of course, that require that the british authorities and the british colonial authorities respect the mohawks, respect their lands, give them sufficient presence and good terms of trade, so there was reciprocity in this relationship. it was not one way. let's go on. we talked about the albany conference earlier in 1754. hendrick was there. what did he say to the british colonial representative? basically he said you, the governor of virginia and governor of canada, are quarreling about lands in the ohio country that belong to us, belong to the native peoples, and basically by saying that

he's indicating i'm not so sure either of you has our interest at heart, that is, the british or the french. if we would assist you, how -- what will be in it for us? how -- what will you do in terms of protecting our interests? and he said at the same time look at the french. they are men. they are fortifying everywhere. you are, quote, like women, barren, open, without any fortification. if you british would have -- and british colonials would have our alliance, you must be strong or else forget it. we will not assist you. an iroquois chief, another one who is unnamed, had a different view and he's quoted in colonial sources. it's a very interesting quote, and his perspective was it would be wiser for native peoples to side with the french than the british. well, let's see his rationale.

brethren, are you ignorant of the difference between our father, the french, and the english? go and see the forts that your father, that is, the french has created, and you will see the land beneath their walls as still hunting ground, okay? the french have these forts in the ohio country, and it looks like an occupation, and they are on indian land. but the land between the forts is all still hunting ground. the french really aren't there to colonize. they are there to hold on to the territory and prevent british encroachments and british trade, okay? while it's the english on the contrary no sooner get possession of a country than the game is forced to leave. the trees fall down before them. the earth becomes bare. they want the land. the english colonists for farming, and that would mean the destruction of our hunting grounds and ultimately our way

of life. so that iroquois chief is indicating that. now, the lake champlain theater on a contemporary -- on a historical map that's in the massachusetts historical society looks something like this. this is a lake again that has its northern point touching today the southern boundary of canada and the western side of the lake, you have the state of new york, today the east side, vermont. here is lake george. this would be a vital corridor of conflict in the war, and bloody battles would be fought here which i can only go briefly into today. the lake is 100 -- lake champlain itself beginning here is 125 miles long, and its widest point is 12 miles wide. it's in a valley even though it's ringed by mountains and, of

course, very heavily wooded, and you can see the internal lines of communication between the st. lawrence river and the interior of north america, the key ones are by water. it's much easier to travel over water than land, and lake chamberlain southward leads to the hudson river valley, the land really between the colony of new york and eastward is new england, so it's very vital region. and this shows us where the fort -- french built a fort in the 1730s that they called fort st. frederique, you don't need to know the names of all the particular forts. the british would later call this fort the point, they later called it the point, and later when they took it over they built a fort there that would be

called crown point. this is on lake champlain, and then in the region between lake champlain and lake george to the south on the narrow passageway, the french built a fort in an area that the natives call ticonderoga. the british adopted the name ticonderoga, but first the forts here were built by the french. well, let's go on in the talk. now here you see a modern view of the fort is reconstructed and reconstructed beautifully and how it is on this waterway that is southward to north or north to south between, again, the st. lawrence and the hudson river valley, and the fort was originally built by the french, and, of course, it would be a scene of conflict. on lake george to the south the british built a camp in -- a fort in 1755 after conflict there with the french. and in the early conflict in this particular theater the

english only had the assistance of the mohawks. the french had the assistance of many native peoples besides the help of their own french colonials, the french canadians, who had a very important role in this campaign. between 1755, 1758-'09 to the end of the war. now, this is a map from the massachusetts historical society again done by a british engineer of the location of the fort. let me just go back very briefly, and what you see here is a lake, and the fort is here, and -- and the map also indicates the route that the french would take for their attack, but they are not just going to attack a fort head-on, even if it's made mostly of logs and earth. they don't have the stone just

to build a stone fort in the wilderness, so-called wilderness. well, it's a heavily forested region, so the point is the french are going to besiege this fort, and they are going to put their men within reach of the fort and then get closer and closer until the british and colonial position is untenable. who was within the fort in 1757? british soldiers and new englanders. new england men and new york and new jersey men, men from the northern colonies. there were about 2,000 colonial soldiers and also british soldiers guarding this fort. let's go on. commanding in 1757 in this theater for the french was a french army officer of the highest caliber, many wars in europe or battles in europe he had fought, the marquis de montcalm, a french nobleman. you have a french general, a high ranking officer from

prestigious family assisting montcalm who well after the war would explore the south pacific and tahiti. and then there was the governor general of french canada at the time and someone who believed in utilizing native warriors and using them to spread panic and terror among british colonial settlers. he did not get along well with montcalm each wanted to be the first in command, and the officers who came from france looked down upon the french colonials in a similar way often that the british officers looked down upon their own colonials. okay. in the campaign of 1757, who were the opposing sides? the french and natives under the

montcalm, french troops, canadian militia, indian warriors. they had 1,600 indian warriors with them in this campaign, almost an unprecedented number from any single instance in north american history up to that time, at least since colonials had come on the scene at all, so montcalm's army not only had french troops from france, well disciplined, trained regulars. he also had canadian militia, french canadians. he had indian warriors of 1,600 men, warriors, and they came as far away as the great lakes, even lake superior. it's hard to believe, but they did. they came hundreds of miles to fight. the british and british colonials there, british regiments and men from new england, new york, new jersey, the provincial troops, where the

militia really serving with the british, okay? who were the various natives fighting here with the french? the abenaki, algonquins, nippissing, micmac, huron, ottawa, potawatomi and winnebago way in towards lake superior. it's quite remarkable that these native people from the great lakes came. so many hundreds of miles. why? because they thought they were strengthen their interests with the french, their ties to the french, and gain trade goods, gain plunder for more, gain scalps, gain prisoners or captives that they could sell for goods and add to their power and strengthen their own position. so they joined the war for their own reasons to be sure. one of the natives who was a

catholic, who had been converted to catholicism, you see, some of the natives who joined the in the st. lawrence valley in their own villages and had been converted to christianity or catholicism. others who came from the great lakes and especially the far western region were not christian at all. and this man who was a catholic said to the western indians, my brothers, we domesticated indians, this is translated from french, from a journal, we thank you for having to come to help us to defend our lands against the english who wish to exploit them. our cause is good, and the master of life favors it. we admire the fine deed you have just accomplished on the lake, lake george. the french called it lac

st. sacrament, the lake, the holy sacrament. it is stained red with the blood of englishmen, and the english who ventured on that lake with their whale boats, mostly men from the province of new jersey were decimated by the natives in their canoes who took many prisoners, 150, killed many men and scalped others. bougainville talked -- and you get the sense of the alliance that is of different elements, french and the native. it doesn't mean they are always going to be looking at the world the same way, hardly, in fact. not at all. look at what bougainville writes about the natives particularly coming from the western region or what the french called the upper country. the cruelties and the insolence these barbarians is horrible. their souls are as black at pitch.

it's an abominable way to make war what a scourge. humanity shatters and being obliged of making use of such monsters, but without them the match would be too much against us. in other words, we need them. we're outnumbered otherwise. we can't do without them. now he's writing this after -- after a battle in 1756 along lake ontario where montcalm had taken the british fort and then after the fort surrendered, there was a massacre of 30 to 50 of the surrendering of british prisoners so bougainville has that in mind. we now have 600 indians and we hold a council with them, but it is a long job. it is a long job to get them to make up their minds. it requires brandy, equipment and food and such. the problem never ends and it's very irksome. now, the fort surrendered, the fort on the southern part of

lake george in 1757. ft. william henry that we had just shown previously. let's go back just a bit. this fort which the british and british colonial soldiers built surrendered over 2,500 men were in it. they couldn't hold out any longer. hundreds had died from the french bombardment, and now the surrender took place.sh commander the honors of war in the european fashion. what did that mean? it meant to surrender with you could be allowed to carry your flags out of the fort which you surrender. you would take a cannon, make one cannon as a symbol that h wi

you. you also -- officers are allowed to keep their arms in their baggage, and the terms were that they would not fight against france for another 18 months, so those terms were considered honorable. what happened in this episode that's shown in "the last of the mohicans?" the native warriors of a list of many that i had shown before, when they learned of montcalm's terms, said, no, those terms are too lenient and too generous. and what happened for us? where is our booty? where are the captains we should draw? so in the night, before the british and english colonials were to surrender, the natives gathered and they were prepared

early the next morning when the british and colonials filed out. and they were attacked and set upon and 100 to 200 were killed. some women and children, too. mostly men, of course. others were captured. about 400 were captured, because then they could be sold and ransomed. they'd be worth a money. the natives were drawn into the commercial economy of colonial north america. they were not separate from it. they were dependent on it in many ways. and montcalm and the french intervened and managed to save a few hundred british and british colonial lives. but their intervention was -- historians will argue how wholehearted it was or how effective it was and whether it was -- it wasn't clearly enough

to stop what happened. and yet perhaps it prevented things from being even worse and more horrible. so to the natives, they felt betrayed in this instance by the french. the french had not given them enough and in fact in no later subsequent instance of this war did anything like the assemblage of native peoples join the french. french -- indian support for the french in north america reached its high point in 1757 with the capture of ft. william henry on the shores of lake george in what is today the state of new york in this lake champlain, lake george, hudson river corridor. it was the high point of native support for the french. the natives largery returned to their villages in the great lakes region in the upper country.

many died of smallpox. they would never rejoin the conflict, those distant indians, again. the french did retain some native allies, but as the british gained the upper hand in the war, a number of peoples, particularly the delawares, went neutral, and some shifted from being neutral to being pro-british, or even from being pro-french to pro-british, because they saw that the british had the economic mind. the british had the main forces that if they were going to protect their lands and their way of life, then it would be best to make terms with the british. so you find that process accelerating in 1758, '59.

one last point for today, because we'll continue the lecture next time -- william pitt. really, william pitt was a prime minister in england, britain, who helped determine the outcome of this war in several ways. and by orienting the policy even more toward war in north america and putting more resources into the war in north america, and he would elevate colonial offices in rank, they always ranked british colonials below a british officer of the same rank, pitt made it so that the difference was not so great and he was sensitive to colonial dignity and pride and also he

increased spending for the american war so that the colonies would be able to raise many more troops -- which happened. and he appointed very able commanders such as jeffrey amhurts and james wolf and sent them from europe where they engaged in the war against france and in europe. he sent them to north america. the war in europe was massive and involved many nations, which the fighting in the caribbean was tremendously important and pitt was very keen on expanding the british empire there. and did -- and of course, the british with their naval might made significant conquests in the caribbean and ultimately, threw the appointment of amhurst and wolf, the british gained the upper hand and their maritime superior, their superiority on

the sea was practically as important as their might on land. of course they controlled the atlantic and the supply routes to canada. so next time when we continue, we'll see how that helps determine the outcome of the war. thank you very much. lectures this history airs each saturday at 8:00 p.m. and midnight eastern and sundays at 1:00. we feature classroom lectures on different topics and eras. to keep up during the week or to sends your questions and comment, follow us on twitter at twitter.com/c-span history. on november 2nd, 2011, the

cia released more than 200 declassified documents and videos that president reagan used in developing his soviet union possible. next officials discuss president reagan, the use of intelligence and the end of the cold war. this hour and a half long symposium was held at the ronald reagan presidential library. >> thank you, duke. i think we all owe you a sincere thank you for making this spectacular venue available today to showcase the declassification and release of the cia and presidential library records. on behalf of our director and our chief information officer i want to thank you very much for coming. i hope you enjoy the afternoon. almost every day i get to go to cia headquarters in langley, virginia. i walk into the main entrance. i walk across the agency seal on

the floor, the one that you've seen in the spy movies. i walk past the statue on the left of william donovan, former director of the office of strategic services. ♪ [ laughter ] >> i didn't know there was a ghost of william donovan that lived at the ronald reagan library. [ laughter ] >> i walk past the memorial wall where on the right side where there is chiselled a star for agency officers who lost their life in the line of duty. there are 102 stars on that wall today. 49 of which have been added since i've been working at cia. i go past a couple of guards with really big guns, up a few steps, and right in front of a bust of vice-president george bush, former director of cia, i turn left. i go down a hallway.

and at the end of that hallway there's a mural of the statue of liberty. below that mural is printed the agency's motto. it reads, "we are the nation's first line of defense. we accomplish what others cannot accomplish, and we go where others cannot go". well, in order to accomplish those things and to go to those places, much of what we do must necessarily remain secret. if our adversaries had access to this information, our methods would quickly become ineffective. so as you can imagine, we take this declassification business very seriously. information management services, the office that my deputy dan sullivan and i lead at cia actually have the privilege to lead at cia is responsible for the records of the cia. records that due to the nature of the business remain secret for a very long time. although operating a secret intelligence organization in a democracy has inherent intentions, as an organization we believe that we hold these records in trust for the american people and in fact when their sensitivity attenuates

over time we have a duty and responsibility to release them so the american people can see for themselves. our last director, leon panetta, a californian, once said to me, "joe, how do you decide when a secret is no longer a secret?" the only thing i could come up with, "sir, it's a very difficult task" to which he immediately agreed and said he was glad he didn't have to do it himself. fortunately at cia we have very dedicated, very experienced officers who go line by line, page by page, through millions of pages of documents each year protecting what they must in the interests of national security and releasing what they can in the interests of the american people. these officers work under incredibly tight time deadlines. and by and large without any expectation of acknowledgement whatsoever. so i'm going to break tradition right now. and if you work in information management services or csi at

[ applause ] >> thank you very much. thousands of hours go into declassification projects like the one we are engaged in today. these folks that just stood a minute ago spend hundreds if not thousands of hours and have worked for this particular event for the last two years. finding documents, redacting documents and ultimately releasing documents. and what we know about the past is always subject to reassessment when new information arises. the reason we look forward to events like this conference today is they provide a wonderful opportunity to re-examine the narratives that accompany pivotal events in our nation's history. the document collection that we're talking about today challenges some of the most

persistent misconceptions about intelligence leading up to the end of the cold war. the myth, for example, that president ronald reagan was an unsophisticated consumer of intelligence provided by the cia. or the contention that u.s. the fall of the soviet union due to a failure of intelligence. when you arrived you were given a booklet. on the back page of that booklet you'll find a dvd. that dvd contains all of the declassified documents from today's event. it also contains a variety of videos that were produced for president reagan, photographs, maps and a variety of other things. it is a treasure trove of information, and i highly recommend that you look at it when you have the chance. now, before i get 1,000 calls back in washington that it doesn't work, the dvd is designed for your computer and not the dvd player attached to your television. [ laughter ] >> so i'm excited to hear the fantastic speakers we lined up for today. so i want to close.

but before i do that i want to recognize a couple of current and former senior cia officers who are in attendance today. peter clement, our deputy director for intelligence is here. you'll hear from him here on the podium shortly. jeanne teisinger our chief information officer is with us today. without her leadership events like today do not happen. admiral inman former deputy director of intelligence is here with us today. you'll hear from him on the podium as well. we have a gentleman who at cia needs no introduction at all because he's a legend. former officer in the office of strategic services and charter member of the cia in 1947 and that's major general john cinglau. welcome. [ applause ] >> so thank you very much for coming. i hope you enjoy it, especially the young folks in the audience today who are the next generation of historymakers. thank you. [ appl ]

>> thank you, joe. it's interesting in our business at the national archives when you have conferences or symposiums like this and you realize how open our society is. i think that's extremely important. and we should feel fortunate as american citizens that we're able to do that. when ronald reagan took office in 1981, it is doubtful that anyone would have predicted the end of the cold war and the collapse of the soviet union a decade or so later. no one, that is, except ronald reagan. president reagan had a vision. and it changed the world and made it a safer place. but he also knew the importance of a strong military as well as good intelligence. as you will learn today, information provided to the president and his advisers is critical. in all fairness, things wen'