you had 16, supplied by an individual who was ceo of a company that then came before the court on an appeal from a buy back company for the jury. and the judge was supported by the contributions, declining to recuse himself, and the court entertain the question of whether the do you process clause of the 14th amendment compelled accusal. . .

>> a person with a personal stake in a particular case had a disproportionate influence in placing the judge on the case. the dissenters said there is no standard here. this will cause chaos in the state courts and invite unwarranted refusal actions and should never have been decided this way. the refusal actions will harm and the cure will be worse than the disease. before week think that our predictions will come true, we must remember this could be this term's case of bush vs. gore. justice kennedy could not have been more specific in saying this was particular to the facts here. this was an extreme case. it was a high percentage. it was a direct case involving

the company. take away any of those facts and to press -- to process would not compel refusal. i just want to say a background word in this situation was the case arises. a few terms ago, the court had narrowly decided case called republican party against white. it asked whether the first amendment barred states from limiting campaign solicitations and statements by judges running for election, and the court said there is a first amendment limits on campaign finance regulation in state judicial elections. justice o'connor has spent most of her time since she left the bench during a kind of -- trying

to do with the unintended consequences of that decision. she has devoted herself with enormous success to the project of trying to bring back some judicial independence to the states and to try to contain republican party against white so we do not think there has to be eight free-for-all in judicial elections. state election spending and financial activity kind of took off in the wake of republican party versus white. it would seem like a first amendment license for resisting a lot of the state regulations. it may be a kind of signal to the lower courts. there should not be a free-for- all in state judicial elections. we cannot handle all through x post refusals.

it sounds in due process, but it may be a shot across about on the excessive reading of republican party versus white to immunize judicial candidates from in the form of a judicial election restrictions. even though i am a huge first amendment libertarian, i think buying judges is one place where the first amendment has real limits. [laughter] let me turn to the two last topics, and then i would love to hear from you. just a couple of the highlights of the criminal procedure docket. here there are many more criminal law and criminal procedure decisions. i have just try to pick out some of the most prominent ones. a couple of fourth amendment cases. herring vs. united states is a

different kettle of fish. maybe it is just a red herring. it tips the scales of justice. herring is a case that raises yet another limitation on the exclusionary rule. it says the for the menendez require the suppression of evidence -- its is the fourth amendment does not require the suppression -- a car search of a vehicle compartment, if the initial arrest was based on a false arrest warrant. it applies only if there is a systematic error or reckless disregard of constitutional requirements, not it is just an isolated it of negligence in a

busy police office. the precedents are not overturned as much as just chipped away at. herring continues that trend. arizona vs. gant limits police authority to conduct warrantless vehicle searches incident to rest. it over bulls a 25 year precedent, a majority led by justice stevens. it is over in a dissent by other justices. the police officer has to believe that the arrestee is then reaching distance of the vehicle. it has to be related to wingspan. you have to say that the

defendant might get a glove -- might get a gun from the glove aparcompartment. a quick word about bandy camp vs. cold sting. -- van de kamp versus goldstein. it extends to actions that are involved in supervising subordinates compliance with obligations of excluding exculpatory information to defendants. this is an interesting case because the court is very into prosecutorial immunity right now. it will ask the question of

whether prosecutorial immunity extends to the investigative phase. it says you cannot just repackage it when you are going after what the prosecutor did back in the investigative phase. i will predict that the court will hold at prosecutorial immunity extends to the investigative phase. i am filing a brief today on behalf of 30 states in support of that case. it was a unanimous decision, and i think it was understandable why the court might not have decided that, because it has not clarified the meaning of embler until now. i just want to mention two more cases.

dinz against massachusetts is another one that will be important to people in the criminal field and in the district courts. diaz against massachusetts extends the crawford line. entitles a witness to have an opportunity to cross-examine the evidence against him to a laboratory analysis of drug samples. lab analysts cannot just sign an affidavit saying yes, this is cocaine or meth. a lab analysit has to be available for cross-examination. the attorney general said it would impose enormous cost on the state. they should be processing samples. it will be enormously costly and difficult. justice scalia and justice

thomas joined in an opinion while justice breyer goes off in the sense with roberts and alito and kennedy. he says we do not do cost- benefit analysis when it comes to the constitution. it must be complied with. you must be able to confront the evidence against you. i love cases in which the justices defy this labeling of who is on what side of these cases. i come now to two glass cases. i will mention pearson against callahan. if you want to go to qualified immunity, do not stop to decide whether the novel constitutional

question has been resolved in your case. i want to back up to another case. it is the case in which the so- called strip search case, involving a search of a 13-year- old girl right down to her underwear, based on suspicion that she might be possessing or distributing a drug forbidden by school policy. in this case, ibuprofen in high potency quantities. this was the case in which the oral argument may have helped to determine the outcome. the ninth circuit said there was a fourth amendment violation here. this was an unreasonable search and seizure, even under the precedent that gives school districts lots of latitude to search students.

even under the tlo standard, there was a violation here of privacy. the opinion of the court by justice souter is not entirely lucid about what the standard is for what is excessively intrusive. he suggests that heroin might be different. it is very significant that the fourth amendment was extended to hold this search unreasonably intrusive, in violation of the fourth amendment. the court goes on to say there was qualified immunity, because the rule could not have been clear. the reason i say the oral argument might have had such impact is that you all recall that some of the justices made

somewhat light of the strip search, with some of the male justice's referring to what is so bad about your underwear being snapped? in happen in the locker room when you were growing up. justice ginsberg in a rare departure gave a long interview to "usa today," in which she said i think my male colleagues may not have appreciated how sensitive roles of 13 are about their bodies and privacy in relation to their bodies. then you get an opinion where the court seems to have shifted over to the fourth amendment ruling. i think that justice ginsberg's presence there was a way of saying that perspective may be brought sometimes by the differential experiences people have based on who they are. in this case, being a woman on the court gave her a different perspective. redding was a very interesting case, but i do not think it

stops school officials from doing searches and more dangerous circumstances. i think the sleeper case -- have given you this under the heading of civil litigation. this was a case in which the court held insufficient a complain that named numerous high-ranking federal officials, including ashcroft and muller themselves, for allegedly putting arab muslim men into a high-security facilities right after the terrible events of 9/11, under a pattern of race, religion, and national origin discrimination. that is the claim. the court says this complaint is inadequate. first, justice kennedy says to

complain against mr. ashcroft and mr. muller, you have to have their personal knowledge that this was discriminatory. it is not enough to allege there is indifference to the discriminatory actions of their subordinates. a prediction you will see this claim for dismissal in every claim of discrimination you will see coming into your court. everybody wondered after the case that said a complaint for conscious parallelism under the sherman act is insufficiently pleaded if you do not have facts showing agreement rather than conscious parallelism. is it just for antitrust or for all complaints?

you can throw out a complaint that merely asserts the legal elements of a claim or a search general and an particularized factual allegations. hugely significant ruling, because now you have motions to dismiss that will multiplied. outside the context of antitrust, a hugely significant ruling. there is a really interesting dynamic in the case. justice kennedy quotes twombley all over the place. he is quoting david souter.

souter rights the principal dissent. he says i am david souter, you know nothing of my work. it is just like the scene in annie hall. an allegation of significance to subordinates. he does not think twombley should have been extended in this case. i predict it will be the site is the most frequently in the pleadings and friday. let me conclude, having mentioned in justice souter just a few brief thoughts about the transition we are about to see. i think justice souter has been a magnificent justice or any of us who had the privilege of arguing before him and the court. we all know that he was

extraordinarily well-prepared, fair minded, extraordinarily probing, and a lucid questioner. he was one knew i would hark back to the great moment when i was able to persuade justice souter to come out to present a eulogy to my late, great colleague and mentor, gerald gunther. justice souter is not a man who likes to travel. he likes new hampshire. i called up his secretary. he loved gerald's but because he said he should approach each case and decided as carefully as you can for that case. he had written him a fan letter

about the book. i was unable to get justice ginsberg to come to the eulogy because she was being inducted into the women's hall of fame. i tried justice souter. i called up and the secretary said you never get him to come. is that in connecticut? no, it is in california. he will never go to california. he only likes to go to new hampshire. five seconds later, might line rang, and it was david souter. he said he would be honored to come to gerry's memorial. he was extraordinarily gracious to everyone there. he is just a magnificent human being and model judge, and will be very much missed.

i think we will miss him for a lot of reasons. the accent is going to change from new hampshire to the bronx. i still remember a case in which i was arguing in court and i was on deck waiting to go up. the advocates ahead of me were arguing a case about whether a law imposed a minimum obligation. the colloquy it started to go something like this. justice souter -- are you saying there is a flaw in the law? the advocate -- no, we actually endorse the law here. >> know, are you saying there is a flaw in the law? >> no, we admired the law. >> he leans over and says no, he

is asking you if there is a floor in the law. [laughter] we are definitely going to have a change of accent. i look forward to other interpretive questions that a new yorker will be able to understand. i just want to close by suggesting that transition may be more complicated than anyone thinks. many people say that there will be a presumptive confirmation of judge sotomayor, who has been another magnificent judge. it has been my privilege to know her as i reside sometimes in the second circuit. many people think it would just be an even trade, that it will not alter the outcome. certainly that is true. justice souter was then 5-4 majorities.

he is in the majority on abortion rights and the establishment clause rulings, such as the one that limited the 10 commandments in kentucky. he is in the majority on a number of 5-4 cases. he has been consistently in the minority of all those states' rights cases that i mentioned before. with respect to a lot of those lines, there will not be a change. i do want to remind everyone that justice souter was not an ideologue. he was often on the side -- on the supposedly non liberal side of cases. he was very often in favor of dismissing complaints, heightening pleading standards and standing recurrence, and other things that make access to civil litigation more difficult.

he was one of the people who was willing to write decisions limiting punitive damages under deep process reasoning, saying you have to constrain that. that is the only major constitutional innovation from the conservative side as opposed to the structure inside. punitive damages, pleading requirements, private rights of action, standing requirements, justice souter was on the business community's side of a lot of those cases. not clear that that is a place that justice sotomayor will necessarily step right into his shoes. if the rehnquist court hallmark

was states' rights, the roberts court homework -- hallmark, you might say that increased barriers to civil litigation, or an attempt to bring rationality to civil litigation, has been a very important, consistent theme of the roberts court. in that, justice souter has been a consistent ally, is an open question whether justice sotomayor are will be. thank you very much. [applause] >> before you get up to leave, we will entertain a few questions. i would also like to take

kathleen sullivan will be here all week with us. you will have a chance to walk right up and ask your own personal question, if you would like. in the interest of time, let's take three questions. if those of you who would like to ask questions will go to the microphone, then i would also like to have you please fill out your evaluation forms, and remember that special task that i am asking. tell us what you would like to hear when we come back to our program in january of 2011. >> you are not obliged, and i know coffee awakes, but is there any thing anyone wants to talk about?

>> i think it would be interested if you could amplify a little more [inaudible] what more do you see in the dynamic of bringing a new justice on? >> i will repeat the question so everyone can hear. what do we think would be the change in the dynamic on the supreme court to have a new justice come on, as justice sotomayor in everybody's prediction will shortly do? the old saying is that every time there is a change in a justice, there is a change in the court. that is absolutely true.

as i am sure you find record -- as you find with your court, the composition of the panel itself does change some of the dynamic of conference and oral argument. i can tell you judge sotomayor is a vigorous questioner. she is an active questioner from the bench. i cannot see that changing. i think the experience of oral argument will be a continued dynamism. for anyone lucky enough to argue in front of the supreme court, it is already an extraordinarily dynamic court. it is a court in which almost everyone asked questions all the time. it is up for of 60 questions in almost every argument. the active questioning will be there. she will be probing question. she is a person of very strong

commitment to coming to the right result. she will be an active participant in conference. she will be an active and vigorous player on the court. we have seen in the hearings that she will not come with preconceived agendas. she will be responsive to her new colleagues, and she will approach them with a lot of modesty and deference. it will change, but i cannot tell you right now as a prediction how it will change. she has been more willing to entertain access to civil litigation in certain contexts where justice souter has been on the other side. she was willing to interpret federal statutes to allow causes of actions. that is the only area where i think we have had any evidence to see what she will do on the supreme court. as those who follow the court know well, the change of justice will change the corporate -- --

-- we just do not know how. >> all the questions are designed to play to a base. what would you suggest that a nominee ought to be asked? >> he asks what could make the hearings less stylized recitations of in the formulas like "i will follow the law." i wish i could answer that question in a useful way. i would love it if the hearings -- i think there are a fantastic educational opportunity. the court is the least visible branch. alexander hamilton said it was

the least dangerous branch, but you might say today is the least visible branch. the court is so invisible, when justice souter was back in new hampshire, he was recognized by somebody in the local coffee shop, and he was pleased. they smiled and said you are that supreme court justice. he beamed and said, why yes, i am. they said, you are just as brier. -- you are justice breyer. he said his favorite thing about serving on the supreme court is the opportunity i have to work with justice souter. [laughter] i actually think the hearings

are a magnificent public educational opportunity for people to learn about what goes on in the court. i think we do squander the opportunity by having a stylized kabuki dance. the vendors -- the defenders will say she is moderate and restrained. that is not a good use of public education. i would love it if the court talk more about the kind of cases i have talked to you about today, not just a few hot button issues. if someone landed from mars, they would think the court only decided about things like abortion and gay marriage. it is of vital case of the huge apparatus, this magnificent apparatus of the federal and

judiciary that decides countless cases in which procedure matters and statues matter. a few questions about whether the carmac covers intermodal shipments by rail or see, that would have been a lot better. i recognize that any recommendation like that does not have any chance of succeeding because the senators play to their base. their base is interested in political issues. maybe to have a panel of people other than the senators themselves doing some of the question, having lawyers or academics do some of the questioning, might be a good thing. as long as we have the system -- we may be stuck with it, but i wish it would be more edifying.

thank you very much. [applause] . >> the first oral argument was scheduled for september 9. the official start to the term begins in october. you can watch this program again or other recent ago america and the courts" programs at c-span.org. join us next week for "america and the coursurts." >> you are watching c-span, created for you as a public service by america's cable companies. coming up next, world war ii veterans talk about their experience. then a look at research into lost jewish assets taken by the nazis. then a discussion with the doctor on the team who tried to say president kennedy's life

after he was shot. >> john mccaslin is interviewed on after words, tonight at 10:00 p.m. eastern on book tv. >> the world were ii memorial honors all those who served on the frontlines and on the home front. recently a group of veterans talked about their experiences during the war and the 60 get anniversary of the d-day invasion. this is about an hour and 20 minutes. >> welcome to the eisenhower presidential library museum and are commemoration of the it anniversary of the d-day invasion. we intended are commemorative program to be a tribute to all veterans, but to veterans of the

second world war in particular. we could think of no better way to pay tribute to them than to simply listen to them and honor their personal stories of honor, sacrifice, and bravery. i want to preface their remarks with the words of another veteran of the second world war, general john s. d. eisenhower, who wrote the following in honor of this occasion. please convey my greetings and best wishes to all those gathered at the eisenhower library to observe the 60th anniversary of d-day, the allied invasion of normandy. in conducting this ceremony, you are paying honor to those thousands of young men who risk and often lost their lives in the cause of freedom. many years have passed since that historic event, a time span longer than the period between the inauguration of thomas

jefferson and the assassination of abraham lincoln. is heartwarming that you today are remembering. much has been written about d- day, and i can add little to what you already know about the preparations and the ultimate success of the european campaign. i would like to offer a couple of remarks on how the event affected my father, general eisenhower, based on his own words. to begin with, there was no question that throughout the remaining years of his life, my father always considered june 6, 1944 to be the most momentous experience in a long career. the stakes were high. nobody even dared contemplate the consequences at the invasion failed. all possible preparations had been made, but the risks were still there, especially with the weather. the prospects were uncertain. it was up to general eisenhower alone to evaluate conflicting reports and to decide, though, or no go. he decided to go, and the rest is history.

despite this personal responsibility for the success of this enterprise, ike was the first recognize that this undertaking was not his alone. every person in the allied force played a vital role. in june of 1945, a month after the successful end of the war, ike was honored in london. the opening lines of his acceptance speech, he paid them to be. humility must be the portion of any man who receives a claim earned in blood and sacrifices of his friends. at the same time, he said, i come from the very heart of america. while admitting the differences between abilene and london, he pointed out their basic similarities. to preserve his freedom of

worship, is equality before law, his liberty to speak and act as he sees fit, subject only to permission that the trespassed not upon the rights of others, a londoner will fight. so will a citizen of abilene. finally, i would like to emphasize how deeply my father grieving over every life lost. he expressed that feeling best in an eloquent statement he made in 1963 with walter cronkite. sitting on the cemetery overlooking omaha beach, he said walter, this d.a. has a special meeting for me. on d-day, my own son graduated from west point, and on the very same day, these young men were cut off in their prime. they have families that grieve for them, but they never knew a great experience of going through life. i devoutly hope will never again have to see such scenes as these. every time i come back to these beaches, or any day when i think about that date 20 years ago, i say once more, we must find some

way to work for peace and to gain an eternal peace for this world. those words were spoken in relatively tranquil times, despite the tensions of the cold war. since that day, america has suffered the agony of vietnam, to iraqi wars, and the continuing war in afghanistan. but the fervor it wishes expressed by ike and the old soldier who had seen war first hand, are immutable. thank you, sincerely, john eisenhower. our moderator today is a historian and director of the museum division at fort riley, which includes the first infantry division museum, the u.s. cavalry museum, and custer house. bill holds a master's degree in american history from kansas state university and has taught at public schools and several colleges. he has written many publications on both local and military history.

[applause] >> afternoon. in the distant past, before words were written down, bands of hunters and warriors would gather in the evenings to recall the day's work, adventure, or battle. after a successful hunt or bloody battle, they would sit around a fire, recounting their exploits. in telling their stories, they might present the horns of the prized corey or produce the shield of a fallen foe. these oral traditions were passed from one generation to the next, and eventually to these stories and relics became sacred to the tribal memory. today, we sit at that fire. it is our privilege today to

have a panel of distinguished veterans of what has been called by some the greatest generation. they are here to recount some of their deeds from an epic time in our history. so i would like to introduce this panel to you. on your extreme left, is lt. general retired richard -- he was called to active duty in february 1940. he served in world war ii with the second battalion infantry and took the italian overseas to italy, france, belgium, and germany. he had a 35 year medical -- military career that saw service

in korea. he commanded the airborne it in the vietnam war and retired in 1975. to his immediate left is bursar retired curley, who is a buffalo soldier of the ninth u.s. cavalry. he served in the united states army for 28 years and has been involved in the local community of junction city in many facets. he enlisted at fort riley in 1940 and was assigned to the ninth cavalry, which was then a segregated horse cavalry unit. in 1943 he was reassigned to the 371st industry regiment in

arizona. he participated in the italian campaigns during what are busy during world war ii. next is colonel retired george boyd, who is a tuskegee airmen. colonel boyd it flew with distinction during world war ii in the 332 air corps. he served in the korean and vietnam wars and as squadron commander in the united states air force before retiring in 1971. after his retirement, he served as commander of the kansas wing of the department of civil air patrol. to mr. boyd's left is sergeant

wendell gugler. he joined the army after high school and was assigned to the 85th mountain infantry in colorado. in december 1944, he was transferred to virginia where his unit shipped out for naples, italy. during the 10th divisions campaign in italy, he saw much action and received various awards to include the compaq in victory -- combat infantry badge into battle scars. to his left is staff sgt walter d. ellers, a congressional honor

recipient. he was born in junction city, kan., and enlisted in the army in october 1940, along with his older brother, rowland. they trained for the war in the pacific when pearl harbor was attacked, but in 1942 the brothers and shipped out to fight in north africa and sicily. they fought in three major campaigns with the first battalion 18th infantry. just before june 6, 1944, the two brothers were placed in separate companies. walter was assigned as a squad leader in company l. both brothers stormed the beaches on d-day. it was not until a month later that walter learned that his brother had been killed on omaha beach. for conspicuous gallantry and

entropy at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty, on june 19, 1944, sergeant sellers and received the congressional medal of honor. these are our panel members today. we have one panel member who is unable to attend. that is a first lieutenant virginia visher. her bio is in your program, and we wish her well today in her absence. to begin the panel, i would like to start with general sykes and go down the line and ask the gentlemen if you remember what you were doing 65 years ago today.

>> 65 years ago today, i remember it very well. i was commanding a parachute battalion in northern italy, and we were engaged in fierce combat with the germans. i will forever remember that night. >> i was at fort riley, kansas. i enlisted in the army in 1940, and i remained at fort riley until june 1943, and was shipped out to arizona. >> i was a very frightened to high school student in new jersey, wondering what was going to happen next. >> i was training encamped hale

colorado. we had spent a year there, and we were about to be transferred to camp swift, texas for some flat land training. >> i understand the question was 65 years ago? 65 years ago i was on normandy beach and had to fight my way off of it. i had joined the first way because they were pinned down on the beach, so i became a first waver. i was originally to be a second waver, and i cannot forget that day. my brother paid the supreme sacrifice for all of us.

>> in going back to the start of their military careers, would you like to address what motivated you to join the army or the military? was it patriotism, the draft, or something else? >> i had just been commissioned to second lieut. out of kansas state. every man a wildcat. [applause] i was immediately called to active duty, and i do not think it was patriotism. they called me and said they wanted me, and i reported to a little place in texas. i thought it was only for six months, but well into my six

months, i received word that it was for the duration. >> i was just out of high school, and going to the post office. i saw signs that said negro soldiers to enlist. just out of high school, you could not find a job. he would make about 50 cents a day, so for five of us got together and went down to recruit. we tell them we wanted to reenlist. at that time, you had to get your mother's permission to reenlist. we had just turned 18 years old, so we went down and they sent us to fort leavenworth to reenlist. we got to fort leavenworth, kan., and they had a quota, and the quota was filled. they said the next best thing

you can do is to go to fort riley, kan., and they will accept you. so we went to fort riley, kansas. they welcomed us with open arms, so we were glad. you got three meals a day and free clothes. he made $21 a month, so nothing could be better. they put me in the horse cavalry. they had more horses and mules up for raleigh than they did people. i remain at fort riley until 1943. though war started december 2, 1941, and they were downsizing a horse cavalry, so they sent to the infantry. we shipped out and went to italy, and i remained in italy until the war ended in 1945. >> my career started, and i am

not sure whether as patriotism or what it was, but i enlisted in the enlisted reserve corps. what that did was get me out of the infantry. it also meant that i would be in the united states army air corps when i did enter service, and that is exactly what happened. >> in the spring of 1943, i was about to graduate from high school here in abilene. it was the height of the war, and i knew that i was going to be in some service. i attempted to enlist in the navy pilot training course and go to kansas city and take an exam, both physical and mental. i passed the exam with flying colors, except for the fact that i could not hear very high

pitches, so they would not accept me. so i came home, and about that time a friend of mine was attending harvard. he came home and was telling me about all of the skiiers that were in listing from new england and the other northern states. that sounded pretty good, so i contacted the national ski patrol association in new york city and obtained an application and file the application with three letters of recommendation. i was approved, and it was notified that i would be sent to camp hale, and that is the way i got there. >> i have to think about this.

i enlisted at fort riley, and when i went down to enlist, my brother and i went down because he did not want to be drafted, and i did not feel like i wanted to go in the service by myself. i wanted to go with him, so i tagalong. when i got down to fort riley, i was not old enough to be listed automatically. i had to go home and get my parents signature. my mother looked me in the eye and said son, i will not sign unless you promise to be a christian soldier. looking back at her, i knew i had to say something, so i told her i would do my best. i saw those tears in her eyes, and i remembered that. throughout my life in the military service, i tried to do my best as a christian soldier. i did not want to dishonor her,

and above all, i did not want to dishonor brought. that is how i got into the military service. -- i did not want to dishonored god. my brother and i enlisted for the mechanized infantry regiment of the seventh infantry division in fort ord, california. it did not turn out that way. we got into the infantry, and we were in the 17th division, and then the third infantry division came along and they were all regular army men. we had enlisted to beat the draft, and we became regular army. they sent us up to the third infantry division and we ended up in washington. we were on top of mount rainier putting on a pair of skis, and i look down the mountain and i was wondering how i was going to get

down that amount. that was the first tilhill i had been on, and it was 8,000 feet up. it started on september 7. that was the first day my life was saved, because they ordered us all to return to recants immediately, so i took off my skis and i let that noun, and here i am. i am still here. [applause] as you all entered military service, what were your initial reactions to the leadership it came in contact with, clothing, equipment, just the general processing into a military career? do you want to make those assessments?

>> i was impressed with the leadership. most of the leaders i encountered west point graduates. i do not think they felt very highly of this outstanding cadet, but after a while it became necessary to rely on the second lieutenants. i was impressed with the leadership. i have a lot of examples that stood me in good stead later on when i became a commander and was able to pass on leadership traits that would help them. >> i think the leadership was outstanding. like the general would say, all of the officers were west point graduates. they were there to teach and learn, and the equipment, i

think they were better than the m-16 that they have today. the learning was outstanding. the in co's were all outstanding. they taught the officers, and the leadership was outstanding. >> when i went into the service, i did not even understand the concept of leadership per se, but i was soon indoctrinated. i started out with a started telling me to take all my clothes off, throw my civilian clothes and a pile, and it's

that time we call the batikfati. then they taught me how to fold my socks and underwear and so forth. this was probably leadership, but it was good training, because i still hold my socks and told my underwear. -- fold my socks and fold my underwear. [laughter] >> when i reached camp hale, i found an outstanding group of people, mostly volunteers. the only ones who were not volunteers at that time were a country that had been sent from hawaii -- 8 cadre that had been sent from a white. there were no noncommissioned officers in the group, but they were very good.

the equipment we were issued was fantastic. it was very well done. we all had mountain jackets and later on we had ski parkas. we had ski pants and we had doubled down sleeping bags. during the winter, when we had maneuvers out in the snow, those bags were wonderful, because we could just lay them out on the snow and crawl in and spend the night in 40 degrees below zero. . .

i smiled at the sergeant and he smiled back, then he chewed me out and made me run around the field with my full pack on. i was learning respect. they were tough. those old soldiers were tough. some of them were very old, to o. >> well, we have got you into the service and got you equipped.

now, would you want to tell us some of the off-duty recreation you were able to pursue? >> [inaudible] [laughter] >> in in junction city, they had a uso. on weekends, the ninth cavalry band would come down and they would have a dance. i eat learned to dance from the u.s. so -- i learned to dance from the u.s uso. i met my wife. we are married 66 years this year. they would come to school and

bring people up to fort riley. every weekend, there would have family day. they would have cold cuts and have the families out to fort riley. at that time, you had to get permission to get married. if they disapproved of the family, you could not get married. so the activities for most of the people who were single at that time, the activities were all focused on a uso and the folks at fort riley.

>> my experience in extracurricular activity pretty much is consistent with what he said, and i will pass, like the general said. [laughter] but i would like to share that the people in the uso and people at home and in the neighborhoods around the bases really supported service people. i remember, we were going through you talk and i was on a troop train with all black american soldiers. we stopped, and the ladies that were giving out donuts and things, all white americans at the station, they gave us the doughnuts and coffee and featured -- treated us like all the rest of the soldiers. believe me, that was really a breath of fresh air for us. so i need and still tell you that people back home in world

war two whort in the war as much of us as those in the uniforms. i am one of the youngest people on this panel. i was very young in 1944, 18 years old. most of these women have some age on me. they went through prior experience. but with five years' difference in age, these guys were old man in the service. if you were two days older, you have right on them, and that but you be the boss. they tell you that. as far as entertainment was concerned, we still each other's money and that sort of thing, it's and gambling. but support came from people back home.

>> while i was at camp hale, the weekends were spent in denver if you could get there. that was a long drive, but there was no tunnel there at that time. a lot of us would make the trek down to denver and have a great time with friends. one of the outstanding things i remember was the brown palace hotel, the premier hotel in town, and it has an interior lobby their eight stories. one of my members put ropes down and repel all the way down into it. [laughter]

>> i am still learning. i just learned i have to speak to this microphone. i apologize. this is a new experience, talking to people like this, and i can remember what the old sergeant's used to do. they spoke loud and you heard them. if you did again, you were running around the field. i got big brained. but i am getting there. there were so the things that happened i would like to tell you about that it would take a year or two. >> during your military service, at what point lived -- what was

your reaction when you first learned that you were going overseas, and would you share with us some of your experience is getting ready, where you shipped to, how did you learn where you were going, that sort of thing? >> as i indicated before, i was the commander of the parachute battalion, and the first training we had was learning how to jump out of the airplane. many people say, why would you want to drop out of a perfectly safe airplane? but after a jump, you made five attempts and went to a tactical unit. and you were basically an infantry soldier. despite the fact used the airplane as a means of transportation, you are going to

fight on the ground, so you had to learn to be an infantryman. there was a great deal of training in that respect, and after about six or seven months of intensive training, we won on maneuvers to tennessee, and received orders. that was with a great deal of anticipation. we did not know we were going until we actually got aboard ship. after about 14 days, we arrived in naples and immediately became infantry combat. >> in 1943, we trained and

trained and trained until 44, when we were shipped out to camp patrick henry, va., to catch a ship. we did not go where we were going until we got out of the mediterranean. we were told we would be landing in italy. we went up to rome. after we passed through rome, we got into combat, and we stayed all the way up to the swiss border. at that time, the army was segregated. i was in the 92nd infantry, and we lost a lot of people, and it was hard to get replacements, because they put everyone in

service battalions. we remained in italy until the end of the war in 1945. >> when i found out i was going overseas was when they handed me the orders and said you are going to go on a 12 month to work -- tour, and the reason you are going is you do not have any overseas time. that is what i found out i was going, and it was just another adventure to me, because we were not in combat. two days later, we were. >> after being trained in texas, we boarded trains and went back to newport news, va., where we boarded the liner, the former

leiner of america, which had been converted to a troop ship and was certainly not like ocean liners had been. we were packed in. but we sailed from there and went to naples, italy. and then my unit was placed on boats and wind up the coast to italy, and we were notified, told that we already knew that our assignment was to spearhead through the mountains, and that is where we located ourselves, starting that. >> when i get to the third infantry division, that was in

1941. we went up to the third infantry division foss headquarters in fort lewis, washington, and we had jungle training. some training getting you on and off the boats, in camp pendleton, california. they took us in khaki uniforms and put us on a train, sent us all across the u.s., and we landed in virginia, where we boarded a ship to newport news and headed out. we were given translation books, and we thought we were going to france.

we said we were going to this country, big coastline and everything, quite a ways out. they said it was french morocco. that is how we learned there was another country that spoke french besides france. that was where we landed, and it was an experience to be on the first landing. that was 1942. >> today, we experience a lot of inflation coming to us in various ways, technology changing, and i want to ask, did any of you no newspaper or

magazine writers that may have accompanied your unit's, and what sort of news to to get from back home? did you get any clippings or articles that told you what was going on after you deployed? >> in my case, i received lots of letters from lots of relatives. that kept me up to date with what was happening in leavenworth, kan., and other places. and they told me lots of news about what was going on in the war. i think the principal source of information, in addition to the letters from home, was the stars and stripes. the people who published it did

a magnificent job, not only in publishing the paper but in delivering it. i think just about every day, we could depend upon having a copy of the paper and get a good idea of what was going on back in the states, as well as what was going on in the war. >> i was just thinking, trying to remember, ernie pyle was a reporter for the "stars and stripes," and at that time we had freed male. we would get letters maybe once a month, something like that. but other than that, it kept us well informed.

>> i was a reporter for "stars and stripes," and it is good to hear that the news was good. i have one of the first article i wrote from them, about anderson air force base and the people who were disposing of ammunition which we would wish we had three years later when the korean war started. during my tour of service, publications were pretty good about keeping us informed. we did it publications from home. my mother used to send me news place bert clippings -- newspaper clippings. we were well kept informed. the only time we were not is when we had temporary duty on some assignment, and you did not get your mail until you got

home. i>> the letters were wonderful, and we had quite a few of them. stars and stripes was a wonderful publication. >> i like "stars and stripes," also. i will tell you about the male leads to get from home. we would like to tell you our story, but by the time you got it, it was censored and scratched out. she played music for us and told us we should quit, but we did

not pay any attention to that. motion, we could not tell you where we were. it was a one-sided story, and it was interested. >> would you be able to describe a typical day in reserve if you are not committed to the front lines? what did you do when you were not fighting? >> well, the first thing you try to do is get a good, hot, shower i think. a clean change of uniform. then there was the task of getting your weapons back in shape, cleaning their weapons,

greeting new replacements. that was always something because you're unit was depleted. it was a matter of training them and getting them back in the line. >> after we returned out of the line, we would be dirty and nasty, glad to get a hot shower and a hot meal. at the time, that would serve c- rations, and then a k-rations in a cracker jack box, and you knew you were going back into combat. we spend our time cleaning our weapons, you would go to shower, take your clothes off, line up,

go into a tent, fold your clothes, and you would go through and take a shower and pick out a bunch of clothes. if they fit, all right. so you take them off and come out the other end after the shower and you try to find a pair of pants and shirt fit you view -- shirt to fit you. we did not have money, because we did not make anything. but if you had money, you would get in a crap game and try to win money from your friend, and he would get angry, quit playing, and take the money away. [laughter] >> i would like to discuss some

of the hardships of being in the service. i want to tell you something i need to share with you. some of the good things that happened after that terrible conflict of world war two. in 1944, my troop was told by our tactical officer we had to defend the gulf of mexico. i went to my first sergeant boomed, and said, you will not let us walk on that beach, and now you want to defend it. what is that about? >> he said, that is part of the united states, and your oath is to defend the united states.

>> i thought, ok, that guidance was acceptable to me. he was the supreme person in our lives at the time. this is 19 -- this is 2000. that of 1944. in the year 2000, i was appointed to be commanding officer of the kansas win of the civil air patrol, so we would go through mississippi, think we were going to stay on the base, we get a notice that we do not have availability because an exercise was going on, and that suggested we ought to stay in a whole hotel downtown. i had the feeling in mississippi i would be discriminated against. well, my wife and i went to a new hotel on the beach.

surprise, it is an interstate gambling casino. six minutes later, we are on the sixth floor and a luxury suite. and i say, look, come here, look out the window. we could not walk on that beach in 1944. here we are now, we can do anything we want to end go anywhere we want, like anyone else. i said, something good came out of this, and this happens every day somewhere in this country because of the people that spent time doing things to change our country. i'm here to tell you that i appreciate bats and salute those of you who voted and those who will vote, and i'm not telling you how or who.

vote. protect that system. it works, and i am living proof of that. >> leaving combat at times, as the other gentleman told you, one of the best things is to take a shower, finally get your mail. in addition to that scene, after being on the front lines for a month and a half, some of us work awarded a three-day pass to florence, italy, a beautiful state. i certainly enjoyed it so much, to be able to leave the front lines and that of all have a bed

to sleep in. but it was back to the front lines again after that. >> my experience in the military service overseas, i read a letter that my brother had written home to the war in 1943. he says, i have been over here for over a year, and this is the first time i have been in bed. i thought, holy cow, he was lucky. and the only time i ever got a bed when i was wounded. i got wounded four times.

not on purpose, but i did get hit. >> what were your reactions to va and v-j day, and how long did you stay in the service afterwards? >> it was a great day, particularly for soldiers in combat. knob by the italian at the time was on a ship, headed back to the state to fight the war and the pacific. so, v-j day was a great day of

jubilation. >> a great day in the military service was when harry truman signed 99 airborne on the 26th day of july, 1948. i think that was a great day. >> i was in washington d.c. on v e day, and it was a wonderful feeling. probably because we did not have to go in combat. but it was a relief. we did not know what the future

held, but it pretty much did not matter on d-day. >> my unit was on lake garda in the italian alps. we had ended up there, and it was quite a celebration for all of us. the j.j. -- v-j day, in the meantime, we were shifted back to the united states and they told us we would be the second wave on japan.

outthrust -- it so happens that the day i came back to abilene, president truman announced that the war was over with japan. >> i had a lot of happy days. after the war was won in japan, we took orders from president truman saying anybody who had ordered should request a discharge. i took it to my commander and he said, you could not do this one. [laughter] so i took it to the battalion

commander, and he agreed. i said we had plans for you, and he said, i know you do. i said i would exercise my rights, and i did. i dealt with veterans for most of the rest of my life, and i had 29 years with the veterans and ministration, eight years before it started working for veterans, and i filed claims for benefits and had a whole lot of veterans were living in rental cars. i would say to them, what are you doing? you are paying $250 a month, and you only have a pack of rent receipts. i said, you can go here and pay

much less with a home, texas, and insurance and you are paying for rent, and you will have equity. i talked to a lot of veterans about buying homes in the 1940's and mid-9050's. [applause] >> gentleman, we have covered a lot of ground this afternoon, and i would like to give you an opportunity if there are things we have not talked about or questions that maybe i missed that you would like to address or even share some personal thoughts we have passed by, the floor is open to you. >> the first thing i would like to say is how impressed i was

with the topic of the american people. when i came in the army, it was less than 120 south bend, including deer force. -- less than 120,000 men. you heard about rooms substitute for rifles, so on and so forth. the head an army of only about 100,000. one year later, the american people work supporting the armed forces of several million, turning out tanks and airplanes by the thousands. that has always impressed me, having seen our army and what shape it was at the time congress passed a regulation.

incidently, they passed the draft with only one vote, and the fall of 1940, which indicates how radisson america was to become involved in world war two. shortly after that, the entire nation was enthusiastically supported the war. the strongest, most capable military force in the world. [applause] >> i will pass on the question. >> i would like to share with you a personal in ventures in terms of what happened after integration was declared to be guava land in the armed forces

by president truman. this is a personal experience. as i was in the 100th fighter squadron, the second wing to which we were assigned was deactivated. um officers and enlisted persons in their units were given an opportunity to do two things. one, they could serve without prejudice and go home to do whatever they wanted to do. or they could stay in or sign up and go for worldwide duty. statistics show we want 15% of the enlisted persons, 50% of officers, everyone else joined the integrated united states

that now become the department of defense. one of my jobs was to ask each listed person if they wanted to go home. general davis at that time asked every officer the same question , and the statistics showed the same thing. 15% decided to go home of officers and chairman, and the rest of the personnel went worldwide vote duties. that was a traumatic time, because the culture had changed. our culture had changed. where we had been a unit of people of color, and that was the only reason we were in those

units, we now have an opportunity to become part of a fighting unit based on training and what was it necessary to win the war. my first assignment was with the 318 fighter and interception squadron, where i was the only black of surf line in the squadron at the time, and it is one of the highlights of my personal life, because begun to be friends, we got to know each other, and we were fighting for common cause, the united states of america. [applause] one of every three in the 10th mountain division was killed or wounded, and i lost a lot of good friends.

but those of us who survived were all very thankful that we did what we could for our country, to bring freedom to the entire world proof -- world. >> i would like to talk all little about why we are here. my society has a convention. once a year we go to a city, and they send us out to schools, every school day camp, and we talked to the students, and that is what i've been doing for 20 years. i talked to schools all over the united states, virginia, tennessee, new york, chicago, wisconsin, olympia, places like

that. i talked to the schools, and the thing i wanted to know most about is what a great nation their living and, and that the stars and stripes is the most respected flight in the world. the reason we have so many immigrants here, so many people of different nationalities, they see that flag and they see freedom, and they come here to get their freedom. that is why we have some may people coming here all the time, because we have a very loose system of immigration, and they come here for education and other reasons, but also for freedom. in every sense, it is a revolutionary war, the biggest war since the civil war.

the next biggest war since world war two. then we have vietnam, korea, and europe. then we have iraq and afghanistan. we have all of these places where we have caused freedom. there is more freedom and around the world than any other nation has caused, and all the other nations put together. the united states has created more people. we're a great and wonderful nation. thank you all for supporting us at this system. [applause] >> i would like to make a comment that extends

celebration. about the last two weeks and april, and visited troops in kuwait and iraq, 6000 or seven dozen personnel. i want to tell you what i found. i found people who knew what we were doing, people who understood their mission, who wished they were home, and people who like to the leadership they receive, for the most part, those that i talked to. and so i've been in the same position as they are now. our conversation is credible. they seem to know what is required of them. we are in great hands with those

soldiers, men, and women out there in the field. i can say that, because i have been there and talked to them, and you need to know that. support them, because they will be where you are tomorrow. thank you. >> at this time, i would like to open it to the floor if there are some questions our audience liked asked rewould -- would like to ask. >> i would like to hear the story about turning the medal? >> would you like to share your experience at normandy? >> if i could do it shortly. first, and did not allowed to

win a medal, and i was only doing my job. what happened was we had a german patrol, and we fired on them, and they came in. i had to take a patrol and follow them. i got half a mile or so and stumbled across a bag going down this road between hedgerows. it was so dark you could not see in front of you. we stumbled briefly over it, picked it up, brought it back. and i go to the commander and ask if i'm satisfied, because we had no maps of any kind.

we got back, and two days later we go to this place where they showed the maps as the second and third lines of defense for the moves the germans will make. so when we open it up, we found that out, and we took the -- we read the maps and went home and packed the next couple of days. on the ninth and 10th of june, i was leading a squad across the field and the platoon next to us was leading across the other field in their platoon. there was a machine gun. so i rushed my men up to the hedge row in front of us so we would not get caught in the field and i started going down the hedgerow to find out where the machine gun was firing from. i heard some noise.

i'm standing there, pointing my rifle and four enemies who had their rifles pointed at me. i had to make up my mind, are you with them, whatever. enter my mind like that and i had to shoot them. another machine gun was firing from another corner, same place as the other one. so i went there, came out, and knocked out the machine gun. after meeting the first enemy, i had them fix their bayonets, and that is one of the best things i did. i went on carry my bayonet and led my squad.

i could smell them before i could see them. [laughter] i learned to smell them in africa, and carry that on for years afterward. we went up to another one, this is the third one, and i went up on the bank to see what was protected their. there were two more troops there, with 12 men on them -- 12 mortars which is more troops on them, 12 men, and they looked at me and were scared stiff because i was, also. i did not tell them that. i asked them to halt and they

started running because they were afraid of these bayonets, because my squad came out there. so we had to shoot them all. the next day, i got the job of leading the squad again. the commander had said my squad out there. and the next guy got killed out there. we started from three sides, and commander told us to withdraw. i knew if we did, they would shoot us in the back. i was on a mountain firing in a circle, maggie -- might be a our man came, firing from the right. my man got shot, but i did not know it at the time because i was busy putting a german machine-gun nest down in the

corner of the field i was in. i got hit in the back, fell down, and i shot him. he actually fell out. so i got up, saw my automatic rifle, and went up to get it. he had been wounded in the right leg and right arm was shattered so i got his arm around my neck and carried him back to the hedgerow, turned him over to be magic, and went back for his rifle and brought that back. i told my commander i was wounded in the back. he looked and said, oh, my god,

you should be dead. i said no, sir. the bullet went into my side, went through it. it went and looked like i had been shot clear through. he said, you ought to be dead. you have been caught clear through. it did not happen, but i had my wounds pressed and went on. so that is why i got a metal honor. [applause] -- that is why i got the medal of honor. [applause] it was not that i was trying to win any honors. it was all just doing my job, and i never thought about it. i never knew anything about the

metal honor until i got wounded a third time, hospitalized in paris, and i was sent back to the front line. the guy and the train was reading "stars and stripes," and he said i am reading how your brother got the medal of honor. i did not tell him he was reading about me, because i had not got it yet. a colonel call me by my name, and he said sgt, what are you doing here. i said i was reporting back to base. he said, you are supposed to be back in the states, getting the medal of honor from the president. i said yes, sir, i read it in

"the stars and stripes. so i went back. john lee, a graduate of junction city high-school, i was talking to him and he said he went to the high school. so anyway, that is how i got a medal of honor. [applause] >> another question? >> well, i want to thank our panel for sharing their insights and perspectives on world war two.

to them and all veterans, past and present, we of deep gratitude and thanks. thank you for attending. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> still to come, and look at research into lost jewish assets taken by the nazis. after that, a discussion with the doctor on the team who try to save president kennedy after his shooting. and another panel with world war two veterans talking about their experiences. tomorrow, on "newsmakers," scott

armstrong from health cooperative about how whopper to this work and will serve in a new system. tomorrow at 10:00 a.m., 6:00 p.m. eastern, here on c-span. a look now into research on lost jewish assets taken from not cease in world war two. from the national archives, this is about half an hour. >> good morning, everybody. i work here at the national

archives. the program is designed to teach about historical research for the records, so we are pleased to have you. we do not just have lectures. we also have genealogy workshops. we have an annual fair that took place in april, and a book group, so we meet several times during the year to discuss a book. so maybe you can make that other programming as well. today we're talking about lost jewish assets. she has an interesting

background. public affairs specialist from the office of public affairs. she started as a researcher at the national archives in march, 1996, talking about jewish assets from world war two. she worked for a law firm on behalf of holocaust survivors. she was hired by the national archives in 2000 as a local researcher for the interagency working group to implement the nazi war crimes disclosure act in 2004. she joined the office of public affairs. articles on her and her research have appeared in "the new york times," "usa today," "and u.s.

news and world report." she graduated with honors in political science from the university of michigan. our program is usually one hour long, and we will take a question and answer, so we hope you enjoy it. i do have one logistical question for you. i handed out evaluations. if you could please fellows out before you go, this is very important for our budget. >> she is also featured here. >> that is true. she is featured every time a guest comes to the national archives. so you need to add that. good point.

>> thank you for coming. it is a pleasure to be here. i spoke to my mother and told her i would be here, and she asked me what i would talk about. i said, there is only one topic have talked about for 13 years, and that is what i will talk about today. i will address and hopefully address three questions. one, why and how did the story unfolds? what was the order of events? congressional hearings? lawsuits? government reports? why did this issue immerge 50 years after the holocaust? number two, how did the national arkwright's at college park become the center of the

investigation? and three, what was the result? what happened? how did the story unfolds? the national jewish congress was big before the war, and slowly became less important. the head of the congress was a man named edgar roffman, the billionaire owner of seagram's. he has been in the movie industry, a huge business man and donor to the party, and a canadian. his father died and he discovered he wanted to reconnect with his jewish roots, and he became involved with the congress. it sounds like an enormous organization. by the 90's, it was not too big.

a man named rabbi israel singer was the main go-to man, and there was a publicist. jewish organizations, any small organizations are always looking for an issue. israel singer was doing summer reading. i am going to use the chart to show how quickly this unfolded. sorry for the squeaking. somewhere in 1995, rabbi singer read a book. i do not have a copy of it. i have read it. i told him about the swiss accounts. this does not have a high amazon ranking. it was not considered a great mystery. but opposed the idea of what happens to money that you have

deposited in swiss banks during world war two if you were later killed? what happens to that money? also, u.s. intelligence officials were in this. so the rabbi started thinking about this, doing a little research, and they thought that this might be an interesting issue to look into. the question, in the 90's, why wasn't this developed earlier? the cold war had ended. obviously, they became our ally. when it was over, those alliances were no longer as

important. . .

>> the summer reading, 1995. the novel, "the swiss account." that began looking into this. a billionaire businessman wanted to broach the issue with the swiss. they said sure, come to switzerland and we will discuss this with you. december 1995. they go to switzerland. they meet with the swiss bankers. apparently to make things happen that were greatly offensive. he is an older gentleman. he was not even offered a chair. that is what he said when he came back. the second was, forget the nicest these -- the niceties, they offered him $32 million to make it go away. he said he was not warmly welcomed, he was not given the chair, he was offered $32

million, and he said that was offensive. the swiss had done some research and they set out of "-- at a all world war ii era accounts, there were dormant accounts. they said the accounts were worth $32 million. that is what he was offered. he was offended, and he decided to do something about it. as i mentioned, he is a canadian citizen. there's not much he could do in terms of putting pressure on the banks, especially the banks with offices in new york. he went to visit someone in january 1995. he went to visit then senator alfonse d'amato. many of your republican him

reject many of you are familiar with him. he was a big donor to the democratic party, visiting with a republican senator. at that point he was chair of the senate banking committee. he had jurisdiction over banking affairs. d'amato was a difficult situation. his big issue at that point had been the whitewater investigation. it was not amounting to what he thought he had. the upcoming election was going to be a big one. he turned to his legislative director and said, do you think this is something we might be interested in? new york has the largest holocaust survivor population of any state in the u.s.. he is a new york politician, and

at one point, as the issue developed, he took out a full- page ad in a jewish newspaper in new york that said " d'amato, good for their jews." as many of you may know, there are congressional staffers who do not this aside the issues for members, but are very influential. he turned to greg rickman and asked if he was interested. greg happens to be jewish and happens to be the son-in-law of a holocaust survivor. he happened to have been with his father locked at the camps over the summer of 1995. so he was interested. alfonse d'amato said if you are interested, the hearings are yours to run.

february 1996, greg rickman sent a letter out to all the different government agencies, and it was signed by a d'amato saying they were looking into the accounts. if you have any documents that relate to this, please send them to us. the letter was written february 23, 1996. a month later, an assistant archivist who just happen to have done his ph.d. on lost jewish looted or during the holocaust wrote back. "we regret that we cannot undertake extensive research necessary to identify the exact

documents that interest you. we will be pleased to assist your representatives in using our finding aids and to make permanent records available in our college park research room." so march 1996 was when that letter came back. the world jewish congress had a consultant who lived in maryland. there were not going to go to the national archives to undertake this research. they said that they could send some intern's to do the research, and it might take to make days to a week. they said they could not do the research for the model, but to send some intern's. -- could not do the research for d'amoato. they ignore their consultant and

were going to come to the archives and go through documents for two days. i happen to be in between jobs. someone called and asked me if i was interested in doing today is of archival research. i had never been to the national archives and knew very little about the issue. there is not supposed to be anything, because they were numbered accounts. why would there be anything in u.s. files? why would we have records of what the swiss banks did in world war ii? >> he said it is to make days, it is at the archives, and i know you need some work. what have you do this? march 21 i met with greg rickman. he handed me the letter from dr. kurtz, with some ideas of where to begin. he gave me the instructions,

safe haven. i had heard there was a project called safe haven, a u.s. effort to attract money from germany to switzerland. that might be a good place to start. ward's 21st 1996 was when i met with greg. march 22 was my first day at the archives, and it was the weekend. my second day at the archives was march 20 fi5. i started with a card of 13 boxes from the jag war crimes branch. this was just a suggested place to start. on my second ever research, and i understand this is not a normal research experience, i found a 1945 u.s. intelligence reports from switzerland, reported on a swiss bank. i have a copy of that right

here. it noted that the main depositors were jews, and it listed accounts of 182 depositors from nine countries. it said safe haven report, which i was told to export. it is from 1945. basically said that these were all accounts that had been opened before 1942 and had not been touched, and they did not know why. they said that there might be three reasons, one, there were people trying to profit from the black market who deposited funds illegally. to, they are trying to move funds out of their home countries, or three, to ensure that the funds would be safe from confiscation by local authorities. they also said that the aforementioned funds and other property are beneficially owned, principally by jewish persons who are nationals of and residents of the not see occupied companies. -- the nazi-occupied countries.

i called greg from the archives and said i found something that looks important. he said come here immediately. make a copy of the document and come to the hill. so i did. many of you may have heard congressional research service. is the research arm of the library congress. they are experts on a number of different fields. greg faxed this list of accounts. there are accounts from romania, it is just listings of names a lot of different amounts. there are names that jumped out, it does not take a rocket

scientist to say these are jewish names. i wonder what the story is. they asked if they could take these amounts and put them in the current figures and adjust for interest and inflation. he said it was a rush order from the chairman of the senate banking committee. they got back to gregg. this one listing from one bank totalled over $29 million in 1996 figures. that is what broke this open. it showed that there was evidence of jewish accounts in swiss banks during world war two and that it was here at college park. historical proof of unclaimed assets in switzerland could be found in u.s. archival records. this sparked and ignited the issue, but there was a very

unusual fire accelerant. how many of you have done research at the archives? this is how quickly this developed. the first hearing was held cable 23rd, 1996. that is how fast the whole thing developed in the april 23. whoever has done research here knows that when a document is copied from the national archives that was once classified, you have a local slug at the top. this is a declass slug. someone at the archives will sign it and then the date.

the nnd date is the year and date it was classified -- declassified. not a newly declassified documents, however, the day, 3/25/96. if someone is looking at the document, what is the date that is easily readable? the first congressional hearing , it censured the model held this up and said declassified last month at the national archives. no matter what any of the staffers tried to tell him, that make for great publicity, and that is what made the news. asta model holding up documents and waving them, saying they were newly declassified. -- alfonse d'amato holding up

the documents. someone who did not know would say that makes sense, 1996, newly declassified. that was the accelerant on this. there were numerous other hearings. how did the archives become the center of this investigation? following the first congressional hearing on this issue, research teams representing the swiss banks showed up at the archives, and the press followed. to ensure equal access to all, greg bradsher had been tasked to be the point person on the issue. the concern was that someone would say you helped miriam, but why are you not helping the law firms? to make everything equal, to

give everyone equal access, greg did a finding aid. this was an early draft. it said -- in windsor military records, set four records that relate to this issue. -- it went through military records. i will go back to that. this is the original, which was under 10 pages long. greg became interested in the issue. he always had new discoveries. one day he said it turns out there was a government agency that is no longer around, call the office of foreign funds control. it no longer exists, but we have about 500 big federal records center boxes of those materials. they have not been processed,

but if you would like to go through them. this was approximately 15 million pages of material. by this point it was summer of 1996, and there were in terms. i was still working with the world jewish congress. we had about 12 in terms. we sat around the table in one of the rooms and went through pages and pages of these boxes. again, i am not a trained historian and certainly not an attorney. these were college interns who made these discoveries. greg rickman suddenly was a at the archives every day. one day he wanted to introduce us to another researcher representing one of the largest swiss banks. reg and i were in short sleeve

shirts and shorts. they introduced us to a man who arrived by limousine every morning. he was tall, incredibly handsome, immaculately dressed in a suit and cufflinks. he had a law degree, a business degree, spoke three languages, and had a background in international finance. that was who we were up against. that is when we realize that this investigation had grown a lot larger. we explore the records of the office of strategic services, a precursor to the cia, the treasury department the state department, and the office of foreign funds control. what sort of documents did refine? we learned a new york connection. it turns out that the three big swiss banks had a subsidiary in new york during world war two. some of the depositor funds had been transferred to the new york branch. they said these were numbered

accounts, we will not give you any information about them. the u.s. began to investigate. as we tackle box after box, we found those investigations. it was fascinating to read more about safe haven and to see the method of swiss neutrality unravel. we learn that switzerland supplied the not seazi regime. in the words of a 1945 memo, as late as april 1945, the swiss were in cahoots with the germans. i talked about the summer research effort. in the summer of 1996, the german magazine noted the importance of our research discoveries. "the avalanche of slime from the archives is threatening to bring the entire swiss banking center, to date no. 1 in the

world, into lasting disrepute." encouraged by this, we proceeded with our work. [laughter] in september 1996, was called and asked to meet with an attorney. i found myself sitting at a table with many attorneys. they were considering suing the swiss banks on behalf of holocaust survivors. they said they wanted to do the work pro bono. the managing partner of the firm asked if i thought there was evidence to support this case. again, i had essentially lived at the archives for the previous six months, studying only this. one attorney looked at me and said it is one thing to accuse someone of tax evasion. it is another thing to accuse an institution of complicity with the nazis. you really think there is evidence to support this? i shared what i had learned from my research at the national archives. about an hour later, i wrapped up. they met separately and offered me the job on the spot.

and my first day, i was given an office and a desk and told to write out what i had detailed to them. the lawsuit was filed shortly thereafter. with congressional hearings and big lawsuits, this became a huge issue, not only in the press. u.s.-swiss relations were sorely tested. this was a democratic alliance for years. they had been allies, to strong democracies. as tensions increased, president bill clinton and the undersecretary of commerce had asked eisenstaedt to testify. it was unclear when the report would be issued. eisenstaedt later wrote a book about this effort called "imperfect justice." this became kind of a logo of the research effort, the gold bars in a swastika.

i would describe what he wrote about the research effort at college park. you'd think it would be very somber and serious. he describes something quite different. "by the summer of 1996, a dozen young in terms were working and uncovered a treasure trove of materials that were used over the next several years to keep the swiss on the defensive. the research at the national archives had eight marx brothers quality. the little-known archives facility in maryland was suddenly besieged by researchers from all parties. soon there was a battle, not only in the halls of congress and in the courts, but among competing researchers, each according boxes of important documents and spying over one another's shoulders. the swiss researchers called rickman devil boy. in 1997 there were almost 50 researchers working for the

swiss bankers association, and for the state department. all trying to l. barr -- elbow their way into a small area to examine the documents. i mention that the law was accelerant in an unusual factor involved in this case. the eisenstaedt report that was commissioned by bill clinton was another. for a number of reasons, the report was held up. the press was anxious. clinton asked eisenstaedt to do it in 1996, but in january 1997 the report had not come out. in march 1997, no report. there was so much suspense. the press was anxious whether or not the u.s. would slam a longtime democratic ally. was this pre-election political posturing? was the worst of the accusations true? did the gold purchased by the

swiss banks from the nazis -- report was delayed and delayed again. meantime, our research continue. the attorneys realized it would not be settled in a court of law but in a court of public opinion. i was encouraged to speak to the press, which may or may not have been a mistake. the report was not out. people were not talking. the bankers were on the defensive, and we kept finding newly declassified documents at the national archives. most of these had been declassified at least 20 years before, if they had ever been classified. it was a very easy story for the press.

there was an absence of news. i was more than happy to fill it. i have since learned some lessons. at the time, i was not necessarily as diplomatic. news reports like this came dowout. the eisenstaedt report was supposed to come out earlier. the swiss it -- the swiss equivalent of "newsweek" sent a reporter out to cover the story. we ended up with this, me standing in front the archives looking very tough. you can understand why the swiss were terrified. i am not a historian. it has a " for me -- has a

quote from the saying you had 50 years to do this. much to my surprise, i ended up on the cover of "usa today." i look about 12. "i had no idea what i was doing when i started and i had no idea what i would find." again, i was terrified. me at the national archives up with the photographer of on top trying to do it an artistic photo shoot. at one point, good morning america call the law firm and asked if i would speak with them. i said it was way above might pay grade.

i checked with the department head. there were more than happy to have me work on this one. we set up the interview, and they came. they were there for about two hours, during which time the attorneys spoke about the cases and about the legal precedent and the historical implications. i said two things. after the interview, before it aired, the attorney took me aside. he was very soft-spoken. he said there are two things you said today that i would ask you never to repeat again. i will show you what aired, and

you will see that is those two things that i was asked never to repeat. >> c-span does not have permission to air this portion of the video. we resume the program at its conclusion. >> was concerned him was that my " was a bit sensationalist, and i had commented on victim goal, whether or not that was part of the ball that went to switzerland. at that point, it had not been proven conclusively, although i thought it was. i am not an attorney or u.s. government official. the eisenstaedt report finally came out in may 1997, accusing switzerland of being nazi germany's banker. this is the audience participation part. hindsight is wonderful, and i distributed some secret bank books.

what i call your number, please speak loudly and read the highlighted part of the document. did the u.s. know at the time that germany might try to launder looted gold through the neutral countries? this is a state department document. hazmat but number one? if you could read that, please. -- who has a bank but number one? >> this is a memorandum dated january 18, 1945. on february 22, 1944, a gold declaration was issued by the united states, united kingdom, and the soviet union, declaring that those nations would not purchase gold from any country which had directly or indirectly obtained such gold from axis forces. meanwhile the question of gold

policy had been raised with all the european neutrals. the statement was made that germany had long since it exhausted all its pre were gold and resources and any accumulation from current production and that by necessity, in the gold offered by germany must be presumed to be diluted. the neutrals, therefore, were requested to indicate that they would purchase no gold directly or indirectly from any access source. that is dated january 18, 1945. >> thank you for reading at. u.s. news and had warned at the neutrals, which is why they were monitoring the so closely. they knew that nazi germany had exhausted its reserves, but was continuing to fund the war. did the swiss banks know that the goal was stolen?

bank book #2 references the chief general manager of the swiss bank corp., one of the largest swiss banks. >> this is from august 1937. i had a very pleasant visit. he took me down to the receivers teller window to show me what was going on. there was a line of about 60 people waiting with cash, jewelry, old pictures, securities, and other valuables. it would appear this is going on all along, and a swiss bank has reached the point where they do not know how to continue to handle french customers, owing to the physical shortage of space for state custody. whereas before itwwas the big fellows who ran across the frontier, today is the small people who export their capital. >> there were lines at the banks, and they said these are

the little people with their possessions. these were french jews fleeing are trying to deposit their money for safekeeping. swiss officials rebutted such accusations and stressed their wartime neutrality. we found evidence to the contrary. this was really provide military assistance to the nazi regime, and did the u.s. no? manga book #3 is a memo from the war department. it is in three parts. >> dated january 15, 1945. this was produced and exported to germany large quantities of ammunition, aircraft parts, radio equipment, and other military supplies, as well as machine tools, locomotives, and industrial equipment. they also furnished electric power and the railroads carry heavy traffic for the germans between germany and italy. these activities were of substantial assistance to the

germans in waging war. signed robert patterson, undersecretary of war. mr. patterson expressed a willingness to turn the bombers lose and make life unpleasant for the swiss generally. >> so yes, the u.s. new and officials at the highest level were not happy about it, not only economic assistance by the swiss to nazi germany but also military assistance. it is a bit cliche to say this here in the national archives, but what is past is prologue. 50 years later we found investigations and the press reports. we found that had all been forgotten during the cold war. what was the end result? there were many more congressional hearings, more lawsuits were filed. there were endless news reports and boycotts of swiss banks in

the u.s.. in august 1998, lawsuits against the three largest banks settle for 1.2 $5 billion. -- $1.25 billion. i would like to say it all went to the survivors, but unfortunately it did not. the class action people who had signed on to the class-action lawsuits did receive a payout, but it was not large. however, it it did provide historical prove and changed our image of a neutral switzerland. it led to a wave of additional holocaust related litigation, including lawsuits against french, german austrian banks, lawsuits involving looted art from the holocaust and lawsuits against insurance companies that profited from the holocaust. this is a pretty heavy topic, so we will have a few minutes for

questions, but just to lighten it up, i will close with a game. i will introduce a topic, and someone will read a passage. this is the audience participation part. all you have to do is tell me, is this quote from 1946, or from 1996. the verse " is from a congressional hearing on the issue of swiss wartime activity. who has bank of number four? >> the germans maneuver themselves into a position where they could utilize their assets in switzerland to support the war effort, and could conceal economic research for another war. these moves are made possible by the willingness of swiss government and banking officials in violation of their agreement with the allied powers to make a secret deal with the nazis.

>> this is an official senate investigation into this issue. 1945, or 1996? >> i say 1945. >> i think 1996. lift the the tab. >> chairman, subcommittee on war mobilization, hearings before subcommittee on military affairs, united make virginia and state senate, november, 1945. >> all of this had been investigated. someone was kind enough to offer to read a passage in german. all of the intermission had been translated 50 years ago. to meet that dazzling person who represented the swiss banks who spoke a number of different languages, this had all been done for us. we just had to uncover it.

we found this committee -- the kilgore committee had discovered that swiss banks had purchased looted gold from germany. that was known 50 years before this investigation. the swiss were not happy with these investigations, and i have a quote from the swiss press slamming an aggressive senator. >> honorable center getting to be known in switzerland. he is not our friend. he made serious accusations against our country in press. the new tack is but one episode against a country of four million inhabitants. on the whole, the matter is not a suitable importance. >> so the senator is attacking us, and is not a big deal. 1945, are 1996?

>> it is november 22, 1945. >> same thing. do you think there was less anger this time around, with this investigation? this document was faxed to senator d'amato pose the office from the number two diplomat at the swiss embassy in washington. this was in 1998, immediately after of the model lost his reelection campaign. >> i should like to congratulate you against your miserably failed reelection to the united states sen. i am proud of the new yorkers who sent you where you belong. the campaign of lies against my country has not save your political career from oblivion as planned. i savor the irony that iraq was

finally broken by your allies -- at your back was finally broken by your allies. give my regards to greg rickman who provided you with this pseudo historical dirt to throw at us. better people than you will work hard to repair it and succeed. >> he was a former deputy chief of mission in washington. he wrote that letter -- he was not so diplomatic. he wrote the letter after he received his new posting to bulgaria, and was not happy with that. thank you all for the audience participation. this was a very short introduction to a big and complicated issue. i am happy to take any questions. >> i do not have a sense of how

much of the material was classified, dealing with this issue, but it seems to me that that the classification of the 1970's should have brought about a renewed focus and interest, because it was more generally available. it would have been known only to a few persons before the declassification took place. >> that is a very good question. most of our documents really were. why was this not a big deal then? for those of you who have done research at the archives, they are not always finding aids. there are boxes that no one has gone through. the volume of material, we have 10 billion pages of material. if you remember what i held up at the beginning, he continued to expand that document.

the most recent copy is this. basically, it ends up that there were not people to go through all this. people did not know where to start. we had a team of 12, and this is all we did. all these documents were there. in the video, they have me in the stacks saying the documents for right here waiting for someone to find them, which is what makes research so fascinating here, because you never know what you might find. it may be new, are not quite old and has been available, but no one has seen it. >> that you ever run across -- what did kilgore trout this? >> this was all investigated. they warned the swiss to repaiy

diluted goal and have a go to restitution organizations. this was all dropped because suddenly they were fighting a new war. suddenly the germans were our allies and it was forgotten as we move forward. >> have you considered writing a book? >> it is a good question. other people have, but in the meantime, have worked on some other things, and everyone involved -- several others have written books. when i started, i was not sure how much to go into this. when i started doing this research, it was a clear-cut issue of good versus evil.

i had never worked on anything that was this black and white. but having worked with attorneys, some of the attorneys involved were not the best people, and some stole from the holocaust survivors there represent. one has since been disbarred. someone with one of the organizations embezzled some funds and deposited them in a swiss bank account. when the model is of being the last one standing -- when d'amato in the being in the last one standing and one of the good guys. i was very nice even now i approached this -- i was very naive when i approached this. everything is here, and is much purer and much less tainted. there are no attorneys' fees or

accountants' fees, and the information is there. to revisit all this with a critical eye at think would be very challenging. >> i want to confirm that i heard correctly what you said. did you say that 33 tons of dental gold were extracted in one camp alone? >> that is what we found. this was in u.s. records. the whole dental gold question, i had heard about that. that was probably among the most sensationalist things i heard, but then we found evidence. apparently there was concern that the camp commandant would still the dental gold. it had to be certified. they did monthly reports on how much dental gold was taken from how many victims, and we found those reports, which was absolutely chilling.

>> is it fair for me to keep separate the issues of assets, cash and other assets deposited by european jews trying to secure their wealth before and during the war in switzerland and the issue of gold deposited by the germans or sold by the germans to the swiss? are those two separate tracks, and if they are, which of the two came to light more in the later years and which were more well known to the u.s. government back in the 1940's? >> the question is monetary vs. non monetary gold. the nazis not only to victim gold, they took over currency and gold reserves. the nature of archival research is that it comes out in pieces.

when you are dealing with organizations that have an interest in getting press coverage, and senator d'amato has an interest in press coverage, and lawsuits that are never going to be heard in a court, it was almost haphazard what came forward. the monetary gold, the bars of gold that were then sent to switzerland, that was known about. what came out in the investigation was the extent of the non monetary, the victim gold. we have time for one more question, and then i will be available afterwards. >> i am curious whether you found evidence of collusion of u.s. firms in your research. my late father-in-law had a translation for itt, and he

was devastated when he realized that collusion between that concern. >> the swiss case was settled in 1998, and there were lawsuits against the german companies that had u.s. subsidiaries, including ford and volkswagen. that form a whole new wave of litigation. many of the company said that their subsidiaries in germany were completely nationalized by the nazis, but many of them or not. it is all at the archives, because all this was investigated. we found records, and there have been additional books and reports showing that not only did the u.s. companies know that this was going on, but they profited from that. he had forced an slave laborers who had to work 12 hour shifts.

they did not need to provide them with food or insurance or so security or pensions are anything like that. they had a disposable work force, literally three slave labor, and many companies may have been founded on this wartime slave labor rather than some economic miracle that occurred afterwards. one last question. >> is there any reason concerning when it something is declassified? is there a date or timeline? >> some of these documents may never have been classified in the first place. that is just when they were processed, and some news that code. there archivists' here who might be better able to explain.

we have different divisions that goes through and help decide what remains classified and for how long. are there issues of national intelligence, names and operations? it was something for british intelligence, the british government had to approve it and in the u.s. government has to approve it. the whole declassification process can be held up on a number of different levels. clinton basically said, because the eisenstaedt report that came not criticizing the swiss, a later report criticized other allies and neutrals, and then they said way, what about the u.s.? what was the u.s. role? that is when the nazi war crimes disclosure act was passed and signed by clinton. it basically said that any information that remains classified that relates to this needs to be processed and

declassified and made available. so there was the interagency working group to implement the workrooms disclosure act. as they became declassified and sent to the archives, there were historians their review the information and make reports available. that is what i worked with for my first four years at the archives. there is an executive order under clan that said that after a certain point, certain records would become declassified. shifted the burden, meaning that you have to give reason why it remains classified, otherwise it is declassified. >> is there some kind protocol that could have been ignored or plan that way.

>> i will be here for additional questions. i appreciate your interest and your participation. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> here is a look at our schedule. coming up next, a discussion with the doctor who served on the team that tried to save president kennedy's life after he was shot. following that, world war two veterans talk about their experiences, and later another look at research into jewish assets taken by the nazis.

>> we now go to dallas for a discussion with the doctor who served on the team that try to save president kennedy's life after he was shot. this oral history took place in the summer of 1997 on the 64 museum in dallas. it is about 45 minutes. >> do you recall when you heard or any thoughts and yuma have had when you heard about him coming to dallas? >> there was a lot of negative statements in the paper about kennedy and some real hateful step in the paper. we were aware of that, and at the time i did not think that was going to help anybody. i did not have any real thoughts about his coming. >> did that cause at the hospital, since it was a place

where someone would naturally be brought, was there any advance preparation in any way, just a contingency plan is something happen while the president was in this city? >> no, as a matter of fact, one of the big differences in then and now was not only the hospitals preparation but it secret service preparation. at that time, there had not been a president assassinated in probably 50 years. it never really, seriously occurred to anybody that the president would actually be harmed, at least to anybody that i knew. as you were well aware, right now with the president visits any city, the secret service precedes him. they select a hospital where he will go. they select the position, a whole situation set up. his medical records made available. he is followed by a paramedic ban, etc. -- a paramedic ban.

in 1963, as far as i know, there was no pre planning. the reason they came to parkland was simply because they were headed that way, and that is where all the injured patients went. there was no selection of hospital or letting us know his blood type or anything else. >> the secret service had been around with the parade route. >> as far as i know, there's no information provided about the president's health status or anything like that. >> zeroing in on november 22, 1963, can you reconstruct your day for us? read at the hospital overnight? >> i do not remember the early

morning. i was assigned to surgery c, which is an elective surgery service. it was our day to admit patients, so i am confident i came in that morning in may grounds. it was also our clinic day. we did not operate that day. early in the morning, probably 9:00, we went over to our clinic and started seeing patients we had operated on and patients who were being evaluated for new operations. about 11:30, we were getting pretty close to being through with our clinic, and we got a call from the emergency room that there were three patients down there to be evaluated for admission. this was not president kennedy, these were three patients who had come to brooklyn for care.

edgecomb to parkland for care. someone had to go down and see them and i wake them. we had also scheduled a special x-ray for a patient who had blood clots in his lungs. somebody had to go down and participate in that x-ray study. the x-ray study sounded like more fun than working on the three patients, so jerry, who was a year ahead of me in the program flipped. he won the coin flip. he got privilege of going to do the x-ray study, and i went down to the emergency room to start is by way in the patients. that is how i got down to the emergency room. >> that is why you are there an hour later? >> right. >> do you recall having any thoughts about missing the parade or anything? >> we did not. the only comment i remember, dr.

jenkins commented on the president being in town and he hoped everything went well. >> do you remember exactly how you first heard, what you are doing at the time? a dispatch came in? >> i may be telling you more than you want to hear. the other thing which is different, right now, as you know, there are mobile intensive care units, paramedic equipped vans to pick up injured or ill patients. they have direct radio communication with the hospital so we know what is coming and we can direct care before the patients get here. in 1963, none of that existed. dallas really did have a very sophisticated system for the time, but it consisted of some

of the ambulances having radios which connected with the police dispatcher. the police dispatcher with then call the hospital and say x patients are coming. there's frequently some confusion in all that communication of several people. a lot of times we got a call from the police dispatcher which turned out to be a false alarm or overstated. that leads up to what happened. one of the nurses came out and told richard delaney, who was in charge of the emergency room that day, that she had just got a call from the police dispatcher and the president had been shot and was on his way to the hospital. >> only the president? >> that is the message remember, the president has been shot and is on his way to the hospital. the obvious question is, what do you do? the first thing you do is you do

not want to believe it. with all the misinformation that happens in a situation like that, it was easy to say that it must not be right. the other thing you do is you start getting ready. the nurses page to the appropriate people to come and take care of an injured patient. the rest of the surgery team on call, the chief resident, who was ron jones, who is now chief of surgery at baylor. malcolm perry, who is the attendees on call that day, and dr. tom shires, the chief of surgery, was actually in galveston. basically, they paged the whole resuscitation team. we hope to very much it was a false alarm