Monday, March 09, 2015
Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Weapon
http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl?id=1988_575102
chron Houston Chronicle Archives
Sparks erupt in VP debate/Close race heightens stakes in Bentsen- Quayle skirmish
JUDY WIESSLER, CLAY ROBISON Staff
THU 10/06/1988 HOUSTON CHRONICLE
OMAHA, Neb. - Democrat Lloyd Bentsen and Republican Dan Quayle sparred in Wednesday night's vice presidential debate over Quayle's qualifications to be president and squared off in a bitter exchange over the memory of the late President John F. Kennedy.
The sharpest exchange of the nationally televised face-off, the first and only scheduled for the vice presidential candidates, was sparked when Quayle said he has as much congressional experience as John F. Kennedy did when he ran for president in 1960.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/10/us/politics/forsteve-russell-a-relaxing-post-after-helping-to-capture-saddam-hussein.html?partner=EXCITE&ei=5043&_r=0
The New York Times
For Steve Russell, a Relaxing Post After Helping to Capture Saddam Hussein
By EMMARIE HUETTEMAN MARCH 9, 2015
WASHINGTON — It is fair to say the life of Representative Steve Russell, Republican of Oklahoma, became considerably more sedate after he was elected to Congress.
A retired lieutenant colonel, Mr. Russell served 21 years in the Army, in Kosovo, Kuwait, Afghanistan and Iraq. He commanded a unit integral to catching Saddam Hussein and wrote a book about it: “We Got Him!: A Memoir of the Hunt and Capture of Saddam Hussein.”
After founding a group called Vets for Victory, Mr. Russell became a public speaker who was no stranger to the news media, appearing on shows such as Spike TV’s “Deadliest Warrior.” He started a company that makes replicas of Iraqi rifles, including those used in the recent film “American Sniper,” and he served in the Oklahoma Senate.
Mr. Russell, 51, who represents Oklahoma’s Fifth District, spoke about the challenges of being in the military and Congress in this interview, which has been condensed.
You served in state government briefly before returning to your rifle manufacturing business and veterans advocacy organization. What moved you to run for Congress?
We find ourselves really at a tipping point of whether we want to protect our life, liberty and property or whether we want a big government to do that, and whether or not we can pay for it. And I didn’t want to look back on my life thinking that I might have been able to help our country at a certain point and didn’t try.
You commanded the unit that tracked down Saddam Hussein.
There were half a dozen units involved with the manhunt from start to finish. Mine was not the only one. But we were a major part in the hunt for Saddam.
When I did my memoir, I really wrote it not only to establish the historical record of just regular soldiers that were involved, but also to give the people a sense of what it’s like to be in infantry and what those times were like from somebody that had a unique position in it, both fighting on the ground but having a broad enough understanding of the bigger picture because of the rank that I was. And I felt it was important that somebody tell that story.
Did you find that difficult?
I did. It took me three years to write, not just because of the tedium, but I was revisiting those times every single day, very hard times, and to go back and to take them up in detail. But when I was done, it was very cathartic. It was as if, “O.K., I’ve got this done now,” and I was much more at peace with a lot of things because I had gotten it out of my system.
Do you think that there is some worth in challenging the war you’re in?
I can’t tell you, as a soldier, how hurtful it was to have leaders of this body that I’m now a member of declaring our war lost while we were fighting in the field. And it’s almost as if they were trying to undercut and undermine so that they could self-fulfill their predilections. Guys like me are losing friends and exerting ourselves in ways that most human beings will never do. But we did it for our country.
Question, support, become more efficient, but when the debate has ended upon the vote of approval of sending force, the most humane thing you can do is win and get it done.
What has been the hardest part about adjusting to being a congressman?
I think the thing that’s been eye-opening is that so much of the division and the conflict in this town is not generated by us. It’s generated by those that profit from it. And this group on the left or this group on the right, using our images and pictures: “Help so-and-so stop such-and-such. Send money.” And I think that it’s unfortunate, because people back home getting their communications, they look at it and they’ll go, “Yeah, I’m going to help Steve Russell fight the bad guys” or whatever. There’s people enriching themselves, making millions in this town off fomenting division and conflict. And I think that’s shameful.
Three of your five children are adopted from Hungary. What moved you and your wife to adopt?
We wanted more kids. Cindy had had some arthritis complications and stuff. We were going to adopt a boy, and we weren’t planning on adopting three children. And they were going to divide them up, and we said, “No, we’ll take them all,” not knowing what that meant. That was a big challenge. They didn’t speak any English. We didn’t speak any Hungarian. They were 5, 6 and 8 when we adopted them. They’re all grown now.
My youngest daughter, who was naturally born, she was 3 at the time. She just jabbered away at them as if they understood everything she was saying, and in large measure, she was probably as responsible for teaching them English as we were.
http://www.springfieldspringfield.co.uk/movie_script.php?movie=austin-powers-international-man-of-mystery
Springfield! Springfield!
Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery (1997)
I've never seen
that big star before.
What is that?
Good God.
I'm gonna get you,
Austin Powers.
It's fricking freezing
in here, Mr. Bigglesworth.
From 5/25/1963 To 7/16/1989 ( George Bush - The President's News Conference in Paris ) is 9549 days
From 11/2/1965 ( my birth date in Antlers Oklahoma USA and my birthdate as the known official Deputy United States Marshal Kerry Wayne Burgess and active duty United States Marine Corps officer ) To 12/25/1991 ( as United States Marine Corps chief warrant officer Kerry Wayne Burgess I was prisoner of war in Croatia ) is 9549 days
From 5/25/1963 To 8/8/1988 ( Ronald Reagan - Remarks to the Employees of United States Precision Lens, Inc., in Cincinnati, Ohio ) is 9207 days
From 11/2/1965 ( my birth date in Antlers Oklahoma USA and my birthdate as the known official Deputy United States Marshal Kerry Wayne Burgess and active duty United States Marine Corps officer ) To 1/17/1991 ( the date of record of my United States Navy Medal of Honor as Kerry Wayne Burgess chief warrant officer United States Marine Corps circa 1991 also known as Matthew Kline for official duty and also known as Wayne Newman for official duty ) is 9207 days
From 5/25/1963 To 8/8/1988 ( Ronald Reagan - Remarks to the Employees of United States Precision Lens, Inc., in Cincinnati, Ohio ) is 9207 days
From 11/2/1965 ( my birth date in Antlers Oklahoma USA and my birthdate as the known official Deputy United States Marshal Kerry Wayne Burgess and active duty United States Marine Corps officer ) To 1/17/1991 ( RACKETEER INFLUENCED AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS US Title 18 - the Persian Gulf War begins as scheduled severe criminal activity against the United States of America ) is 9207 days
From 5/25/1963 To 9/30/1975 ( my biological brother Thomas Reagan the United States Navy test pilot was the primary test pilot for the first flight of the Hughes and McDonnell Douglas AH-64 Apache attack helicopter and for the United States Army AH-64 Apache test program ) is 4511 days
From 11/2/1965 ( my birth date in Antlers Oklahoma USA and my birthdate as the known official Deputy United States Marshal Kerry Wayne Burgess and active duty United States Marine Corps officer ) To 3/10/1978 ( Jimmy Carter - Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act of 1978 Statement on Signing H.R. 8638 Into Law ) is 4511 days
From 5/25/1963 To 9/30/1975 ( my biological brother Thomas Reagan the United States Navy test pilot was the primary test pilot for the first flight of the Hughes and McDonnell Douglas AH-64 Apache attack helicopter and for the United States Army AH-64 Apache test program ) is 4511 days
From 11/2/1965 ( my birth date in Antlers Oklahoma USA and my birthdate as the known official Deputy United States Marshal Kerry Wayne Burgess and active duty United States Marine Corps officer ) To 3/10/1978 ( premiere US film "Gray Lady Down" ) is 4511 days
From 5/25/1963 To 9/30/1975 ( my biological brother Thomas Reagan the United States Navy test pilot was the primary test pilot for the first flight of the Hughes and McDonnell Douglas AH-64 Apache attack helicopter and for the United States Army AH-64 Apache test program ) is 4511 days
From 11/2/1965 ( my birth date in Antlers Oklahoma USA and my birthdate as the known official Deputy United States Marshal Kerry Wayne Burgess and active duty United States Marine Corps officer ) To 3/10/1978 ( premiere US TV series episode "C.P.O. Sharkey"::"Tell It to the Marines" ) is 4511 days
From 5/25/1963 To 10/5/1988 ( the "Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy" speech from Lloyd Bentsen to Dan Quayle ) is 9265 days
From 11/2/1965 ( my birth date in Antlers Oklahoma USA and my birthdate as the known official Deputy United States Marshal Kerry Wayne Burgess and active duty United States Marine Corps officer ) To 3/16/1991 ( my first successful major test of my ultraspace matter transportation device as Kerry Wayne Burgess the successful Ph.D. graduate Columbia South Carolina ) is 9265 days
From 5/25/1963 To 2/27/1983 ( Nikolai Aleksandrovich Kozyrev deceased ) is 7218 days
From 11/2/1965 ( my birth date in Antlers Oklahoma USA and my birthdate as the known official Deputy United States Marshal Kerry Wayne Burgess and active duty United States Marine Corps officer ) To 8/7/1985 ( premiere US film "Real Genius" ) is 7218 days
http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=R000604
Biographical Directory of the United States Congress
RUSSELL, Steve, (1963 - )
RUSSELL, Steve, a Representative from Oklahoma; born in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma County, Okla., on May 25, 1963; graduated from Del City High School, Del City, Okla., 1981; B.A., Ouachita Baptist University, Arkadelphia, Ark., 1985; U.S. Army, 1985-2006; author; small business owner; member of the Oklahoma state senate, 2008-2012; elected as a Republican to the One Hundred Fourteenth Congress (January 3, 2015-present).
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000196/bio
IMDb
Mike Myers
Biography
Date of Birth 25 May 1963, Scarborough, Ontario, Canada
Birth Name Michael John Myers
http://www.springfieldspringfield.co.uk/movie_script.php?movie=austin-powers-international-man-of-mystery
Springfield! Springfield!
Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery (1997)
Scott, my boy, how are you?
How was your day?
My friend Sweet Jay took me
to that video arcade in town.
They don't speak English,
so Jay got into a fight...
and he's all, Quit hassling me
'cause I don't speak French."
And then the guy
says something in Paris talk...
and I'm like, Just back off."
And they're all, Get out."
And we're like, Make me."
It was cool.
Fascinating.
What are your plans
for this evening?
I thought I'd stay in.
There's a good titty movie
on Skinimax.
And that's how you'd like
to live your life?
What?
Scott, I want you to meet
Daddy's nemesis Austin Powers.
Are you feeding him?
http://www.springfieldspringfield.co.uk/movie_script.php?movie=austin-powers-international-man-of-mystery
Springfield! Springfield!
Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery (1997)
Why don't you just kill him?
No, Scott .
I have an even better idea.
I'm going to place him in
an easily escapable situation...
involving an overly
elaborate and exotic death.
Why don't you
just shoot him now?
I'll go get a gun.
We'll shoot him together.
It'll be fun. Bang!
Dead. Done.
One more peep out of you
and you are grounded, mister...
and I am not joking.
All right. Let's begin.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=17301
The American Presidency Project
George Bush
XLI President of the United States: 1989 - 1993
The President's News Conference in Paris
July 16, 1989
The President. Well, we've just concluded 2 1/2 days of intensive and productive meetings with the summit counterparts on economic and political issues. And let me take this opportunity, first of all, to thank President Mitterrand for his most gracious hospitality.
The summit, in my view, was a clear success. We met in a time of sustained economic growth and agreed that the prospects are good for the continued expansion without inflation of that growth. It was against this backdrop that we conducted a wide-ranging discussion on critical global issues, from East-West relations to the growing environmental challenge that we face.
We came to Paris at a truly remarkable moment. The winds of change are bringing hope to people all around the world. And who would have thought just a few short years ago that we would be witness to a freely elected Senate in Poland or political pluralism in Hungary? I was really touched by what I saw and heard in those two countries -- people determined to keep their dreams alive, people determined to see a Europe whole and free. And that's why America brought to this summit our determination to support the reform movement in Hungary and Poland. People yearning for freedom and democracy deserve our support, and it's because of the community of values shared by these summit countries that we were able to agree to meet soon to discuss concerted action that will help Poland and Hungary.
Democracy and economic growth go hand in hand, whether in Eastern Europe, the Summit Seven, or the developing world. And therefore, much of our discussion here in Paris centered on economics. We reaffirmed our international economic cooperation and our whole policy coordination process. Our strengthened debt strategy was firmly supported. We reaffirmed our determination to maintain and improve the multilateral trading system, calling for the completion of the Uruguay round by the end of 1990 and extending the GATT to new areas, including agriculture.
This summit marked a watershed in the environment. And we agreed that decisive action is urgently needed to preserve the Earth. We committed to work together, as well as with the developing world, to meet our responsibility of global stewardship. The measures we've agreed to in Paris are timely, and they lay the groundwork for further specific steps when we meet again next year in the United States.
And finally, I was especially pleased to find that my colleagues share our sense of urgency and sense of the importance of the worldwide fight against drugs. Among other steps, we agreed to establish a financial action task force to find new ways to track and prevent the laundering of drug money. I look forward to meeting my summit colleagues in the United States next year as we continue working on these and other priority issues, build on the genuine progress that I think was made here in Paris.
And I might say that I was very pleased that this meeting coincided with the Bicentennial here. It was a very moving experience for all of us.
Now I will be glad to take any questions.
Future Economic Summit Participants
Q. Mr. Gorbachev wants to play a part in the world economic discussions. Would he be welcome at the next economic summit table?
The President. Well, I think that's a little premature, but it was very interesting, I found, that a leader of the Soviet Union would address a letter to the French President as head of this year's summit. We talked about that letter a great deal. There's an awful lot that has to transpire in the Soviet Union, it seems to me, before anything of that nature would be considered. We're talking about free-market economies here. But I found fascinating the very fact of the letter. But there was no -- there certainly -- I don't think any indication that he will be attending the next summit. He'll get a very courteous and very thoughtful reply from Mr. Mitterrand.
Q. How about the poor countries -- Bangladesh? Would they ever be welcome?
The President. Well, this is an economic summit of countries whose economies -- drawn together by the free economies of the West, and so, I don't think there's a question at this point of expanding the summit. There is concern about the economies in the world that aren't doing so well. Bangladesh is a country that does need aid, and, indeed, the communique addressed itself to trying to help Bangladesh.
Summit With Soviet President Gorbachev
Q. Mr. President, you consulted with the NATO allies on military matters in Brussels, and then you had an economic summit here in Paris. What's left before you sit down with Mr. Gorbachev for a superpower summit?
The President. A little more time, I think.
Q. I mean, is there any more -- don't you have anything to discuss with him now that you've planted this groundwork?
The President. Yes. Let me explain, to those who aren't familiar with the policy, that Secretary Baker has met a couple of times with Mr. Shevardnadze [Soviet Foreign Minister]. There will be another such meeting of that nature, and at an appropriate time, I will have a meeting with Mr. Gorbachev. But I don't think anything at the summit influenced that bilateral meeting.
Summit Environmental Issues
Q. Mr. President, the summit called for decisive action on the environment, but various environmental groups are saying that you did not take decisive action. Could you respond to that?
The President. Well, I did see one or two groups. They didn't think I took decisive action when I sent -- or took proper action when I sent a very far-reaching clean air proposal up to the Congress. And so, some have been critical.
Many have been supportive on the broad -- the very fact -- I'll tell you where we got a lot of support is the very fact that the communique addressed itself with some specificity to various environmental goals: the whole concept of cooperation on research, technology, and transfer to the LDC's [less developed countries]; the prevention of pollution; the idea of setting up monitoring stations so we can better predict and thus avoid environmental disaster.
There was a lot of common ground. In fact, I would say that on that and, perhaps, antinarcotics there was most fervor. And so, I think many environmental groups see the very fact that this matter was on the front burner as being very positive. And the summit did make strong enough statements to commit all of our members, and hopefully others around the world, to sound environmental practice. So you get criticized; but I think, generally speaking, it's been very, very forward looking.
Assistance for Poland and Hungary
Q. Mr. President, you promised in Poland and Hungary that you would seek concerted action on the part of the countries meeting here to help those countries. There seems to have been a pledge that there would be concerted consideration of action -- no dollar figure attached and no specified action promised -- and a meeting apparently planned. And do you feel you got what you wanted, sir?
The President. I think so. And you'll notice, Brit [Brit Hume, ABC News], that in both Poland and Hungary I stopped well short of setting dollar figures or of challenging others to meet dollar figures. But on this one, let there be no doubt there was unanimity that we should address ourselves to the problems of Poland and Hungary. And so, I was not disappointed. I didn't go in there with a specific package with dollar figures on it, and I think that an early meeting to do just that is good. It called for food aid to Poland. That's specific. Doesn't have a figure on it, but -- no, I think we got what we sought. And there was no rancor on that question and no division on the question. But there was unanimity that we have to move on it.
Soviet Role in Economic Summits
Q. Since you've said that you spent a lot of time last night talking about Mr. Gorbachev's letter, can you tell us a little bit about those discussions, and can you tell us what your view is? What is an appropriate response from the West to such an extraordinary request by Mr. Gorbachev to become part of the economy of the Western democracies?
The President. We would welcome any movement by the Soviet Union towards market-oriented, or Western economies. There's no question about that. And there's nothing begrudging about our saying -- in replying to Helen's [Helen Thomas, United Press International] comment, my replying to Helen's -- that I don't expect Mr. Gorbachev to sit as a member at next year's summit. But the discussion was -- it started off by: What do you think he means by this? And a lot of discussion -- we'll get the experts to analyze it -- and all of that took place. And people concluded that it was just one more manifestation of the changing world we're living in. And that, I think, was the main message.
And then, where we go from here -- some of that has been addressed in the communique, because we talked in there about help for the Third World. And some of his letter, as you know, was on that very subject. When it came in, Mr. Mitterrand read it off to the group there and then said: "Well, what will we do?" And my suggestion was -- which he had intended to adopt anyway -- that he, as the man to whom the letter was addressed, would reply to it. So, that's the way it was. And the fact that it's happening, is taking place -- the President of the United States can go to Eastern Europe and witness the very kind of change we're talking about.
I'll tell you -- I want to reply to Carl's [Carl Leubsdorf, Dallas Morning News] question here -- that almost the most dramatic for me was when Mr. Nemeth, the Prime Minister of Hungary, handed me that piece of barbed wire -- tearing down the Iron Curtain between Hungary and Austria. Now who would have thought that possible? And this letter -- just one more manifestation of the exciting times we're in of change. They're moving towards our open system, our free system, our system of free elections. And that's the way I would look at the letter -- in that context.
Future Economic Summits
Q. Mr. President, in connection with next year's summit, there's been some talk among some of your people about possibly having it in your home State of Texas, possibly in San Antonio. And I wondered whether you'd like to see that.
The President. Well, I'd have to run that by the Dallas Morning News and see how they felt about it, but that's a distinct possibility. However, it's too early, no decision has been made. The fact that Jim Baker is from Houston and I'm from Houston and Bob Mosbacher's from Texas should have nothing to do -- [laughter] -- with where the next summit's going to be, and there has been no decision.
Q. That wouldn't mean some discrimination against Dallas because of your roots?
The President. No, none whatsoever. Get that down. The fall elections are up in 19 -- Charles [Charles Bierbauer, CNN]?
Q. Let me follow on the question about summits. These things have gotten a lot bigger than they were originally planned to be -- hundreds of your people, thousands of us. It's your first summit, but you've got to host the next one. Have you given any thought to how you want to do it in terms of style?
The President. No, but, I'll tell you, the part -- and I'm the new boy, the new kid in school -- but the part I found most interesting was the unstructured part, the part where you sit with these other leaders, tell them what you think, listen carefully to what they think. And that happens sometimes in the corridors or sometimes before a structured seminar, sometimes at a meal. And I would like to think that the more emphasis we've placed on that kind of interaction, the better it would be.
But there was no discussion by the summit interlocutors on how to restructure it. Indeed, it went smoothly. And I will again say that Mr. Mitterrand handled the formal part very well. But for me, I'd like to see more just plain unstructured interaction between the leaders, where you don't just have to talk on the agenda items.
Space Exploration
Q. It'll be 20 years next Thursday that man first landed on the Moon. There are some people in your administration that would like for you to announce on Thursday that we're going to go back to the Moon, possibly even to Mars. Can you and Dick Darman find that kind of money in the budget?
The President. Well, you put your finger, John [John Cochran, NBC News], on some of the real problems -- the major problem -- on setting major goals for space exploration. And whether we will be ready by next week or later this week to make any momentous announcements, I'm not sure. I have not made a decision on what we will say on that historic day.
Q. Would it be too quick going in on it with the Soviets, though?
The President. Well, that has been suggested. And some, as you know, discussion have gone on -- not, I don't think, recently -- between us and the Soviets on this. But certainly the concept of international is not offensive to me. But we'll have to wait and see because no decision -- --
U.S. Economy
Q. Mr. President, Friday's economic indicators show some weakening of the U.S. economy. Apparently, some of your summit partners expressed some concern about that. What assurances did you give them and can you give us that we're not headed for a recession?
The President. Well, you know, ironically, none did express to me their concern about the U.S. economy stalling out. We really didn't get into that discussion. I must say that from time to time it is a matter of concern to me, and thus I've tried to think through with our Secretary of the Treasury and others the concept of how the interest rate structure should be. But I've had no indication from home, nor had we picked up any here, that they felt that the U.S. economy was going to move towards a recession. And that's the thing, of course, that you'd want to guard against.
Our growth has not been as robust as the growth in some other countries, but we're still moving. And when you have a several-trillion-dollar gross national product and you take a small percentage of growth, and it makes for enormous dollar figures in growth.
Soviet Role in Future Economic Summits
Q. Mr. President, how much change would the Soviet Union have to make before they could earn an invitation to next year's economic summit? If you can't answer that specifically, at least could you give us some sense of scale?
The President. Well, one, as you know, I have welcomed the reforms that are taking place in the Soviet Union. But I don't -- this concept of the Soviets coming to a G - 7 summit has never been, to my knowledge, thought much about until this letter appeared, so there's no standards for entrance into the G - 7.
The Soviet economy needs a lot of work. And I say that not to be critical, but certainly that's an objective judgment. The economy is in bad, bad shape -- far worse shape than the Western economies. And so, I think what we ought to do is to encourage the kinds of economic changes in Eastern Europe and -- to the degree the Soviets would not consider that an intervention into their internal affairs -- in the Soviet Union. Those should be the next steps.
Welcome the interest that was shown by this letter. This wasn't an application for admission to the G - 7. It was saying: Let's do something in a common way about solving problems around the world. And so, I wouldn't set a standard right now. I'd simply say: Let each of us try to get our economies in order. And as soon as that happens and as soon as we see the manifestations of freedom break out there, in terms of demonstrably free elections all over, then we start talking about democratic change, and then the day approaches. I think it's very premature to start laying down guidelines from here as to what we need to do on that.
Future of Europe
Q. Mr. President, you've talked about a whole and united Europe, and Mr. Gorbachev has talked about a common European home. Are they the same concept, or what is the difference? Is there a difference between the role of the U.S. in those two statements?
The President. Europe whole and free is our concept. His common European home is fine, so long -- as I said earlier -- you can move from room to room. And that means coming along further on human rights. That means much more openness. It means support them when you see them move towards perestroika and glasnost. But it means an evolution in the Soviet Union, and it means an evolution in Eastern Europe. And we've begun to see it.
A Europe whole and free does not visualize a Europe where you still have barbed wire separating people, where you still have human rights abuses in one or two of the countries that are egregious. And so, it is whole and free, and the common home theme is a good one. I mean, that's a very good theme, and we should encourage it. But we want to see these countries continue to move towards what works, and what works is freedom, democracy, market economies -- things of that nature.
Q. May I follow up? In the meeting of the G - 7, is there room -- or, did you sense the countries want U.S. leadership or they want the U.S. to be a coequal partner?
The President. You mean with the Soviets? No, I sense that those colleagues feel that we have disproportionate responsibility. I think there's a keen interest in how I will work with the Soviets. There's no question about that. I felt that very clearly.
Soviet Role in Future Economic Summits
Q. At the risk of seeming fixated by Mr. Gorbachev, when you discussed his letter, was there a suggestion from anybody that it might have been a bit of mischief or an attempt to get some publicity out of a Western summit?
The President. I can't say that that never occurred. [Laughter] But I don't think that, after people thought about it rationally, that anyone was prepared to say that and that alone was what motivated this letter.
There is change taking place. And I think for some time people really wondered whether I was a little begrudging in recognizing that change and encouraging that change. But I think now that has been laid to rest. So, when you see something of this nature, you take a look at it, and you assess it, and then you -- but you don't discount it in a cynical fashion.
But I think there was the timing. The summit has been planned for a long time, and this letter might have come in earlier on for more serious "sherpa" consideration, as every other issue was subjected to marvelous work by the "sherpas" -- who incidentally did a superb job -- and this one didn't. So, I think people would excuse a reasonable degree of cynicism -- but don't think the conclusion was cynical.
Eastern European Reforms
Q. Mr. President, going back to the other day in Poland, an elderly man said that when people talk to you folks about change, just remember that the Communists still have the bayonets. So, my question to you is: Do you believe that countries like Poland and Hungary are really going to have serious and permanent change, or is there a line that their leaders and that Moscow just won't go past?
The President. Well, no, I think that you've already seen serious change. I think you see the political situation in Hungary, for example, is absolutely amazing compared to the way we used to view Hungary. And if the Soviet Union, instead of taking their troops out of Hungary, had tried to tighten down, I don't expect we'd see the kind of change in Hungary that we're seeing today. And so, I'd say that we're a long way from what Gorbachev has spelled out as a common European home, but it's moving. So, let's encourage the progress. Maybe I missed the nuance of your question.
Q. That there is a course that's going to lead to a permanent change, or, again, the question is: Are the Soviets going to step in and pull the rug out from under at some point?
The President. Well, I would quote Mr. Gorbachev's words back to him on that, what he told me in New York, and what Jim Baker has heard from Shevardnadze, and what everybody who interacts with the Soviets hear, and that is that perestroika is for real. You cannot set the clock back. It is going to go forward. And so, I would see that as what guides now.
However, I have said as long as there are enormous imbalances in conventional forces and in certain categories of strategic forces, the West should keep its eyes wide open. And indeed, there was some reference to that in this communique. There was unanimity on the part of the NATO allies that we ought to be cautious and that we -- and so to answer your question, it's not a done deal; and that's, I think, what was being reflected there in Poland.
Q. Mr. President, I wonder, as you put all of this together, what you said about Poland and Hungary and Gorbachev asking to join the world economy. As a matter of policy, do you see the cold war over, and do you think the West has won it?
The President. I don't like to use "cold war." That has a connotation of worse days in terms of East-West relationship. I think things have moved forward so that the connotation that those two words conjure up is entirely different now. And yet I don't want to stand here and seem euphoric -- that everything is hunky-dory between the East and the West on arms or on differences in the economy or on how we look at regional problems. We have some big differences, still. But let's encourage the change. And then I can answer your question in maybe a few more years more definitively.
Economic Summit Accomplishments
Q. Mr. President, the Summit Seven leaders are celebrating a gathering that was so successful it went 2 1/2 days instead of 3. Could you not find another half day's worth of problems to discuss and maybe resolve, sir? [Laughter]
The President. We're kind of running out of gas. I'll tell you, it's been a vigorous experience in physical fitness for me, and I try to stay in pretty good shape. But this one -- when you couple the summit with the [French] bicentennial and then tack on Poland and Hungary, I wasn't about to argue we needed more time, and nor was anyone else. I think the fact that this rather complex agenda was completed in harmony is the fact that ought to really carry the spotlight, not the fact that we finished in advance.
There's going to be plenty of opportunities to discuss a lot more problems that exist around the world. But we had an agenda; we addressed it. We finished it on time, and it was done harmoniously. So, I think that's why it worked out. And that is exactly what happened. We did complete it. And we had a lot more opportunity because of the bicentennial to have interaction with the other leaders, more so than at any other summit.
Q. Do you feel, sir, you accomplished all you could?
The President. We accomplished what we set out to accomplish.
Stealth Bomber
Q. Mr. President, the Stealth bomber had a couple of setbacks this week, and Senator Nunn, as I understand it, indicated he's not going to pay for a plane that just taxis. [Laughter] Do you have faith in this project, or are you alarmed by the recent developments?
The President. Well, Senator Nunn and 250 million other Americans that pick up the bill for it -- but he's not going to pay for it. I mean, it's a decision that the Congress is going to have to take collectively. If Senator Nunn decides that it isn't a good idea, it's going to be a whale of a fight. But I think that legitimate questions have been raised about the bomber, and Secretary Cheney has addressed them very forcefully, giving the administration's position. Being gone, I don't have quite as sensitive a feel as I would if I were at home of the nuances of the battle. But we have gone forward with our proposal, and now it's up to the Congress to decide what they're going to do.
And when I saw Dick Cheney, in essence, saying make up your minds, I think he was doing the right thing. When I saw Senator Nunn expressing his reservations, we have to understand he's doing what he is obligated to do as chairman of that committee. But it will be sorted out, I think.
New Taxes
Q. Mr. President, you're giving away money to Poland and Hungary, and you're talking about spending more money on the environment. There are a lot of needs at home. And now you're in a new budget cycle. Is this the time -- and you promised today to reduce the deficit, the U.S. budget deficit -- is this the time to announce that it's necessary to raise taxes in the United States?
The President. No! [Laughter]
Q. How are you going to do it then? How are you going to meet -- --
The President. Well, we've already got a proposal up on the Hill, and look at it very carefully. And our Director of the OMB has done a very good job in sorting out priorities. He's worked, and our Cabinet has given him full cooperation. And the proposals that I have made can be and are included in our budget thinking -- not just for this year, but beyond.
But you put your finger on something that does trouble me when I come to countries like Poland and Hungary. I wish we did have more -- more funds with which to help others, encourage private investment and public-private partnerships and privatization. I wish we had much more to do there or speedily apply to environmental concerns or antinarcotics cooperation.
So, I don't want to sound like we have it all made at all. We've had to sort through priorities in a very complicated way. But to answer your question, you have to go up to the question that was earlier asked about the economy itself. And I do not want to risk screeching growth -- modest though it may be -- to a halt by raising revenues in the way that some have suggested.
Ms. Thomas. Thank you.
The President. Oh, thank you, Helen. Are you willing to give them a 4-minute extension? There are so many -- this is what gets it -- Marlin, what is your advice, as a man who has been through this every single day? [Laughter]
Mr. Fitzwater. Two more, sir.
The President. Two more. You weren't necessarily one of the two, but go ahead, Maureen [Maureen Dowd, New York Times]. [Laughter] Far be it from me, in this land of delicacy and grace, to not recognize you. [Laughter]
Eastern European Reforms
Q. -- -- in Eastern Europe you talked about two themes constantly: one, encouraging democracy and moves to a market economy, and two, that you weren't there to try to raise tensions with the Soviet Union or challenge them in any way. But my question is: If what you want is carried out -- moves to democracy and a market economy -- aren't you really talking about the dissolution of the Soviet empire? And is that what you mean when you call for a Europe that's whole and free?
The President. Soviet empire? If you mean the imposition of a Marxist system or a socialism in their definition -- system on others -- yes, I'd like to see Europe whole and free. But with the Soviet moving towards market -- and they're not there -- towards more freedom, towards more openness; they themselves have recognized that their system doesn't work. So, you don't run the risks or have the same tensions that we might have had 10 years ago talking about the very same themes I talked about in Poland and Hungary.
I went to -- some of you were on this trip -- went to Vienna several years ago and gave a speech, and a man in -- the speech was on differentiation. And I will spare him identification. But a Hungarian official told me that he personally -- he befriended us, and we talked carefully -- had gotten a lot of grief over the fact that we had singled out Hungary as a country that was moving. Even then, even those short years ago, moving in a way that their changes could be accommodated by closer relationships with the West. And that conversation I had on this trip showed me how dynamic the change. So, I don't think there's a risk of -- if we're right in our assessment that change is going forward -- I don't think there is this risk.
Soviet Role in Future Economic Summits
Q. Is Mr. Mitterrand free to reply to the Gorbachev letter himself, or will it be circulated, or would you like to see the letter? How would you like that to go?
The President. No, I think that he should reply to it himself. He has a good relationship with Mr. Gorbachev. Gorbachev was here. They've had some followup, I believe, and the letter was addressed to him, albeit as the president of the summit. And so, I think it's fitting that he simply use his good judgment and reply to it in any way he wants. And that's exactly what he's going to do. Incidentally, that was discussed.
Q. And if next year's summit is in Texas, can it be very early? [Laughter]
The President. Parting -- walking shot.
Economic Summit Accomplishments
Q. Mr. President, in this summit, you achieved all your goals. Do you have the feeling of being the winner number one of this summit?
The President. Well, I pointed out before we came over here that something of this nature ought not to be judged in terms of winners and losers. Your question sounds very much like some that we engage in at home of who's up, who's down, who's ahead, who's winning, who's more popular, who's ahead in the poll -- Bush or Gorbachev -- in Eastern Europe or Connecticut. [Laughter] And it doesn't really have much to do with that. What -- --
Q. Are you satisfied -- --
The President. I am very satisfied. I am very satisfied that the summit achieved its goals. Every other summit leader tells me that it was the best summit they have attended, and I again would salute the President of the French Republic for the way in which he conducted the meetings. But, yes, I am very, very satisfied, and there aren't any winners or losers or who is up or who is down. We're together is how we approached the East. We're together is how we approached the environmental questions.
I didn't take a question here on Third World debt, but there was a strong endorsement for the Brady plan. And there was no dissension on that approach. So, it came together very, very well. And if the Brady -- and I shouldn't say this. I know this is going to get me in real trouble. But if the Brady plan looks like it's going to be successful, we may call it the Bush plan. [Laughter]
Thank you all very, very much.
Note: The President's 18th news conference began at 6:01 p.m. at the U.S. Ambassador's residence. A tape was not available for verification of the content of this news conference. The President traveled to Amsterdam, The Netherlands the following morning.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/323063/Nikolay-Aleksandrovich-Kozyrev
Encyclopædia Britannica
Nikolay Aleksandrovich Kozyrev
Nikolay Aleksandrovich Kozyrev, (born Sept. 2, 1908, St. Petersburg, Russia—died Feb. 27, 1983), Russian astronomer, who claimed to have discovered volcano-like activity on the Moon. His sightings of apparent gaseous emissions from the lunar surface challenged the long-held theory that the Moon is a dead and inert celestial body.
In 1931 Kozyrev joined the staff of the Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory, near Leningrad (St. Petersburg), where he studied the planets and auroral phenomena. These studies gained him distinction, but he was imprisoned by the Stalin regime in 1937 and was not released until 1948.
In 1954 Kozyrev made a much-disputed report of an aurora, similar to the Earth’s Aurora Borealis, on the planet Venus. The existence of such an aurora would mean that Venus has a magnetic field much like Earth’s, and the study of Venerian phenomena would thus provide much new information on geomagnetic storms. (The U.S. space probe Mariner 10, passing within 3,600 miles [5,800 km] of Venus in February 1974, found no detectable magnetic field.)
While investigating the lunar crater Alphonsus in 1958, Kozyrev reported a reddish mist covering part of it for a short time. He interpreted this as a volcanic eruption and confirmed his observations the following year, but his conclusion that volcanic activity was the cause of the disturbance has been disputed by astronomers. Nonetheless, his observations led to a new focus in lunar research for a time.
In 1963 Kozyrev startled astronomers with his spectroscopic discovery of hydrogen in the thin atmosphere of Mercury. This gas should have escaped Mercury’s light gravitational field long ago. From further studies Kozyrev concluded that the hydrogen comes from the Sun in the form of hydrogen nuclei.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=30475
The American Presidency Project
Jimmy Carter
XXXIX President of the United States: 1977 - 1981
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act of 1978 Statement on Signing H.R. 8638 Into Law.
March 10, 1978
I am pleased to sign into law today H.R. 8638, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act of 1978. Enactment of this legislation takes us a major step toward fulfillment of an objective which the United States shares with other nations—a halt in the spread of nuclear weapons capability while preserving the peaceful use of nuclear energy.
The Congress has responded to this challenge with both care and courage in establishing a framework for ensuring that we meet these objectives. Senators Ribicoff, Glenn, and Percy, Representatives Zablocki, Bingham, and Findley, their colleagues on the committees which developed this bill, and their staffs have my respect and my thanks for their leadership on this issue. It has been a privilege for me, as it has been for Secretary Vance and other members of my administration, to work with them on the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act of 1978.
Our efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons began more than 30 years ago, when we went to the United Nations with an offer to place certain aspects of nuclear energy under international ownership and control. The passage of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and the adoption of the Non-Proliferation Treaty by the United Nations in 1968 and now this law, each have moved us further toward attainment of our nonproliferation goals.
On April 7 and 27 of last year, I outlined the policies and programs which we would implement to diminish proliferation risks. Today, I want to reaffirm this administration's strong commitment to that policy. We also recognize that nuclear power technologies now in operation, which do not involve nuclear fuel reprocessing, can and must provide an important source of energy for our Nation and for their countries. Our current once-through fuel cycle is and will continue to be a significant contributor to our energy supply. Properly managed, it can function without increasing the risks of proliferation. Our policy takes a responsible course between forgoing the energy benefits of nuclear power and becoming committed to commercialized use of plutonium before we know that we can deal safely with its risks.
I continue to oppose making premature and unnecessary commitments to commercialization of the fast breeder reactor and reprocessing, as exemplified in the United States by the Clinch River and Barnwell projects.
We and the other nations of the world must use the time we now have and pause to develop safer technologies, better institutional arrangements, and improved safeguards which will permit all nations to achieve their energy objectives while preventing the spread of nuclear weapons.
More than 40 nations have already joined with us in an International Nuclear Fuel Cycle Evaluation to explore and assess our means of meeting these twin goals. During this period of examination, the uranium-fueled reactors now in widespread operation can be used without incurring new proliferation risks. If our common search for improved institutions and technologies is to be successful, however, all nations will be required to avoid those steps which prejudice the outcome of the INFCE.
The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act sets the conditions and criteria which will govern U.S. cooperation with other nations in our efforts to develop the peaceful use of nuclear energy. The encouragement of universal ratification of the Non-Proliferation Treaty is central to the act, as is the establishment of a comprehensive set of controls, including application of International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards and provision of a stable framework for international nuclear cooperation and commerce. The act will also make our export licensing process more predictable.
We also will be taking steps to strengthen the safety and security of the fuel cycle we now have in operation and to ensure that it continues to be an efficient and reliable source of energy, both domestically and abroad.
Over the course of this year, we will develop comprehensive policies for management and disposal of radioactive waste, including implementation of the spent fuel storage program announced last October. To ensure our ability to continue as a reliable supplier of uranium fuel to those who share our nonproliferation objectives, we are moving ahead with a new enrichment plant at Portsmouth, Ohio.
Preventing nuclear proliferation will not be easy—some have called this task impossible. I believe, however, that halting the spread of nuclear weapons is imperative. We must press forward in our efforts. Fear of failure cannot be allowed to become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
In our first year, we have made substantial progress. The nuclear-supplying countries have agreed upon and published guidelines for the export of nuclear fuel and technology. The International Nuclear Fuel Cycle Evaluation is under way. As this legislation now becomes law, we are establishing clear criteria and incentives for nuclear cooperation, as well as sanctions against violations of safeguards.
Although I still have reservations about the numerous provisions in this act which state that Congress may invalidate or approve executive branch action by concurrent resolution, I am signing it because of its overwhelming importance to our nonproliferation policy. I do wish to make clear, however, that by signing this act, I am not agreeing that the Congress can overturn authorized executive actions through procedures not provided in the Constitution.
In conclusion, I am persuaded that the new criteria, incentives, and procedures in this act will help solve the problems of proliferation. They will help to ensure that access to nuclear energy will not be accompanied by the spread of nuclear explosive capability. While I recognize that some of these provisions may involve adjustments by our friends abroad, this more comprehensive policy will greatly increase international security. I believe that they will ultimately join us in our belief that improved world security justifies the steps which we all must take to bring it about. Control over the spread of nuclear weapons on our planet is one of the paramount questions of our time.
If the world is to benefit from the great potential of nuclear power, we must act now to protect ourselves and future generations from its worst dangers. We in the United States will dedicate our expertise and technical resources to this task, and we urge other countries to do the same. Let us continue to work together to achieve these goals.
Note: As enacted, H.R. 8638 is Public Law 95-242, approved March 10.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=36217
The American Presidency Project
Ronald Reagan
XL President of the United States: 1981 - 1989
Remarks to the Employees of United States Precision Lens, Inc., in Cincinnati, Ohio
August 8, 1988
Thank you very much, and thank you, Roger Howe and David Hinchman. And I brought a couple of Washingtonians along with me here, Congressman Gradison and Congressman McEwen. And I thank all of you very much.
You know, I can't tell you how good it feels to come here to the heartland, where America's work gets done, and to get away from that puzzle palace on the Potomac. [Laughter] Every time I leave Washington to travel around the country, as I get out of the plane I half expect to see a sign waiting for me saying, "Welcome to America." You know, if I didn't get out of Washington often, it would be easy to lose touch with what's really going on. Back at the airport someone asked me my impressions of the Reds' manager. I told him, but I still don't know if he meant Pete Rose or Gorbachev. [Laughter]
Well, I came here today to tell you something really that you already know: that you're a part of a remarkable American success story. Around the country, companies like U.S. Precision Lens are leading America's economic expansion and manufacturing boom. In fact, more good news came out last week: U.S. factory orders have grown at their highest rate in 18 years, and production levels are pushing factories to near capacity. Not surprisingly, employment is at its highest level in history. Just last month, America created another 283,000 new jobs—that makes it over 17 million jobs since our expansion began. And like yours, these are high-wage jobs, jobs with a future.
America is in the longest peacetime economic expansion on record, and it's our exports and our manufacturing that are now driving it. In many ways, all of you already know this, because you've been part of it right here. Since 1980, as if you didn't know, your company has tripled sales, doubled employment, and your exports have exploded into world markets. And talk about beating the pants off the competition: You sell over a third of what you make to companies from Japan.
You're not alone. Americans today are selling shoes to Italy, medical equipment to Japan, and machine tools to West Germany. A furniture company in St. Louis now exports to Europe, its owner having discovered, in his words, "that my products were a lot better and a helluva lot cheaper." [Laughter] One company up the road in Columbus has even figured out a way to sell sand to Egypt. [Laughter] It mines and refines a high-tech silica sand that is used as a cleansing agent in furnaces. From software to sand, from jumbo jets to precision lenses, American products are the finest in the world, and we can outcompete any country on Earth.
I've heard some people bad-mouthing our economy recently. I think they must have stopped reading the newspaper that day in 1981 when they handed over the lease to the White House. Yes, things were bad back then. But today unemployment is at its lowest level in 14 years. Inflation is low and under control. America's manufacturing productivity has soared 4.3 percent a year-that's the highest rate since World War II. Real family income is up. Exports are at an all-time high. And America has created, on the average, a quarter of a million private sector jobs each month for 68 consecutive months. Any way you slice it, America has taken the pennant and is sweeping the World Series.
You know, I have to interrupt right here to say something on this employment. I had to go to Washington to discover a certain statistic: those statistics about employment. Do you know what the potential employment pool of the United States is? It is everybody, male and female, from age 16 and up. And today the highest percentage of that potential pool is employed than ever in our history—62.6 percent have jobs in this country, of everyone, male and female, above the age of 16.
Now, some people are telling you to take for granted the economic growth of today and Of the last 7 years. Their message is: You can take prosperity for granted. It's time for a change; take a chance on us. Well, that's sort of like someone telling you that you've stored up all the cold beer you could want, so now you can unplug the refrigerator. [Laughter] But, no more than with a refrigerator, you can't unplug our progrowth economic policies and expect things to stay the same.
Well, the fact is the whole world is learning from our example and turning away from decades-old policies of government-mandated economic failure and turning toward the type of economic policies that Vice President Bush and I have put into practice over the last 7 years. The policies that pulled America out of economic stagnation, rising unemployment, declining family income, and double-digit inflation have made America's economy a global success story. These policies are the wave of the future. Country after country is reducing taxes, cutting regulation, reducing the role of government, and letting entrepreneurs and working people build new factories, new jobs, and new futures for themselves and their families. It's sweeping the world, but like hamburgers and baseball, it all began right here in the United States.
You know, I have to tell you, there is a thing called the economic summit every year—seven of us, seven countries. And we go from one country to the other, and the country where you're meeting is—their head of state is the chairman. And so, I was a new kid in school when I went to my first one up in Canada, and for a little while, why, I kind of stayed there and stayed silent and so forth at these meetings. And then our economic reforms began to take hold, and what a thrill it was! The new kid walked into the meeting—it was in Europe someplace—and there the other six of the seven sat facing me. And finally one of them said, "Tell us about the American miracle." Well, I was very pleased to do that.
There's a story about a fellow who was always asking Abraham Lincoln to give him a government job. And one day the news was that the Customs chief had died, and sure enough, this fellow shows up and asks President Lincoln if he could take that fellow's place. And Lincoln says, "It's fine with me if the undertaker doesn't mind." [Laughter]
Well, no bureaucrat, politician, government expert, or certified genius sitting in a Federal office in Washington has ever been able to replace the economic miracle of free men and women working with their hands, their hearts, and their heads to build a better future for their families and a stronger economy for America. I have said this again and again, and I'm going to keep on saying it: It's not the Government, it is the American people who have made our nation the greatest country on Earth. Basically what our program did was get out of your way and let you do what you can do so well.
I can't think of any part of America where that's truer than here in the heartland, the Midwest. You know, I get a little tired of hearing Cincinnati and other Midwestern cities called the Rust Belt when the Midwest is the heartland of America's industrial renaissance. The Midwest isn't the Rust Belt; it's the Boom Belt. I can't help wondering if maybe Precision Lens can help out some of our critics. I think they could use a pair of high-quality lenses because they've been looking at the world through mud-colored glasses for much too long.
Well, there's another area where the example set by Precision Lens is crystal clear. I'm talking about your important efforts toward a drug-free workplace. Through preemployment testing, employment counseling, and treatment, you've really made a difference. Here and around the country, workplace drug programs have brought dramatic improvements in worker safety. There is no place for illegal drugs in the workplace or anyplace else in this land. I believe that programs like yours make a positive impact throughout the community. In addition to making this plant safer and more productive, you can also be proud that you're sending a message to our children to be drug-free because illegal drug use will not be tolerated.
Well, before I go, I want to let you know that I'm delighted you were all able to get in to work today. [Laughter] They weren't going to let me in at first, but luckily someone recognized me. [Laughter] Of course, it's always nice to be recognized.
You know, years ago, after a quarter of a century in the picture business and a number of years then on television and the General Electric Theatre and so forth, you're used to being recognized, and it's nice. And I was walking down Fifth Avenue in New York one afternoon, and suddenly a fellow about 30 feet ahead of me, coming my way, stopped. And he pointed, and he said, "I know you. I know you. I see you in those pictures and on that television screen all the time."
Well, you know New Yorkers. They all stopped, and everybody in the street kind of lined up, made an alley. And here he came, down the middle of the alley, and he was fumbling in his pocket up here, coming toward me. And he keeps on talking about how well he's known me and how much he's seen me on the screen and everything. Gets right to me and sticks out a pad and a pencil and said, "Ray Milland." [Laughter] So, I signed "Ray Milland." There was no sense in disappointing him.
Well, it's been a real joy for me to be here with you and to see the work that you do and the tremendous pride with which you do it. And I think that's enough for me. I just thank you all, and God bless you all.
[At this point, Mr. Howe gave the President a magnifying glass.]
Thank you all. Thank you very much. And to the two Congressmen over here, now I can read the fine print in those things you send me. [Laughter]
Note: The President spoke at 11:10 a.m. on the warehouse floor at the company. In his opening remarks, he referred to Roger Howe and David Hinchman, chief executive officer and president, of the company. Prior to his remarks, the President toured the facility's manufacturing and production areas.
http://www.springfieldspringfield.co.uk/movie_script.php?movie=real-genius
Springfield! Springfield!
Real Genius (1985)
Taylor!
-Why aren't you in the lab?
-I just--
You're here to work,
not to play doctor.
http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0002424/quotes
IMDb
Quotes for
Foxxy Cleopatra (Character)
from Austin Powers in Goldmember (2002)
Austin Powers: Mr. Roboto is lying to us.
Foxxy Cleopatra: Tell me something I don't know.
From 12/20/1994 ( in Bosnia as Kerry Wayne Burgess the United States Marine Corps captain this day is my United States Navy Cross medal date of record ) To 7/22/2002 is 2771 days
From 11/2/1965 ( my birth date in Antlers Oklahoma USA and my birthdate as the known official Deputy United States Marshal Kerry Wayne Burgess and active duty United States Marine Corps officer ) To 6/4/1973 ( the United States patent granted for the automatic teller machine ) is 2771 days
From 10/28/1994 ( premiere US film "Stargate" ) To 7/22/2002 is 2824 days
2824 = 1412 + 1412
From 11/2/1965 ( my birth date in Antlers Oklahoma USA and my birthdate as the known official Deputy United States Marshal Kerry Wayne Burgess and active duty United States Marine Corps officer ) To 9/14/1969 ( premiere US TV series "The Bold Ones: The New Doctors" ) is 1412 days
From 6/12/1981 ( premiere US film "Raiders of the Lost Ark" ) To 7/22/2002 is 7710 days
From 11/2/1965 ( my birth date in Antlers Oklahoma USA and my birthdate as the known official Deputy United States Marshal Kerry Wayne Burgess and active duty United States Marine Corps officer ) To 12/12/1986 ( premiere US film "The Golden Child" ) is 7710 days
[ See also TBC ]
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0295178/releaseinfo
IMDb
Austin Powers in Goldmember (2002)
Release Info
USA 22 July 2002 (premiere)
http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0002424/quotes
IMDb
Quotes for
Foxxy Cleopatra (Character)
from Austin Powers in Goldmember (2002)
Foxxy Cleopatra: Well, the future better get ready for me. 'Cause I'm Foxxy Cleopatra, and I'm a WHOLE LOTTA WOMAN.
http://www.springfieldspringfield.co.uk/movie_script.php?movie=austin-powers-in-goldmember
Springfield! Springfield!
Austin Powers in Goldmember (2002)
You got a lot of nerve dragging your jive
white ass in here.
I don't believe we've met. It's me Foxy,
Foxxy Cleopatra. Long time no see. Stop.
We can't be seen talking to each other,
you dig? I'm using this cat as a distraction.
I get it yes, very clever.
First things first.
up Foxy Cleopatra. Where have you been?
Listen Foxy, I just want you to know
I never intended to hurt you baby.
http://www.gateworld.net/atlantis/s1/transcripts/105.shtml
GateWorld
STARGATE ATLANTIS
SUSPICION
EPISODE NUMBER - 105
DVD DISC - Season 1, Disc 2
ORIGINAL U.S. AIR DATE - 08.06.04
LAB. Sheppard follows McKay in, then stops at the sight of Teyla's belongings scattered over the table.
SHEPPARD: What the hell is this?
McKAY: I know how it looks. It was a special request from Sergeant Bates.
SHEPPARD: I'm gonna bust that son of a bitch.
http://www.springfieldspringfield.co.uk/movie_script.php?movie=austin-powers-in-goldmember
Springfield! Springfield!
Austin Powers in Goldmember (2002)
That was close Foxy, I owe you one. Austin,
I found this in Goldmember's office.
It's a micro film, maybe a clue.
Smashing.
http://www.stargate-sg1-solutions.com/wiki/Stargate:_The_Movie_Transcript
STARGATE WIKI
Stargate: The Movie (1994)
CATHERINE
Jackson, are those your parents?
[Daniel glances from her to the photograph, his motion to lower his hood arrested for a moment.]
DANIEL
Foster parents.
http://www.stargate-sg1-solutions.com/wiki/Stargate:_The_Movie_Transcript
STARGATE WIKI
Stargate: The Movie (1994)
EXT—NAGADA, DAY
[They enter the city, Kasuf gesturing and giving orders. Kasuf gestures, and people pull away several hangings to reveal a large sized disk of the Eye of Ra suspended between two of the buildings. Everyone prostrates themselves again, following Kasuf's example.]
DANIEL
The eye of Ra. It's the Egyptian sun god. They think he sent us here.
O'NEIL
Yeah, I wonder what could've given them that idea?
[He pointedly fingers Daniel's pendant with the same symbol.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0295178/fullcredits
IMDb
Austin Powers in Goldmember (2002)
Full Cast & Crew
Beyoncé Knowles ... Foxxy Cleopatra
http://www.stargate-sg1-solutions.com/wiki/Stargate:_The_Movie_Transcript
STARGATE WIKI
Stargate: The Movie (1994)
MYERS
Ex-excuse me. Wha-what are you doing?
DANIEL
That's not coffins.
[Daniel ignores Myers, crossing out the word "forever to eternity" and replacing it with...]
DANIEL
"For all time." Who the hell translated this?
http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0002424/quotes
IMDb
Quotes for
Foxxy Cleopatra (Character)
from Austin Powers in Goldmember (2002)
Foxxy Cleopatra: Hey. What's kickin', Basil?
http://www.springfieldspringfield.co.uk/view_episode_scripts.php?tv-show=the-americans-2013&episode=s03e05
Springfield! Springfield!
The Americans
Salang Pass
she has no idea her father's in the CIA, does she?
http://www.stargate-sg1-solutions.com/wiki/Stargate:_The_Movie_Transcript
STARGATE WIKI
Stargate: The Movie (1994)
DANIEL
(on recording)
I'm never gonna get paid.
http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=3633
Digital History
Senator Joseph McCarthy's Speech on Communists in the State Department (excerpts)
Annotation: In February of 1950, Joseph McCarthy gave this speech warning of communism in America. He gave specific names of people working within the State Department and listed their crimes.
Document: Ladies and Gentlemen:
Tonight as we celebrate the 141st birthday of one of the great men in American history, I would like to be able to talk about what a glorious day today is in the history of the world. As we celebrate the birth of this man, who with his whole heart and soul hated war, I would like to be able to speak of peace in our time, of war being outlawed, and of worldwide disarmament. These would be truly appropriate things to be able to mention as we celebrate the birthday of Abraham Lincoln.
Five years after a world war has been won, men's hearts should anticipate a long peace, and men's minds should be free from the heavy weight that comes with war. But this is not such a period -- for this is not a period of peace. This is a time of the Cold War. This is a time when all the world is split into two vast, increasingly hostile armed camps -- a time of a great armaments race. Today we can almost physically hear the mutterings and rumblings of an invigorated god of war. You can see it, feel it, and hear it all the way from the hills of Indochina, from the shores of Formosa right over into the very heart of Europe itself. ...
Today we are engaged in a final, all-out battle between communistic atheism and Christianity. The modern champions of communism have selected this as the time. And, ladies and gentlemen, the chips are down -- they are truly down.
Lest there be any doubt that the time has been chosen, let us go directly to the leader of communism today -- Joseph Stalin. Here is what he said -- not back in 1928, not before the war, not during the war -- but two years after the last war was ended: "To think that the communist revolution can be carried out peacefully, within the framework of a Christian democracy, means one has either gone out of one's mind and lost all normal understanding, or has grossly and openly repudiated the communist revolution."
And this is what was said by Lenin in 1919, which was also quoted with approval by Stalin in 1947: "We are living," said Lenin, "not merely in a state but in a system of states, and the existence of the Soviet Republic side by side with Christian states for a long time is unthinkable. One or the other must triumph in the end. And before that end supervenes, a series of frightful collisions between the Soviet Republic and the bourgeois states will be inevitable."
Ladies and gentlemen, can there be anyone here tonight who is so blind as to say that the war is not on? Can there be anyone who fails to realize that the communist world has said, "The time is now" -- that this is the time for the showdown between the democratic Christian world and the communist atheistic world? Unless we face this fact, we shall pay the price that must be paid by those who wait too long.
Six years ago, at the time of the first conference to map out peace -- Dumbarton Oaks -- there was within the Soviet orbit 180 million people. Lined up on the anti-totalitarian side there were in the world at that time roughly 1.625 billion people. Today, only six years later, there are 800 million people under the absolute domination of Soviet Russia -- an increase of over 400 percent. On our side, the figure has shrunk to around 500 million. In other words, in less than six years the odds have changed from 9 to 1 in our favor to 8 to 5 against us. This indicates the swiftness of the tempo of communist victories and American defeats in the Cold War. As one of our outstanding historical figures once said, "When a great democracy is destroyed, it will not be because of enemies from without but rather because of enemies from within." The truth of this statement is becoming terrifyingly clear as we see this country each day losing on every front.
At war's end we were physically the strongest nation on Earth and, at least potentially, the most powerful intellectually and morally. Ours could have been the honor of being a beacon in the desert of destruction, a shining, living proof that civilization was not yet ready to destroy itself. Unfortunately, we have failed miserably and tragically to arise to the opportunity.
The reason why we find ourselves in a position of impotency is not because our only powerful, potential enemy has sent men to invade our shores, but rather because of the traitorous actions of those who have been treated so well by this nation. It has not been the less fortunate or members of minority groups who have been selling this nation out, but rather those who have had all the benefits that the wealthiest nation on earth has had to offer -- the finest homes, the finest college education, and the finest jobs in government we can give.
This is glaringly true in the State Department. There the bright young men who are born with silver spoons in their mouths are the ones who have been worst.
From 12/14/1944 ( premiere US film "National Velvet" ) To 1/17/1991 ( the date of record of my United States Navy Medal of Honor as Kerry Wayne Burgess chief warrant officer United States Marine Corps circa 1991 also known as Matthew Kline for official duty and also known as Wayne Newman for official duty ) is 16835 days
From 11/2/1965 ( my birth date in Antlers Oklahoma USA and my birthdate as the known official Deputy United States Marshal Kerry Wayne Burgess and active duty United States Marine Corps officer ) To 12/6/2011 is 16835 days
From 12/14/1944 ( premiere US film "National Velvet" ) To 1/17/1991 ( RACKETEER INFLUENCED AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS US Title 18 - the Persian Gulf War begins as scheduled severe criminal activity against the United States of America ) is 16835 days
From 11/2/1965 ( my birth date in Antlers Oklahoma USA and my birthdate as the known official Deputy United States Marshal Kerry Wayne Burgess and active duty United States Marine Corps officer ) To 12/6/2011 is 16835 days
[ See also: To Be Continued ]
http://www.amazon.com/We-Got-Him-Capture-Hussein/dp/B007HVXYOE/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&sr=&qid=
amazon
We Got Him!: A Memoir of the Hunt and Capture of Saddam Hussein Hardcover – Bargain Price, December 6, 2011
by Steve Russell (Author)
Hardcover $10.80
Product Details
Hardcover: 480 pages
Publisher: Threshold Editions (December 6, 2011)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 1451662483
ASIN: B007HVXYOE
http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/BookDetailsPL?bi=15123839379&searchurl=$encodedSearchUrl
AbeBooks.com
We Got Him: A Memoir of the Hunt and Capture of Saddam Hussein [Hardcover]
Published by Threshold Editions (2011-12-06)
Bibliographic Details
Title: We Got Him: A Memoir of the Hunt and Capture...
Publisher: Threshold Editions
Publication Date: 2011-12-06
http://www.tower.com/we-got-him-memoir-hunt-capture-saddam-hussein-steve-russell-hardcover/wapi/118873546
TOWER BOOKS
We Got Him!: A Memoir of the Hunt and Capture of Saddam Hussein (Hardcover)
By: Steve Russell
Format: Hardcover
Publisher: Threshold Editions
ISBN: 1451662483
WAPI (Tower ID): 118873546
Release Date: December 6, 2011
http://www.springfieldspringfield.co.uk/view_episode_scripts.php?tv-show=better-call-saul-2015&episode=s01e05
Springfield! Springfield!
Better Call Saul
Alpine Shepherd Boy
Did your neighbor consent to sell you her paper?
From 12/14/1944 ( premiere US film "National Velvet" ) To 3/20/2003 ( United States Title 18 Treason 2381 - the Invasion of Iraq local time Baghdad Iraq & George Walker Bush ) is 21280 days
21280 = 10640 + 10640
From 11/2/1965 ( date hijacked from me:my birth date in Antlers Oklahoma USA and my birthdate as the known official Deputy United States Marshal Kerry Wayne Burgess and active duty United States Marine Corps officer ) To 12/20/1994 ( in Bosnia as Kerry Wayne Burgess the United States Marine Corps captain this day is my United States Navy Cross medal date of record ) is 10640 days
[ See also: Posted by H.V.O.M at 6:16 PM Sunday, October 09, 2011 ]
http://articles.latimes.com/2003/mar/20/news/war-iraq20A
Los Angeles Times
War with Iraq / Initial Assault
US Attacks Iraq
War to Oust Hussein Begins With Airstrikes
March 20, 2003 John Daniszewski and Edwin Chen Times Staff Writers
The United States launched a thundering bomb and missile attack on Baghdad at dawn today, targeting senior government leaders in what could become all-out war to drive Saddam Hussein from power and disarm Iraq.
Air raid sirens blared, and yellow-and-white tracers from Iraqi antiaircraft fire streaked across the city. Several large explosions rocked the capital, and a ball of fire flared in the southern sky. As the sun rose higher, street lights flickered out and the city fell into a ghostly silence.
"The opening stages of the disarmament of the Iraqi regime have begun," White House spokesman Ari Fleischer declared shortly after 9:30 p.m. Wednesday in Washington, or 5:30 a.m. in Baghdad. Forty-five minutes later, President Bush told the American people that he had ordered coalition forces to strike "selected targets of military importance" in Iraq.
http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=3633
Digital History
Senator Joseph McCarthy's Speech on Communists in the State Department (excerpts)
Annotation: In February of 1950, Joseph McCarthy gave this speech warning of communism in America. He gave specific names of people working within the State Department and listed their crimes.
This is glaringly true in the State Department. There the bright young men who are born with silver spoons in their mouths are the ones who have been worst.
Now I know it is very easy for anyone to condemn a particular bureau or department in general terms. Therefore, I would like to cite one rather unusual case -- the case of a man who has done much to shape our foreign policy.
When Chiang Kai-shek was fighting our war, the State Department had in China a young man named John S. Service. His task, obviously, was not to work for the communization of China. Strangely, however, he sent official reports back to the State Department urging that we torpedo our ally Chiang Kai-shek and stating, in effect, that communism was the best hope of China.
Later, this man -- John Service -- was picked up by the Federal Bureau of Investigation for turning over to the communists secret State Department information. Strangely, however, he was never prosecuted. However, Joseph Grew, the undersecretary of state, who insisted on his prosecution, was forced to resign. Two days after, Grew's successor, Dean Acheson, took over as undersecretary of state, this man -- John Service -- who had been picked up by the FBI and who had previously urged that communism was the best hope of China, was not only reinstated in the State Department but promoted; and finally, under Acheson, placed in charge of all placements and promotions. Today, ladies and gentlemen, this man Service is on his way to represent the State Department and Acheson in Calcutta -- by far and away the most important listening post in the Far East.
Now, let's see what happens when individuals with communist connections are forced out of the State Department. Gustave Duran, who was labeled as, I quote, "a notorious international communist," was made assistant secretary of state in charge of Latin American affairs. He was taken into the State Department from his job as a lieutenant colonel in the Communist International Brigade. Finally, after intense congressional pressure and criticism, he resigned in 1946 from the State Department -- and, ladies and gentlemen, where do you think he is now? He took over a high-salaried job as chief of Cultural Activities Section in the office of the assistant secretary-general of the United Nations. ...
This, ladies and gentlemen, gives you somewhat of a picture of the type of individuals who have been helping to shape our foreign policy. In my opinion the State Department, which is one of the most important government departments, is thoroughly infested with communists.
- posted by H.V.O.M - Kerry Wayne Burgess 11:27 AM Pacific Time Spokane Valley Washington USA Monday 09 March 2015
