms of resolutions don't no please
50:26
i mean let's get some policy out of this
50:29
and and
50:30
this thing's now got to be kicked around
50:31
and see where do you go from here it may
50:33
be
50:34
you have to cut off trade
50:37
and but fire the bureaucrats you've got
50:40
and get some you can trust
50:42
maybe that's the way to go
50:45
i next step is definitely information
50:48
in other words hold as you are with
50:51
trade you know hold with the clamping
50:52
down on trade as a temporary
50:54
position but don't commit yourself to it
50:56
for 50 years i would suggest but
50:58
information is vital you've got to find
51:00
out what kind of deals have been made
51:02
with the soviet union that's vital
51:04
because i suspect the worst i suspect
51:07
they've sold
51:08
the thing out just lock stock and bow
51:11
now that's my suspicion
51:20
yes
51:23
operation keel hall was 1945-1946 where
51:27
uh i don't know how many at least
51:29
several hundred thousand russians
51:31
who were then in europe were forced to
51:33
go back to the soviet union
51:35
they were forced by american and british
51:38
troops to go back
51:39
and the grave there are still graves in
51:41
austria
51:42
on the bank of the river driver of 142
51:45
russian
51:46
uh 142 russians who committed suicide
51:49
rather than go back to the soviet union
51:50
now this was a flagrant violation of the
51:52
geneva convention because paragraph 33
51:55
of the geneva convention
51:58
just flatly disallows
52:01
you it does not allow you to to force
52:03
someone back when he doesn't want to go
52:04
you can
52:05
claim political exile and
52:08
so these people probably ended up in
52:10
siberia we're still doing it
52:12
if you think of the lithuanian seaman
52:14
kudurka
52:15
who jumped from a soviet ship to an
52:18
american
52:19
coast guard cutter in american
52:21
territorial waters just two years ago
52:25
and the coast guard commander on the
52:28
instruct under instructions from
52:29
washington allowed the soviets cut to
52:31
come on board a
52:33
an american naval vessel in u.s
52:36
territorial waters
52:38
they they beat the the the lithuanian
52:41
sailor and dragged him back on the
52:42
soviet ship
52:43
that's another flagrant violation now
52:45
i'd like to see the papers on that
52:50
anyone you're the only one
53:06
that was uh epstein julius epstein i
53:09
don't think he's there any longer
53:12
julius epstein has spent many years 15
53:15
years
53:16
working on that he knows more about it
53:18
than anybody else i came into it because
53:20
he uh i could see what he was doing
53:24
he was doing that what i was trying to
53:25
do in western technology so every chance
53:27
i get i just mention it to make sure
53:29
that as many people as possible know
53:30
about it
53:31
but he is the man on operation keel hall
53:40
yes
53:49
i'm not optimistic i know mr nixon has
53:52
said that this is going to be an open
53:54
administration
53:56
open information but he also said the
53:59
taxes weren't going to be raised and the
54:00
number of other things
54:04
in other words i don't think
54:07
that they will change one little bit
54:09
until they are forced to change
54:11
and it is going to take a great deal of
54:13
public pressure through congress
54:15
i just do not think they're going to
54:17
change voluntarily for good reason
54:19
i have read something like over 10 15
54:22
years perhaps quarter of a million state
54:24
department documents
54:26
either read or scan them and if that
54:29
material had come out at the time
54:31
for example colonel house cabling wilson
54:34
at the time of the bolshevik revolution
54:36
suppressed criticism of the bolsheviks
54:38
and american newspapers if that'll come
54:40
out in 1917
54:41
imagine the war that would have created
54:44
and i think the same thing is going on
54:45
today
54:46
i don't know but i suspect uh
54:51
i don't think they will do it
54:53
voluntarily i think is going to take a
54:54
great deal of public effort
54:56
but i do think it is vitally important
54:59
yes sir
55:04
there are examples of policy
55:07
being used in that manner in other words
55:09
if you want to bring about something
55:11
you've got to have a kind of a
55:13
a wall to battle up against to bring it
55:15
about it's the marxian you know
55:17
thesis and antithesis brings about a
55:20
synthesis
55:21
uh there is no question in my mind that
55:23
the so-called international bankers are
55:25
very much in the middle of this thing
55:27
there is a group i call it the
55:29
establishment
55:31
it seems to be a transatlantic
55:33
establishment and i know that
55:35
because i have english sources there's a
55:37
transatlantic link there's no question
55:38
about this
55:40
it pretty well controls policy there's
55:42
no question about that
55:43
whether you call yourself a republican
55:45
or democrat the same people that
55:46
kissinger was under kennedy johnson and
55:49
nixon
55:52
they put it while running the show
55:57
but it's going to take an awful lot more
55:59
work to get the full picture out i don't
56:01
think we'll scrape the surface
56:03
but what i do know look basically i'm a
56:04
researcher this is this is my job
56:06
i'm a technician i do know there is a
56:08
much bigger picture
56:09
and the picture i've got is only a
56:11
little part of it there's a lot more
56:12
under the surface
56:13
no question about that do you wanna
56:32
[Applause]
56:33
you