[laughter] ..

was adapted for his best-selling memoir see no evil and a sleeping with the devil. he's one of the most accomplished operatives in the history. he's won the career intelligence medal and speaks eight languages. he spent much of his 21 years with the cia and the middle east and one of his notable assignments of which there are plenty was attempting to assassinate saddam hussein. he is currently national security analyst for cnn and one of the foremost authorities on the middle east. he takes us on a wild adventure through the history of assassination in his latest book the perfect pill. thinking about who the perfect fit would be to interview bob tonight obviously we needed someone with the appropriate crop of house and experience and deep knowledge of the complex political history and we also needed someone who had been portrayed by the major movie star in the movie based on their

work. so, we are deeply honored to have him here to interview bob. wool is one of the founders of the center for investigative reporting at uc berkeley where he is the david logan distinguished chair and investigative journalism. he spent 22 years as a producer with abc and cbs and is currently a correspondent and producer for pbs and frontline. and his investigation into the tobacco industry for 60 minutes was chronicled in the film the insider and al pacino played him. [laughter] so please join me in welcoming the name george clooney and al pacino could only pretend to be, bob and loel. [applause] >> good evening.

before i came here tonight i e-mailed the first time i heard jenny was in the early 1990s and then was your supervisors in washington said to me we have this maniac out in the middle east. how did you get into the cia? it was actually berkley . fault i was studying chinese and giving to the graduate program. i was out of money and looking for a job part time. my roommate said get a good job. so i thought this was funny and i said maybe the cia committee hearings and he said there would be hilarious so that would be hilarious so i called a federal center in san francisco and that was a long pause.

and i think the operator thought this was a joke but anyway it was in lawndale california, just down in orange county. it's out in the middle of nowhere. i called them up and they sent me an application and only somebody unemployed would have the time to do without. [laughter] and i said look there was no way i was going to get hired. my mother used to teach at ucla. i'd grown up in aspen and the only thing i knew how to do was to ski race and barely got through college. they called me up one night and said let's go into 21 years later i was still in. expect hispanics make sure that everybody understands, you said let's go you were a cia lobster.

>> s.. i was what was called a case officer. when i applied for the job they described it to me when he or she works for the cia on the resume they have carved, everybody knows they go to academic conferences and they go to schools and things like that. they say without the m.a. you can't have that but we have this other job where people go overseas and they drive around at night and pick up agents and they debrief them and steal secrets and carry guns and things like that. >> is that if it's a year from now, let's go but when it comes time to go -- so anyhow the cia is divided from the analysts that work from the academics and operatives who go here to places

weird places like iraq and afghanistan and collect intelligence or as the fbi describes the cia we catch bank robbers and they robbed banks. [laughter] connects a basically got a license to steal, to lie. >> if you ever want to do a break-in, let me know. if you are expected to lie from the time you got up in the morning to the time you went to bed you figured your phone was tapped and you tell the utopia statistic stories. if you do well to the drugstore you would say something completely the opposite in the conversation to throw people off, which was mr. action your entire life. >> so you go into this in the wake of the church committee meetings into the reforms of the 1970s related to the

intelligence community. many things which are now by the board, the national security law and so on. so how did that restrict you at that time in anyway? >> i think they had a hard time getting people the time. >> like i said i came from a liberal family. my mother ran for county commissions in the county and color out of. any other half of the tickets was hunter thompson. she was a socialist and he wanted the sheriffs to drop the don't ask me how the cia missed this, but they did. >> they missed a lot of things. this is a security guy out of the neighborhood with his suit and tie in everything. and i lived with this -- and berkeley used to be fairly liberal at one time. [laughter] i put a picture on the wall and

they owned a boa constrictor. there was a knock on the door. i was home alone and there was this guy that said that you know mr. and i said that's me. so anyway i got through security. [laughter] >> to make sure that all of you understand who we are dealing with. >> okay. so let me fast forward to this book because you have had a number of books. when you were in the cia, you couldn't kill anybody. >> know you couldn't assassinate anybody. when you came in and you have to sign an agreement that you had read and understood the meaning of executive order 123 which

means you can't kill anybody as a cia officer. you go directly to jail and if you talk to anybody for proposed merger you have to break off contact. it was clear cut. you go back in the 40s and 50s and see this castro stuff of course that never but that never really got off the ground. 61 bay of pigs but that i was never very serious going to the mob. we sort of held off that whole assassination and that it is a dumb idea and we are never going to do it again. and if the officer whether they were an analyst with operatives have to sign the order and they were very serious about it. >> succumb in your 21 years, you -- and we will get to the saddam hussein incident and in your 21 years you never got to kill

anybody is that i? >> i never killed anybody or threw told anybody or threw the grenade into the school bus. i never -- i was issued pistols but didn't like it. i was always afraid it was going to shoot myself in the foot. [laughter] they gave us machine guns and mortars and all this stuff and a lot of training, military training jumping out of airplanes, but it was more like this is what it's all about. so when you talk to people, you have a familiarity with gun. but you're never going to go out and shoot anybody. if you have talked about shooting anybody they would run you out. >> how do you wind up going to lebanon because that becomes your obsession. >> i studied arabic and i worked in a consulate and studied arabic for two years.

it has gone to hell. the chief had been kidnapped kidnapped at the embassy had been blown up in april of 83, the marines in october, and they have a list of one of people that spoke arabic and would go to beirut and that's me. >> don't ask me why i got thrown out of the division. >> i was walking down -- >> don't you speak arabic? >> so, it was another prank like joining the cia. >> it was a blackhawk and there were two of them. they had come out into the whole idea of communicating in the helicopter was a bit strange but when they got to beirut, the helicopter drop down ten to

15 feet off the ocean floor. so, they spring into their vests on. they came in and they were going right into the sure and it turns on its side. they were from delta force. they said you have ten seconds to get off the helicopter otherwise i'm going to push you out. it's like apocalypse now. >> i was sent there mainly to look at hostages to cause a completely disappeared. bill buckley that the ap reporter covered the university of beirut, they had disappeared.

>> of a completely disappeared. he was hit over the head in his apartment coming out throwing in the back of a car, disappeared in the suburbs. it was the first suicide bombing against the united states which was a huge mystery to us at the time. it mystified the fbi and actually wrapped around the firing device. there was no signature on the bomb which there are always signatures on bombs. there were none on that. the truck had been stolen, the suicide bomber we couldn't identify. even there was such a thorough explosion that there were no traces on the law, and this clearly is of such

professionalism that nobody in the united states government had ever seen this, period. so you are presenting me with a mystery. >> and they blew up the french barracks. spit along with the marines. i believe that they were involved in the locker. they were clearly at a level way beyond bin laden or isis in terms of communications. they didn't have any communications. >> so, at this point, the shia can either hezbollah or the iranians were killing more americans than any other terrorist group in history. >> if you don't remember this, they took a step in and drove it right to the guards and up the steps and into the barracks and caused reagan to pull out of lebanon.

they lost the marines since world war ii in a single day. until this day i have never seen professionalism like this in a group. >> and you are the secret weapon on the ground? >> so what did you do? >> you have to figure out lebanon. i wasn't serious about anything until i got to this one. they are using low-power communications and it's sort of a base in beirut. if you pick these up, we have a site it was very complicated. we call them nature sees at the

time and today they call them algorithms, but at the time i have stacks and stacks. >> in the process you start to zero in on basically the perfect killer. >> lebanese come aboard to 62. he'd gone to the battlefront when he was about 15 to study business affairs. don't tell me why. and then in 1982, he was recruited by iran and put on the front line in the side to start killing americans.

>> this is continuous shedding american blood for 20 years. this is the israeli embassy. >> they set off the bombs in the department stores and in london. >> there was nobody like him in terms of simple capabilities to disappear into stale telephones and talk about misdirection. he was simply brilliant at what he did. so in a sense he is the white whale. he is the guide you hunted. >> don't ask me when does depp switched. we had a sealed arrest warrant from the department of justice and if we ever got in a position

to arrest him, we were supposed to notify the marshals and the fbi and the rest could go through the whole procedure. someone like this isn't going to be arrested by the marshals were the fbi and they aren't going to come to beirut and the lebanese police aren't going to arrest him if he had the password file stolen from the police over his records. he had all of his records but he'd never gone out of the beirut airport he raced from the physical records. so, at that point i sat down with the ambassador and a couple other people inside we could get close to this guy that he is going to resist and he is going to probably die. and the ambassador said well, that's a hypothetical. i don't deal with hypotheticals. when you get to that point, arrest him, but for me that was opening season on the night. i could -- hypothetical.

there was no longer an executive order 123. >> when we get to iraq if somebody is resisting arrest and this is how bin laden was killed he was considered enemy combatant and dangerous. its lawyers come its definition. it's against the law to assassinate people, but if you describe the situation as a war zone and you can do it anywhere, you can kill somebody. >> from seal team six piece out and i was living in berkeley at the time and i said tell me about your authorities. he said if we get a pid on somebody come a positive identification we can go in unless there is on the ground, no threat to anybody at all, if

it's short of that, they can shoot you. if you are living in berkeley and a seal team six comes through the window they can kill me? yes. now the context for that is the united states law controls part of the country in some conflict, but if you take that idea, as much as i understand it, and i didn't go to law school, things like the iran that was killed committee latin, seal team six is critical. but in your book the way that you described, you described him as being focused. he knows his enemy and what he is going to accomplish in this particular action and is a

political objective. he doesn't waste energy. it's almost a love poem to him in the sense of seeing an expert to do what he does. but you said exactly the opposite about what they are doing. i mean, -- ima can't or a n. and i don't like the foreign policy. i think that they assassinated bin laden in 2011 and we have something a lot worse than isis because we will not acknowledge that we are dealing with an insurgency, sunni insurgency and the assassination isn't going to do you any more at all. we've taken political murder to the middle east hoping that it is a detour around the war, but it's not what we've got because in iraq we are going to the 100 year war i don't see any sense

playing into iraq and that is what we are doing. they are selecting the targets and we are hitting them. it's just not going to work. but if you take the lebanese context in 1999 to force the israelis out of lebanon, what he did was in a very technically brilliant operation, he hit the israeli commander with the shaped charge traveling at high speed and hit them directly. we were better at pulling the four suspected and in israel and the security zone which was hitting them hard. it's too expensive and it will simply hit them with massive

force. so, what he did, the purpose is to preserve the force and avoided the war. but if but if you are assassinating people and it's getting deeper into the war, you are going against the whole intent of the database is the argument i make. we simply cannot project american power around the world using political murder. if we were combined in a space like lebanon where there were only 4 million people and it was with a very specific purpose and intelligence but then i to deny going further in the story and they work for the united nations on the assassination investigation and that was the premise of a skilled the in 2005 command but happened that killed him with a car bomb bombing at the 20th of people come he'd

gone from taking this tactic to avoid the war to a sectarian conflict and killed a man that was a symbolic head of the sunni and lebanon and got more violence. so he broke always rules. he did very well for about 20 years. he made other mistakes, too. he started using a cell phone and he then set himself up as a target. >> are you saying that in 2008 he managed to avoid the nsa, the cia, the military intelligence people, smoking -- seal team

six. >> he completely disappeared. he used to write a motorscooter. he was unknown even in hezbollah which nominally was under that umbrella. there maybe three may be three or four people. >> nobody that could be turned? >> never a defector from the other side. we had one of the other hostage takers, from the iranians, but never in his group was there anybody that came out that betrayed him. >> in your book you were worried one point but you're going to get hit by him. >> definitely they were looking at us. the problem is i grew up in middle-class and i didn't grow

up in a war zone. you take people that have been in the civil war and their families are getting killed and they are killing people. they tend to figure out what you're they are doing and it's the darwin effect. i talk about the admiration for his skill, but i certainly wouldn't trade my life for his growing up in the southern suburbs in beirut and as a teenager leaving school with the collection and shooting at the other side. >> this part of the world that's falling off, progress and anything that we taken the civilization is growing by the day. you look at nigeria and isis which is truly pre- islamic. cutting off heads with knives is tribal or kidnapping women.

so it is the murder of people to political ends there are more and more people capable of doing this. if it is my interest and i write my mother into the story. i was going to ask what is your mother doing in the middle of lebanon? >> she's a great character assassin. [laughter] >> she's should have had my job, but that's beside the point. i want to make it personal how far i am from this world and even how far the cia is. >> you write the best assassins were the best kills our local.

>> the best were in sight of the family. it is local. take one of the greatest assassination historically determining the assassinations in 1995. i think that if anybody could have cut to the chase on a middle east settlement and he was a hero, well respected. but if you take the place of his enemies removing him a truly made a difference but that's local politics, i don't understand that for but for them it made sense. and i have to go back to the idea of killing hitler. clearly this would have saved lives and avoided destruction i'm told especially if it had been done in 33. there are occasionally figures in history which are cancerous and they should be cut out.

we hate assassination. as americans we just hate the idea. >> but we've done it to lincoln and mckinley. the most dangerous drop in the products warily as president of the united president of the united states. >> that's why we hated so much. its lunatics and the rest of it. what we are missing is the ability to change history at a particular moment in a particular context. it does save lives. the reason i wrote this book is to examine the modern assassination. i found out that there were political assassinations. they had to kill certain people and they did and he found that

it was a successful route to conflict resolution. >> we had a local assassin here named james the weasel who was a mafia guy and eventually he became a semi-celebrity. he wrote a book and became a government witness and i had an experience of having been soothed by him. they never killed anybody that didn't deserve it. >> at the heart of assassination has to be a just act. and i think not only for the assassin, you can't be making money off this for things like

that. it has to be an active justice. preserve the organization and discipline. >> i started talking to crazier people and some more biologists. they said that there is a thing that correct me if i'm wrong, the cells will kill another solid cancerous. is that the detail of your nightmares about it to try to figure it out? >> its engagement. me and my team are the first americans that are brought up under the charge of the assassination of the world leader by the department of

justice and the fbi. so to me if i'm in the middle of something i start to understand it. i can get engaged and think about it. i was in iraq in 1995. the general came general came to me and said i represent five officers and a dad, general officers and we would like to get rid of saddam hussein and lift the sanctions. would you support a coup d'état and i said it sounds good to me. i was the chief in iraq, saddam, wrote it up, sat down on the tax that's classified and it didn't get an answer and eventually they came to me and said well he's going to go to his palace and we dropped 12 tanks we are

going to ask them to step down. is the main gun and assassination obviously you didn't know that, so i sent a message back to washington saying this is their plan. some of the militia that i was working with over and the divisions, and i got a message from washington saying if you have become a lawyer, don't talk to him, come home and trust us on this. there's been a problem so we could come back. >> they said we are hauling them even for the attempted murder of

saddam hussein. they go through this investigation and even though we never actually helped to pull the trigger it gave me an insight in the way of thinking about what it's like in the field and how hard it is to target somebody like saddam hussein just as it would be these days, no communications. this is an examination of the assassination and it's sort of a funny title, but the perfect kill is nearly impossible. >> what you do talk about is the use of indiscriminate violence whether it's drones or cruise missiles as a tactic that is only going to backfire and isn't going to succeed.

>> we are doing what is called signature strikes if you have a drone flying above and a couple of guys that are clashing and doing exercises in the field and somebody back in washington says they are near this village, this doesn't look right to us. we have entered a drone strike in a month. in some of the years we would have 750 drone of strikes and not a single name would appear. it's amazing. it was overused. we have overused it. the whole point is to make it very precise. you really scare the enemy when you get to the one guy that was causing you a problem rather than somebody that appears to be legal.

>> in november of 2002 i was doing a story in the so-called sleeper cells and they were recruited by someone who lived in saudi arabia for a long time that was but was an american citizen and in november of 2002 h. rowan fired a missile at a vehicle in yemen and blew the car up and he was the first american citizen killed. and at that time the u.s. government backed off. he was collateral damage can he was in the wrong car at the wrong time. today we take credit for it. >> it's so complicated people are just jaded. they don't care.

they don't care but the accuracy of drones just like they don't care about enhanced interrogations. they have the documents that say that it doesn't work and you have a few people involved that say that it does and i want to make up my mind as an american whether torture makes it safer or not. that doesn't justify it morally, but we still don't know. there are two sides to this. but i can't imagine that the senate would just come to these conclusions that torture doesn't work. it's because they are basing it on evidence. and the war on terror, it is in sali -- somalia. who knows where it's going to go

next. but do we really stopped to see what it's getting us? >> in your experience i remember people that came into the fbi in to the fbi in the mid-70s are back then and they learned about what could go wrong in the church committee hearings and there was a sense that we have to be more focused, we have to be smarter about what we do. have we lost that caution, are they no longer alive in spite of the intelligence committee? >> we had to recruit a russian military officer to tell you when they were going to send armored divisions. it was that simple.

>> it became very complicated but for me it was more complicated this made things a lot worse in the middle east it's gotten so dangerous that he locked up in a bubble in a couple in the green zone and we are looking at the world through drones and i'm not sure if you can understand it. now they are doing it in c-reactive iraq and i don't think they do it particularly well. i think that they are missing a lot if the nuances. the attack apparently was messed. the president called up the team. he was misled. it wasn't his fault.

>> the president who was a constitutional law scholar so he taught. >> i think you have a president who was a fairly liberal democrat and has to cauterize the rights. he has to take actions beyond bush. >> they would set the message i don't play around with national security and this is what a lot of the strikes are trying to be strong without sending the troops back to the middle east. >> said it so it is a way of saying you are a tough guy.

>> do we ever see people going in and taking pictures or keeping track of this >> i'm talking about between san francisco and new york there is a big part in the united states that assumes we have to be doing this. they don't look very deep into that. i have to get back to the notion of the assassination it's been part of american history. >> that you are looking at canada, john wilkes booth. clearly assassinating lincoln wasn't going to do any good. it was an act of revenge. but they could dismiss as criminal acts and not carry it out by a coherent political organization.

>> so our assassinations have no plan plans of our enemies focused, is that the lesson that you are telling us? >> 1989 this year he ends in the united states agreed on the new president. new president. they were going to close down what was has the law at the time. they were going to more or less slow down and stop the war in the south. >> it's where they put explosives in the charge in a close down candy store and the president's convoy was going down and that was the end of any talk about closing hezbollah down or any talk of restoring the lebanese state.

>> he didn't have a grievance against the president meant that they felt in their interest we are talking about their interests, not ours they felt it was a danger to what they were doing and that is the islamic resistance in the south. he did have a plan and they followed his plan consistently. and once they committed violence they didn't go on to commit more symbolic violence. and the avoided things like car bombs which as you know everybody was using them. they went out of their way never to use one and a built-up areas. they were sending enemies to use violence responsibly and then we get what we want and people hold to the agreement. >> they did it with the french and 85 and 86.

i'm going to until you stop supplying weapons to iraq and that is exactly what happened. after the french he stopped killing frenchmen which is something you don't see from al qaeda or isis. so the french felt that they had a rational player at the other end. >> so you're saying that he was a master of using political violence to get a political end. >> to get a political end and then once he got back, he stopped. >> succumbing you and your friends in lebanon decided he wanted to take him out. what was so difficult?

the sunni wanted to have no part of it. he stayed off any sort of communications move from night to night. he completely disappeared into the suburbs which he could do. that's what they called a denied area. we used to send cars through. >> there was off the grid but he had his own up in the air of the generators on the corners, nobody would go down. >> the sea greens are scared. they refused to set foot in the suburbs and they were scared of him. that's the whole point of the

book we were not qualified to do this and he was afraid to come after us. he paid any attention to me at all he could have found me and got rid of me that he probably didn't think it was worth it. >> he closed the americans down, got rid of the marines, closed the embassy down, it was a bubble. the central intelligence wasn't a threat to him. >> he blew up the embassy and killed six cia people. but in the embassy bombing they were going after the ambassador because they were trying to make a peace between israel and lebanon. he opposed that clearly.

it was narrow grievances and everybody knew who everybody was and it wasn't some grand strategy. when he did move to bigger targets and he was involved in saudi arabia in 1996 he also tried to kill his brother-in-law and that failed. so he looked at the ability to protect political violence in long way away and it doesn't really work and he withdrew and came back. he would continually learn about what worked and what didn't.

>> so she could do this and survive until he was apparently assassinated in 2008 that he could survive so long. >> which is absolute other discipline. i mean, we found the same thing with our special operators, the delta force. they first went into it in afghanistan where the helicopter went down and they lost a bunch of guys. they learn how to fight the war and they are very good at what they do. they changed the tactics for instance in iraq where they come into a house. it used to come a great technical term, the dynamic was hostage rescue and then they were ambushed one time and they said we are going to do combat entering into this shoot anybody in the house because we learned how to fight a war.

and you know, we are -- they've still got in his ability to do this. getting to the morality of it, i'm looking at human nature and a bunch of assassination and explaining why they work or didn't work. this is very much a political science book, but what i did was when i first wrote it, there were 21 laws and i didn't want to break an anthology. it was probably boring subway so they rode through the samaritans of trying and failing and then i had to throw in some stories about my mother.

>> that it is 21 lessons for something that you see in the end you don't be leave. >> it is 21 conditions that you have to meet before you can carry off a successful political murder. but if you read each one carefully, they get harder and harder and harder. like don't ever miss. it sounds funny but when they tried to kill henry fight and they failed he just became a stronger king and it was considered a divine ordinance that he was chosen and he became a strong and conveyed france and took the rest of it. the same leaves and we can't afford and i gave the attempt to margaret thatcher when they put a lot of explosives into a room and there was no chance of ever killing her husband was so far away. and at the end of that i don't think they got anything out of

it. i mean if things would have been different. the ones that work, call it terror if you like but a capable ssn is something that you have to worry about and you have to change your behavior. that is an obvious rule. not leaving your fingerprints on an assassination is also scary. blowing up the embassy in april, 1983. it certainly scared the fbi and the cia when they saw this complete exclusion. it destroyed the firing device. i mean, we knew what we were up against as opposed to bin laden who goes on tv it's not a form of the organization but he

clearly wasn't as capable. >> you say that it's not a formidable organization, but the pentagon would say that's because we are taking their leadership out of the worthless territories and we tracked them down. >> qaeda was a pic of operation. and i'm just reflecting what people tell me. it's a little bit of money from bin laden, al qaeda. they got very lucky. our paradigm changed on 9/11 with flight 93. in a sense once they heard about the world trade center that

changed. i don't think you can look at it as an assistant threat. not only will it be a tragedy but an incentive to go into the war in the middle east that we ultimately cannot win. and i think that's really the problem with sunni violence in the middle east is that it is so indiscriminate setting off car bombs in baghdad. this is a varying degree whose survival is at stake and you have a fringe lashing out with his extreme violence. it was as opposed to changing the american way of life were

striking out at us. i think that he could have set off a bomb in new york or chicago and we traced the groups, they just didn't want to. it was the narrow channeling of violence is much more efficient and people are ready to go on because would we do with lebanon? we bombed it in the spring of little bit and we just laughed. there is no real damage >> you can hear them explode into the lebanese were convinced that we were firing blanks but it didn't detour anybody. >> sold-out theater of so that leader of the islamic state apparently was just wounded. is that going to make any difference click

>> no. we tend not to listen to enemies which is always a big mistake. i listen to his sermon in those -- basel. you have to look at isis and it's a manifestation of the grievances of people in that area. when we have that much chaos default is to some imaginary point in history which these people are trying to return to. they said you can get rid of it but it's not going to do any good. so that's not going to work

there. you could get rid of the leadership and would speed up the price now it is here to stay >> i think that we should open up for questions. >> if their questions in the audience. >> thank you both. i'm curious what your mother knew about the profession and what she thought about it. spirit she was living in venice california at the time and said if you tell anybody that you work for the cia, i will cut your throat. [laughter] [laughter] [laughter] 's connection is very liberal. she just was not amused. >> there were liberals in the cia. >> i've just got my friends, don't ever say it.

my daughters didn't know until he went on 60 minutes and they were watching tv and they said that is on tv. >> the next question is also on your left. >> what would you propose that we do with isis or nothing at all what is your fact on that? >> i'm sort of involved in the sense that i keep up with the tribes in and our province and they are quite adamant that they will not deal with the government of their. they said that he is just a clone of the previous premaster and what we want is partition. we want the same right as the kurdish republic which is owned by federal troops didn't. we get a percentage of the oil, we keep iraq that are allies to commit essentially breaking it up. they want to take baghdad to the sunni suburbs to go to the

region. baghdad itself would be an open city and it will be divided between the kurds, but there's nobody in washington who wants to hear the word partition. >> it seems to me that everyone has forgotten that iraq was not a country at the time of the first world war. >> we are going to hold them together with the air force or drones but nobody wants to admit it, that iran is actually picked up a country. the new defense minister is approved by the iranians probably know this for a fact the militia was our moving into a all al anbar and on the ground

in uniform. no one wants to admit that we lost iraq can and at, and that democrats don't and neither do the republicans. you know i would just say partition it or at least stand out of the way but if we've become identified with the iranians, then we've taken sides in the civil war civil war that goes back to the 17th century. it's hard for me to do the difference between the sunni and the shia. the deeper you get into the into it, the more confusing. and you ask people is it really worth killing yourself over the small doctrinal changes coming and apparently it is. >> next question over here on

the right hell do you propose that we fight this war were to be just modified it and let them take care of it themselves and clean up the mess afterwards? >> the asymmetrical warfare. what do you do about serious? the fact is it is and so asymmetrical in the fact that there is a country. there is the islamic caliphate or whatever you want to call it goes from bothell to mosul. i would do it covertly. i could go back to the partition and start sending arms to the sunnis who disagree with us. but at the end of the day, what is going to destroy the jihad is other muslims. it's unsustainable.

the islamist republic cannot govern and definitely. it is violent. it's irrational. there are too many foreigners, north africa and africa and even the west. .. we don't want to ally with iran. that's the last thing this president wants to do.

he has been forced, we have been forced into that corner and the further we go, the more we support iran the more the saudis are going to send money and there's no way to stop it. they are not exactly rational either. i'm not their best friend. i wrote a book about saudi arabia and if you go to riyadh you carry in your hand i guarantee you'll be arrested at the airport. so there are no good guys in this conflict. >> we have another question in the front. >> you alluded to this before that the cia has become increasingly militarized. i'm wondering if you see any point in the future that the cia becomes more of a human intelligence center once again

and finally if you have any advice for aspiring case officer? >> i tell people i would go back into the cia in a heartbeat simply to understand our national security establishment but it's one of those questions smart enough enough to give them, wise enough to get out. you will spend four or five years. i think it will go back and i came -- for public office is paint the worst picture. there are a lot of people doing good work in their islands of excellence. if you stick to those islands you can stay out of counterterrorism but anything that is politically tainted in washington you don't want to go there. which is a big part of the world but nonetheless there other things you can do there. >> i would bet the director of intelligence headquarters next to the counterterrorism center for the fbi and the cia which is

right next to the agencies headquarters and it's a new and a vast expansion of a physical facility, state-of-the-art which interestingly enough when i was allowed in to meet with a group of people there were little signs up in the hallway saying be aware, journalist and building. i like it when i read light starts flashing. again, come on. sort of a joke. >> but a lot of this seems like a joke. >> abc distortion washington? they are much more like serious than fifth avenue or beverly hills or anywhere. there is more money flowing to that city than ever. >> going into the intelligence apparatus. he listened to snowden for instance any worked for booze allen.

he didn't graduate from high school. made according million-a-year. he had a pole dancer also as a girlfriend. >> i never had one of those. >> it's amazing it's amazing you work for booze allen and make a quarter million because you could quadruple that. booze allen is giving melling -- getting a million for that contract. >> that is for all the counterterrorism people go. >> he had been fired from the cia. he was doing white hats in geneva apparently. he was saying i'm going to show you but you can't be the cia but rather than telling the national security agency what he had done because they want to get rid of him and snowden has done some good throwing a light on the

spot on the other hand in the government you don't get to decide what you are going to expose. when i write my books even today i send it to the cia and there at some comments and some are good and they take up what's classified. it's a process but i can go out and say i'm going to take everything i know, expose assets and agents and codes. you can do that on an individual basis. that is what you are supposed to have congress four. >> the next question on your last. >> it's a good segue. earlier on you talked about your security clearance and you touched upon that process again. i worked for an organization where i have to go through the renewal for the security clearance every five years. it's a very interesting process

as you know. you touched on there can be some conflict between your daily work in the security clearance process. they are not totally aligned so i was wondering if you wanted to comment on that a little bit more. >> the problem with the system is top-secret security clearance. the cia would and should be in my humble view, it should be sending people out abroad that really grasp local cultures and countries and the mentality of it. to do that you pretty much have to go native and a large sense. you can't lock yourself up in an embassy or any facility and understand what's going on. i understand why people with top-secret security clearance that really know stuff, they don't want them going to lebanon and moving into the cobb valley and learning arabic for dealing

with drug dealers or the rest of it. one of the greatest liberating things for me was leaving the cia in going and meeting people. it's like my vision, completely open but once you're in that system you don't want to have friends out there. you can have journalist friends. anybody who has a criminal record or the mafia you can't talk to them unless it's in a certain environment. so by force of the security clearances you really do limit yourself and you limit your vision which is not good for the cia case. what i would do which is over simplistic to simply bring people when they go up to the secret level. they see certain stuff but they can't really expose stuff. they could still do their jobs. it's amazing and by the way journalists, the secrets that leak out i know more about the

cia today, about scandals and the rest of it than when i was in because the journalists talking to the journalist, i know people are transferring. these are undercover people. what they do and what they did on the last assignment and whether they have a fake case or not, i never used to hear that stuff. >> it's better to be out. >> it's much better. you just show up. >> a senior counterintelligence person that i know when he left the government retired but got tired back the contract level. he said to me that people out here are a lot smarter than the people inside. >> it's true. it's an unfortunate system and the kgb suffered the same thing. this inbreeding and washington is a bubble because people stay there and the top-secret

security clearance, it's a commodity and there's a price on it. there's actually a market for what it's worth. you can walk into a job. you have ts clearance? you can have this job. whether you are qualified or not. people don't want to lose that so they tend to stay in that area. >> a question down here in the front. >> in one of your books you spoke about the iranians and patients so with that as a background can you speak about the leadership of the iranian people in the nuclear ambitions? >> while i have a lot of respect for iranians in the sense that they did go to war with the united states after the revolution, after 1980.

they took over the embassy. they were responsible for the marines. they were responsible for lockerbie. it's just a fact. maybe with the libyans. they went through this revolutionary period in the same same people that got through it have now moved into this thermidor where they understand us. they understand how far we are going to go. there are negotiations going on in him on now. they know how far they can go on pushing us. so we won't react. they also have learned to deal with sanctions. they are evading the sanctions through banking and oil and the rest of it. i wrote a book about iran about six years ago called the devil we know about how one day we would end up effectively allied with iran which is what we have

done which has served their purpose. i had lunch today with an iranian. he said if you look at the borders you include lebanon and syria and iraq and the rest of it. or even yemen. south of the borders are almost established and this was a country that wasn't going to make it. it was going to collapse under its own irrationality and so i find them very pragmatic. i went there in 2005 and this was after i wrote my book. ex-cia officer landed at the airport. they let me in. it was within irish film crew with a british television. they let me go anywhere. call me any's tomb. they let me interview the chief of staff. because they understood their

paranoia, while they are paranoid but not to the point that i -- they thought that i was a threat. it's a country of 70 million people that survived long time. it will survive a lot longer in air countries. >> by the way when you see these rogue operations like the "new york times" article on sunday where bobby levinson the fbi, former fbi agent is incarcerated in my ram what are you thinking? what's going on but nobody seems to know what's going on. in the intelligence community. >> what happened with tom mikhail was he was a port authority detective in new york, lived in new jersey and he befriended the family which are bolded just that live in iran and they are by our definition

terrorist groups. he was reporting on them to go see the family members in pakistan and he was talking about a tax that would occur in iran. he was doing his job monitoring those people. it was not his responders ability to say hey there's going to be an attack in a week and decide whether we are going to tell the iranians are not where it's going to occur. that's a political decision. it's unfortunate because the iranians are going to -- react very badly. >> apparently there was no centralization of control over what he was doing. he was detailed by the director of intelligence. >> and when his contract expired he said go and i will pay you later. he had all the e-mails. this was an fbi agent that was kidnapped and arrested in

quiche. i think they found these e-mails from the cia on his e-mail on his phone or computer. he was probably roughed up and died of a heart attack. this is all speculation. it's incompetence. it's not the way you run intelligence. you don't run with a port authority detective who is operating on its own any don't let analysts send messages on e-mail from the cia. it's a sprawling intelligence community which is out of control. >> we are out of time for questions that bob will be signing in a tram and you couldn't ask more questions there. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you.

>> i'm very pleased to introduce our speaker, marin katusa who is the chief energy investment strategist at casey research. his book is apparently breaking records and cracking all kinds of bestseller lists in numerous

categories, international fares public-policy ephedra. you heard it here my friends. he's an accomplished investment analyst. he served as chief strategist at casey research since 2007. his funds are among the top performing in the resource sector over the last five years in canada. he is a regular contributor to the business news network and has been interviewed by global media outlets such as cnbc, cbc bloomberg and forbes. marin has traveled to numerous conflicted and challenging areas including russia, iraq ukraine mongolia kosovo and colombia among other resource rich destinations. he is a former mathematics professor. hello?

okay, how are we doing? there we are. we are back. i think that happened because of my own personal history with mathematics but we will just gloss right over that. marin is a former mathematics professor and used his advanced skills to create a diagnostic resource market tool that analyzes and compares hundreds of investment variables. over the years he has been involved in raising over a billion dollars in capital for early stage resource companies. subs -- marin is conversion and russian and a graduate of the university of british columbia and lives in vancouver. marin is going to speak for 30 minutes and we will have our traditional q&a and then there will be an opportunity to get signed books at the end. with that, well comes marin. [applause]

>> travel to over 100 countries. the largest producing copper mine and largest investor in gerald and as i really got into the internationalization of investing in the diverging energy markets i was the largest investor in the lead financier in the first two rounds of what is today's today is europe's most successful shale gas company in the u.k. called quadra lib. how did this all happen? have been talking about this colder war for decades now and going to places to invest to find solutions for countries such as germany or the u.k. who have been increasing their energy dependence on russia. germany over the last decade increased its dependency on russian oil by 52% something the

media doesn't talk about. a little over two and a half years ago i had a heart attack and ended up with a quadruple bypass. all of the hectic traveling of over 300 days a year over 10 years caught up with me and i ended up writing a book called "the colder war." we have some great videos on our web site which we really explain what the colder war is all about so please visit the web site for colder war.com after this. let's just jump into this. i've got 30 minutes. into the lost decade. the west and are west and our many notches north america but in western europe is really demonized vladimir putin is such that they make in the darth vader of the world and compare him to joseph stalin for example. britain came out and compare putin's russia to the nazis. there's a lot of misinformation out there but it's clear vladimir putin has already made his strategic moves but not with the sword.

how did this all happen? after the fall of the ussr russia was in shambles. the soviet empire was truly in crumbles. it's fair to say that russia was a -- mohsin rush ahead no concept of what capitalism wasn't no idea what to do. the morel and pressure was very low to now begging the west for money. so what happened here? unfortunately got worse for the russians before it got better. for example in 1994 they lost the invasion to the first war in chechnya. chechen rebels and the russian army back home. after the fall of the soviet union putin was in east germany at the time, went back to st. petersburg and he became an

adviser on international affairs to the mayor of st. petersburg. this is where putin created his inner network who were to travel with him to moscow and spend the next 20 years of his life together. i nicknamed it the st. peter's big boys -- st. petersburg boys. medvedev started as an assistant to putin in st. petersburg and later on became prime minister and then president and also ran the largest gas producer gazpr gazprom. in 19966 and putin moved to moscow he brought over those st. petersburg boys who would eventually rule over the russian economic sector the energy sector of the transportation sector in the media and the political sector. igor such and who has been with putin for 20 years as the deputy prime minister. it's very important studies of what putin has done to gain his power. so let's look into this.

by 1998 putin was the head of the fsb the old kgb that we know up of in the west. he was buried unknown on the international stage. within 12 months putin was given the nod to be the sixth prime minister in less than eight years and the person at the time is boris yeltsin. no one expected anything of vladimir putin. yelton took a liking to him and more importantly all approved of him. so where did that go? putin understood there were five prime ministers before him that accomplish nothing and putin knew he had to do something drastic, something very competitive and most importantly something that would get him on the national stage. her first move had to be a bit one and he had to succeed. by late september of 1999 putin figured out what that move was and was to go to war with chechnya but this time he needed to deliver a quick and decisive victory to the russian people.

that's exactly what he did. putin's plan was a scorched-earth policy. the russian army advanced slowly and enforce using both artillery and airpower against the chechens defense. the results come over 300,000 of 800,000 citizens in chechnya fled from the russian advances and fled outside of chechnya. putin back then knew the importance of controlling the media and during that second war in chechnya no journalists or media were allowed in the war zone something that's important to understand. putin delivered to rush with the people wanted at the time, quick victory and people took notice. then just before midnight on december 311999 and yeltsin unexpectedly resigned. he appointed putin president and everyone was shocked. the national stage there were questions, who was this man. less than 18 months he went from

the head of the old kgb and the fsb to prime minister to president never done before in the history of russia. so most leaders with such an experienced acceleration or career would be happy with that. they would write a book due speeches. this was just the beginning of his plan and now putin had a size on the oligarchs which he needed to consolidate to execute his plan. we talk in great detail in the book subtree of how putin humbled the oligarchs but i want to focus on the most important one. after seven years of communism almost all the russians were struggling to adopt the principles of a free-market society. there's an old joke in communist russia we pretend to work, they pretend to pay us. however not all work told about capitalism. and to the individuals who would

eventually become a oligarchs. they were young, smart and aggressive. they took risks. they violated russian laws. most were jewish and i will point out why this is important in a later section. they were very ruthless. unfortunately they were not as ruthless as putin as you will find out later. putin recognized the power of the oligarchs not just of the economic aspect but the oligarchs control the political aspects within russia. that is what putin set out to change. for the sake of time i will focus on the most powerful and wealthiest one brodsky. we know of him in the west because he spent 10 years in the a russian prison. what's interesting about his past is burkowski was the communist youth leader of russia however because he saw was going on he saw that the russian empire was crumbling. he wrote a treatise called the man with the ruble and he was

really studying the free market system. he had a large import business that was the largest bootlegger of alcohol in russia and the largest bootlegger of hardware and software that violated many of the russian laws at the time. so it's interesting. here's a guy that was a youth leader of the communist party, switched over and did a 180 creating a large import company and took advantage of the collapse of the ussr. what really set him apart from the other smart young guys he created a bank which was the vehicle that eventually took over the russian oil sector. by late teen -- late 1989 code oravski made hundreds of millions of dollars from diverting state funds from russia. when yeltsin took over code arose he was one of his key strategic advisers on the economic front.

the russian sector had companies and what they wanted to do was make sure every individual within russia had an equal share of the company so there were 140 million citizens in russia. each person would get a represented share of the company in the state would own the largest controlling block. unfortunately people didn't know what to do with the shares and there was no true stock market. it wasn't the new york stock exchange. people didn't know what to do with these vouchers. khodorkovsky's bank created them market and bought these for pennies on the dollars from people who didn't understand what was going on. they created a market in the controlled a lot of these companies through his bank. this was the beginning of what khodorkovsky entered the billionaires club and after 1993 through the loan for sheer steel that was the key deal.

that's how they took control of the russian sector. in 1993 was created by the consolidation of dozens of oil and gas companies hoping to share the wealth with the russian people. it was eventually the largest producer of oil in russia. khodorkovsky took control of this by two methods. by 1994 yeltsin needed a lot of money. his approval ratings were less than 5% and he needed $159 million in the budget so what did they do? they created a plan where the government would put up shares for the money. unfortunately the collateral the assets of the company were worth 25 to 50 times what the principle amount bank "the perfect kill" put up. they literally took control of you coast for 5 cents on the

dollar. within a week else in made another $150. he went to khodorkovsky and this time the russians got a better deal and sold for 15 cents on the dollar. essentially the whole bill of what khodorkovsky bought this for he paid it all back within three months from the cash flow from yukos a brilliant move for him a disaster move for the russian state. so what happened here? this perspective really changed pudas concept here and how these oligarchs were picking up key aspects for pennies on the dollar. khodorkovsky was a brilliant businessman. he brought north north america technology and north american know-how and equipment and most importantly he brought north american people to improve the production from yukos. for example we talk about fracking in north america.

before george mitchell made it famous it was happening in russia believe it or not. so the canadians were fracking away at yukos assets but yet within just a few short years of taking control khodorkovsky became the 16th richest man in the world with a net worth of over $16 million. this is a prime example of how the oligarchs in russia controlled all aspects of the russian economy and media. that is however until putin showed up on december 31, 1999. initially putin have the support of most of the powerful oligarchs. that all changed after the first election in early 2000. putin said his eyes on the oligarchs. he recognized that if he needed to move his agenda forward he need to get rid of the oligarchs so he proposed a deal to the oligarchs. if you don't meddle in my politics in russian politics i will let you keep the money that

you stole from the russian people. it's a fair deal in putin's eyes. now go back to the most powerful oligarchs, khodorkovsky. he refused and he didn't just refuse to deal the challenge putin and funded the political components to putin but also challenged them publicly. if you understand the slavic mentality and the way business is done in russia you see the exxon deal, who is the middle of her sing a? putin. the one thing with russian business if the russian president is seen signing the bill the bill will be passed. so khodorkovsky to come putin and unfortunately lost but he did with a double-edged sword approach. the final straw that rand khodorkovsky was he tried to sell yukos in a bidding war between chevron and exxon. both rockefeller spin-off companies from standard oil. ironically it's khodorkovsky

succeeded in selling yukos he would become the largest since she -- shareholder of either chevron or exxon which ever one succeeded it. however the present effects and tax exxon didn't like khodorkovsky. khodorkovsky tried to do the deal without putin's approval. you don't do that on major national interest in russia in putin's russia. so what happened in? using russian law they put khodorkovsky in prison for tax evasion and most importantly they seize the assets of yukos. they also froze all the bank accounts. then using russia law, there's an old saying it can be interpreted in whichever way the governor wants it to be interpreted and they demanded tens of millions of dollars in penalties and tax evasion but because they froze the accounts of the company there was no way this the yukos could pay that penalty and a russian state took

over those assets. now what happened? essentially they went up for auction. was it a fair bid process and at exxon or chevron get to bid for a? no. a shale company funded by less than 350 u.s. dollars bid for these assets, had no money in their bank account but were worded the assets in yukos. within a week they emerged with yost has been the shell company and we get into the details of who controls the shale company we can all figure out who it was. interestingly enough it passed with no problems. so what about the individuals who agree to putin's plan? rome in a brahma the owner of the football club chelsea is net worth increased but he had to agree to putin's plan. the wealthiest oligarch in russia today was born in --

uzbek ethnic. he is not even born in russia but he's a muslim set to putin is very pragmatic. it doesn't matter what religion you are or where you are bored if you play with putin's rule to let you keep what you have. then we get into the great game of the 20 century. let's first take a look at the 19th century. there were 321 global conflicts in the 19th century. 73 of those britain was involved in and 50, france. britain was a world superpower the time. 52 of those major global conflicts were in europe only and in the 20 century 53 major global conflicts worldwide. of those 53 the ussr and russia were involved in 38 of them. usa was involved in 19 of the 53. now we see that there is a transition. the more wars you are involved in the less will you do in the next generation. in the 21st century there has

been so far nine major global conflicts. china has been involved in zero them. russia has been involved in one. usa, anyone can make a guess. all nine. now oil became the underpinning of the financial sector. we control the oil, we control power. how did this all start? petroleum by no means as a modern discovery. historically was gathered from oil seeps used in babylon and babylon was a great victim of the first desert storm. oil was drilled in china about 400 b.c. but our modern petroleum era actually began in the russian empire in 1846. what do i mean by modern petroleum era? the first modern well drilled by a mechanical equipment occurred in the russian pair to the first

oil well drilled in the u.s. occurred 15 years later titusville pennsylvania. initially oil was used as a or to produce carrot scene for heating and light. 1976 with the invention of the internal combustion engine. at this time in the russian empire today azerbaijan was the largest producer of oil in the world. between 1875 in 1890 by the bob kool oilfields experienced a 200 fold increase in oil production. not a 200%, 200 times increase in oil production. a population of baku was growing faster than london new york and paris combined. unfortunately later on for the russians and ukrainians oil wasn't the only thing that came out of baku. joseph stalin learned the power of oil and created his ideas while he was born and raised in his early years in baku. the nobel family took notice of

the baku oilfields early as today rothschilds. both along with many other foreigners invested sickened at the end amounts of capital to increase the oil production by kanervo. interesting facts about the baku oil. they were the inventors of the modern-day oil pipeline. i was first and put into place in the baku oilfields. also the oil tanker was invented by the no bills. also first put into place in the baku oilfields. by the 1900s the russian empire produce 15% of the worlds oil but things started to change in the u.s. by this time. in 1899 the croatian immigrant better known in north america as andy lucas planned on drilling an oil well in texas and that became the world famous oil called spindletop. it was a gusher. it produced over 100,000 barrels of oil a day and that set off a

boom. by 1910 the u.s. became the world's largest oil producer. oil war and peace are directly linked. after world war i it was clear to winston churchill and remember he was the general admiral of the navy and became the prime minister. he realized great britain needed to modernize its navy to compete with the modernization of the german military but to do so are needed to secure a long-term supply of oil. great britain secured the supply from iran and this was critical advantage that the allies had in world war ii. oil was one of the main reasons hitler attacked russia in the winter and we know how that ended. but let's note russia worked with the u.s. and the u.k. to defeat the nazis something today armenia forgets. i'm not here to glorify putin. i'm here to lay out the facts that you can make decisions for yourself. history took a dramatic change

during the bretton woods conference in july of 1944. two critical outcomes occurred out of this conference. first the 44 allied governments agree to maintain a fixed currency versus the u.s. dollar. interestingly enough russia was never invited to this meeting and they never agreed to this but the 44 allied nations who agreed each country pledged to buy and sell the u.s. dollar to keep the currency within 1% of the agreed-upon exchange rate. if everyone agreed to that the u.s. government assured the allies that the delivery of gold at a rate of $35 u.s. per ounce of gold if you are too tender u.s. dollar. post-bretton woods the u.s. becomes the center of international finance. this arrangement worked up until 1967 when charles degaulle set timeout. we want our goal. here is the u.s. dollar.

gold bars are flying back to paris. as the speculators took notice and there were some onslaught on the u.s. dollar. what did nixon do? he closed the gold window on august 15, 1971. the same time u.s. funds up in the major oil predicament. it was importing over 70% of the oil it consumes and it happened to be from the middle east. we all know about that airport a crisis in the early 70's. nixon had the dilemma that he came up with a solution. kissinger, henry kissinger who i actually think is a great book out, the world order, he also came out and said we are on the verge of the cold war. they needed to secure a demand for the u.s. dollar but also secure the supply of oil to the united states. so nixon sent kissinger to saudi arabia. kissinger set up what women now know as the u.s. picture dolly.

what did they do hear? saudi arabia would we reinvest the surplus profits in u.s. debt securities. the u.s. government returned but promised military support to keep the existing saudi family in power and the house of sod accepted and in kuwait agreed and eventually the other members followed suit. u.s. and saudi arabia and other members of opec had a strong relationship. by 1992 because they were pumping oil into the national markets the russians who went from 10.6 million barrels of oil a day down to 4.5 million barrels of oil a day and saw oil prices dropped by 75% have the big pension we discussed that in the book. essentially the u.s. crumbled. all this set the stage for the slavic warrior to take power. obviously i'm calling vladimir putin.

to most russians in russia he is the slavic warrior. putin was born in 1952 in leningrad in st. petersburg. he started from very humble roots but his grandfather really implanted vladimir putin at a young age with grandiose ideas. who was his grandfather? his grandfather was the personal chef before lennon and web than in past joseph stalin entrusted him that he became an outlet of joseph stalin. imagine the stories that the personal chef stalin had and he shared that with young vladimir. putin had a lot of inspiration not just from his grandfather but his favorite movie growing up was called the shield and sword. that's the russian equivalent to james bond. he wanted to be a spy. he also came became aware

competitor in judo. by 1970 he enrolled in the law department of the state university in leningrad. by 1975 he's recruited as an agent and he looks to east german and his german accent was undistinguishable for anyone else so he was sent to essentially what putin calls and that quote a specialist in human relations. we in north america called it a spy. so when putin got to st. petersburg after the collapse of the ussr he didn't hang a photo of president yeltsin like everyone else did. he put a picture of peter the great of. that's important because that's important because that's who putin bus relates to. he does not relate to the modern failed politicians in russia. he wants to pick up where he left off and take russia to a new level. after putin consolidates power and takes control of the state energy infrastructure media

firms in the politics putin now has to deal with external forces for starting with the rose revolution in georgia and an orange revolution in 2004 in ukraine. what's interesting about these revolutions they were funded by western forces. george soros admits funding ngos to bring down the satellite states in russia. so what happened to your? 2004 yushchenko wins and i did some business in ukraine at the time. the government of ukraine went forward without problems for moscow. but what changed? in 2010 yushchenko's righthanded important allied word ads as she wanted to become present to what happened. moscow became president yanikovich split the vote of the

pro-western side and became president. now he pledged to play e.u. off of russia. he's trying to get the best deal for russian played both of them off one another. unfortunately that came to backfire on him. by late 2013 the tension is building between pro-russian camps and then they revolution because its city square. the battle erupted and resulted in 4000 people who died because of this. eventually hundreds of thousands of people marched in protest and as i stated unfortunately it turned deadly. the acting president yanikovich fled to russia and an interim government elected an interim president yannick -- imaging go.

half of the natural gas that russia exports to europe goes through ukraine. they want to bypass that by using the south stream. that is what is so important. number two d.c. offshore gas deposits to develop in a future. number 38 deep seaport for the worse and maybe but here's what the media's not talking about which is the fourth important one. if ukraine joins the e.u. they have an advantage by bringing in importing goods without tariffs. that wolf meat into that question mark it is the russian market has contracts with the existing states as ukraine does and now the russian manufactures will have competition at a lower price from the european goods. it's about putin also protecting his domestic economy. let's get into the putin is nation of oil. it's a word i invented because people like catchy phrases like

that. essentially you really want to know what the fundamental basis is please visit the web site colder war.com where we have videos of resources. in the book i break down in great detail the types of categories. you have a heavy oil and light oil and sweet and sour and the different densities. today we will clump it altogether a soil. putin's strategic promise to a future. that's what rush is a country and perspective. i'm canadian. russia is over two times the size of canada and canada is the second largest land mass nation in the world. russia is probably at the top of the world if not number two per square kilometer free source endowment. it's not just oil, its uranium,

copper iron ore in sync. they are very wealthy when it comes to resources. under putin's reign russian oil production is has increased from 6 million barrels a day to 10 million barrels of crude oil a day. that's not easy to do in today's world. in 2014 a lot of media approach and said russia is a dying society. 2014 is the first year since 1992 the russian birthrate is exceeding its death rate. interestingly enough the russian poverty level has declined under putin. its unemployment has declined under putin. they doubled their gold holdings and they have much less debt than the western world. russia has anywhere between five to 10% of the world's proven conventional oil resources. there's a difference between conventional and unconventional. the success we have experience

in north america's unconventional. it's taking intro rig horizontally and fracking it. it's the source rock for the conventional deposits. the russians haven't even started their dimensional developments. a very close friend of mine runs larger service company in russia and he says it's not even funny how many resources they have. they are producing what we call the cheap oil or the easy oil. where does this take us? arctic oil is important to putin's grand plan hence you will see the navy and an increase in navy exposure in the arctic and as canadians we are so worried and for the canadian military spends time is in the arctic. more startling other countries in europe that depend on russian oil.

finland and hungary over 75% comes from russia. belgium over 50% germany 40% netherlands under 40% to handle last decade germany increased its dependence on former soviet oil by 52%. putin is a sure boy was based on two strategies. french are outside the comment for oil make deals with the international markets and most importantly drilled within their own borders especially the arctic. we all know now that putin succeeded in controlling the domestic supply but who controls russia's oil sector? ross neff took over daschle company that somehow got the assets of you coast. what about opec and russia? russia will not join opec. opec has invited russia and

beneficial to russia will cooperate with opec. but what does this mean? i last 35 years opec has cut production 11 times during my lifetime and on average for it reduces production by 1.25 million barrels per reduction. opec invited russia and russia went to the meetings. opec shared with russia what they wanted to do and opec decided they would cut production making the assumption that russia agreed to cut production. russia increase production profited from the situation and expanded the market share. opec lost in russia one. today on november 27 opec is meeting again and it's not just russia that opec is at war with. it's also the u.s. shale sector. the u.s. shale sector has become a swing producer and international markets so we will

discuss why that's important in a bit. what about the putinization of gas? if you thought russia had a name i came to oil it's a dream come true when it comes to natural gas. a lot of people in the west on how the russians 25% of all the conventional natural gas in the world. that's not including the unconventional. so when you look at it as much as the u.s. right now produces 62 billion cubic feet per day, that's using conventional and unconventional. russia is producing from the conventional fields in siberia 65 billion cubic feet per day. gazprom produces all the natural gas and who controls gazprom? dmitri medvedev. these are all inner circle loyalists to putin. what does this all mean? i in europe germany depends on 40% of the natural gas the that

comes from russia poland 87% among 100%. even the u.k. 25%. all this happened, the largest successful shale gas formation was from a company called quadrille of which i was largest shareholder and finance the first two rounds. the u.k. proved 100 tcf's 100 trillion cubic feet of gas and that's enough gas to supply britain for 200 years but they still depend on 25% of the gas from russia. lord brown who used to run bp who understands the issues with russia because of the bp investment in t. and k. he's the chairman of quadrille is so he understands what's going on. but now everything has changed. the largest construction is the natural gas pipeline for russia to china. eventually we will see what this all means but russia by 2028

will be exporting more natural gas just to china than all of europe combined. when you build a pipeline you can twin it and ship out arteries to other markets. and that will happen. what about allen g.? everyone in north america's talking about the lng revolution. unfortunately u.s. and canada are five years behind russia and australia for that matter and when you look at the giant fields the russians have you look at the giant gas field which has an equivalent to a billion barrels of oil they are building these things. there's something called fln g.. it's floating lng. the russians have started building these. the other bigger ships on the planet. the ship is essentially a

floating lng sector. there's one in operation off the northern coast of australia. now let's talk about the putinization of uranium. america's largest consumer of uranium in the world. anywhere between 45 to 50 million pounds annually. for the last 20 years on average about 20% of america's electricity is generated by nuclear energy. half of that nuclear energy the euro uranium came from russia. that means that 10% of america's electricity generated over the last decade came from russia. that's one in every 10 homes in america. globally 71 plans are under construction. 163 are planned and trained and 25 nuclear reactors are proposed. almost half of the current primary uranium production on the planet is within russia's control. interestingly enough if you take

all of the uranium production in 2013 in america one russian company produce more and uranium on soil than all the american companies combined. a scary thought. half the world's uranium resources are within the russian sphere of influence. most importantly almost half of the enrichment capacity of uranium is in russia's control. all of the growth of the nuclear sector is in the emerging markets. that is where putin is focusing its future on. so what does this all mean? i bring us together and we see a judgment day for the petrodollar. opec and most of the world by the early 70's have been using the petrodollar however if putin is successful in his plan it would involve the demise of the petrodollar. we have an amazing video on a web site called award.com. major oil and natural gas deals i occurring in nine u.s. dollars

or more. we see the most recent one with russia and iran. russia will build a nuclear reactors and supply a life supply of uranium on non-u.s. dollars. a $400 billion natural gas deal and non-u.s. dollars. but will opec turn their back on the u.s. dollar? that's the key critical question. the u.s. was saudi arabia's largest customer for crude oil. that is all changed. part of the oil were opec is it worth the u.s. shale sector. because of the success of the north american shale sector the u.s. are exporting ngls and condensates. there's a band in america but you can't export crude oil but there's no ban on refined products. what does that mean? the u.s. shale providers producers are now competing in saudi arabia and qatar and kuwait on the international condensate markets. that's not good for saudi

arabia. their number one customers now china. usually a producer goes with what its customer wants. so what does this all mean? the success of the u.s. domestic energy has increased output and production. therefore the import of energy from the middle east has become less supportive to america's farm policy. a lot of people in the media and most americans don't know actually the u.s. military presence in the middle east has been subsidizing the european energy supply that comes from the middle east and north africa. this is now significantly at risk. in the last four years we have seen the arab spring, change of many governments in the middle east the middle east in a power vacuum that continues with the u.s. military leaving and unfortunately for everyone isis and al qaeda are expanding. the war in iraq is nowhere near complete. it's getting worse.

expect complex in ukraine to get works before gets better in his u.s. pulls out more instability and volatility in the middle east will increase. what about the shaky houses saw the? let's talk about saudi arabia. the number two oil producer after russia and it's a great risk. you look at the king right now is over 90 years old. his successor, his brother is in his late 70's and is not doing well healthwise. ..