made about stalin in his nine hundred fifty six secret speech in moscow khrushchev said that stalin ignored all the warnings that were coming about the impending invasion of the soviet union by nazi germany and the lesson that khrushchev drew and the lesson that germany that historians of the nazi regime have drawn is that one must never underestimate the power of ideological fanaticism and that's the reality that we're facing today when people are searching for the leaders to the last year or in some very form. started to run you are familiar with this term because are her i don't really even the extent of our mr figures ninety one of your is your optimism or is just we were told that saddam hussein. never loving anyone spring you remember in two thousand and three it was wrong that saddam hussein was where we were told we were told that anybody who opposed the american the tower. there rock wasn't a lot of these sort of you said earlier we're going to see those are the going would you rather cool is what are so so so now so now it's uncertain so not only it's the same tune all ove

the money would be used to build the khrushchev in iowa trail for bikers and hikers. sharyl attkisson reports it's just one of $8 billion worth of earmarks in the bill. >> reporter: 'tis the season... >> it's december. it's cold outside. as snow is on the way... >> reporter: so is this year's giant blizzard of earmarks. for all the republican scorn over earmarks their finger prints are all over the ones in the spending bill. >> on the issue of congressional earmarks, as the leader of my party in the senate, i have to lead first by example. >> reporter: mcconnell's earmarks of $650,000 tax dollars to advanced genetic technologies, $1 million for a blood center building, $4 million for marijuana eradication. democrats are right in there with billions of dollars worth of their own earmarks, despite their supposed disdain for them. >> i'm somebody who is big on eliminating earmarks in congress. >> reporter: all told, congress added at least 6,600 ear marks worth $8 billion. many of the projects already get millions from the regular federal budget. these are extra sweeters

one took place under khrushchev. the next under ghosh cher when he let everything come out because he was an anti-stalinist. he needed to destroy stalin's reputation to reform the system. he let anything and everything come out about the terror. then it shut down for various reasons and now has begun again. three great debates but the stalin history is still an open wound that the country can't close. if we look back and i have spoke tone gorbachev about this, one would have thought at the time 1988, 1990, 1989, 09ee, '91 that gorbachev's public airing of the stalin question would have put the issue to rest. would have closed the wound. but it didn't. and gorbachev is somewhat baffled by this. in 1961 khrushchev called for a monument to be built to the victims of stalin it wasn't built. 1988 gorbachev called for a monument to be built it wasn't built. two years nooing 2008 the current rush president medvedev endorsed the ide of a monument to stalin's victims being built. no ground has been broken that is how deep the

fourteenth nine hundred sixty one in ceremony or steps major got in march toward soviet leader nikita khrushchev without noticing that issue aces had come undone still he made his official report. comrade first secretary of the communist policy of the soviet union it is my pleasure trip though to you that the world's first space flight above the vostok spaceship anded on the twelfth of april one thousand nine hundred sixty one. there are. ships systems and equipment has been working like clockwork without fail on an excellent healthy and ready to fulfill any new assignments. and government. major garrett. in one thousand nine hundred sixty eight ends death spread around the country almost as fast as news of his spaceflight seven years prior that was despite the fact the d.n.a. on cement had been a long delayed and was couched in very terse phrasing. a commission to investigate the cause of the tragedy was already in full swing. we were provided with reports about panels of scientists who had established a flight c exact trajectory that we used to reports to pass judgment on whether the two men h

campaign change the life of the country for decades to come archie's military contributor you have any khrushchev who fought in afghanistan looks back at how it all started. the list expected guests of the christmas parties since nineteen seventy nine while this summer it spits not who commands the most successful special forces operation. back on christmas night nineteen seventeen ironically it was not only a smashing success for the joint. task force it was a tactical success for their opposite numbers back in langley christmas party was celebrated as the beginning of the new era of entrapping this soviet union in afghanistan as a way to revenge for the united states failure in vietnam and as the beginning of this so-called war otherwise known as the anti soviet jihad and their proxy war against the soviet union in afghanistan conducted by the united states and their allies it's really symbolic that there wilson's war the war part one and part two the current u.s. counterinsurgency both those stages of personalized by robert gates who used to be of the cia coordinator of the anti-c. . again his

manatee khrushchev was wrong. like amity be right about many things, nikita khrushchev was wrong about many things that you have in mind something particular. one of the famous kitchen cabinet debates between vice president nixon and khrushchev was over what indicator was the son of prosperity in an economy and how do you fight that out. and to premier khrushchev, the answer was obvious, and it was rocket thrust with a symbol of soviet power and his version of soviet growth. vice president nixon, after some hemming and hawing, defined color television as is indicated. when they speak to young people i remind them that in those days, this debate happened the year i was born, it was in a long, long period ago, and thursday's color television will be like talking about the ipad today. i was at that nixon was in a box somewhere. he was talking about something quite important. the real answer to my khrushchev was wrong, and, frankly, white nixon got wrote in his debate a year later with senator kennedy was that economi

afghanistan in 1959 and 1960 as dwight dwight eisenhower said existed in the sufferance of nikita khrushchev. this would have been a problematic theater to invest troops but the soviet union has gone. the united states has made a great difference in the way it has intervened around the world, and it could well be that we may make a difference here. i think it is going well. i think it -- the afghans are not going to give us the satisfaction of saying that we have converted to your point of view in every particular and they will never give us that satisfaction. karzai made that very clear but i think the intervention will over time proved to make the world safer. [applause] do you want to add to that? >> david and julie, and in my four years with jack at the white house i did a lot of funerals. at the very first funeral i was asked to do was president dwight d. eisenhower, for your father and it was a spectacular international cathedral. it was one of those moments i will never forget for. >> ron, thank you. [applause] that is exactly where this book ends. that was my 21st birthday, march 31,

when i read stuff about the cold war today, there was a lot more to his relationship with khrushchev. when i was in school, we read reagan read a script and he was a dumb actor but now how involved he was in his presidency and a role he played in the cold war. even truman when he fired macarthur and now he's a top president. how long will we know president bush was and what he really did? >> dr. brown? >> well, i will say this, most historians dislike political scientists like me. most of the historians i know think that 50 years is really a good time frame to start where you end up with more sense of an objective analysis. i think one of my favorite comments from a history professor that i had when i was at ucla and he said i want you in this course because we were talking about the 1970s. he said i want you to call me on when my memory intrudes with history and i think there is this problem for all historians who are writing, all political scientists, all ewaitevaluators your memory is still there. >> i write about contemporary history from the '60s onward and i believe historians c

so in other words during the cold war adversaries and the soviet union, we could have takeda khrushchev visiting the united nations taking off his shoe and dramatically banging it on the table and threatening to bury us. that is not al qaeda strategy. al qaeda acts accident is repeatedly stated in its propaganda in the last significant public appearance on october 31, 2004 before the presidential election. they intend to bankrupt us. i'm not saying there is necessarily any firm anchor between reality and their strategy but all terrorists live in a fantasy world. they all believe their own propaganda. they have to otherwise how could they sustain themselves? but in this case al qaeda finds that this message which had i would argue dubious credibility, dubious resonance when they first tried it out in the summer of 2002 when the economy was growing great guns than when our allen's of payment deficit was not what it was today when her gdp was much longer no one paid attention to it. however today as divorced as it may be from reality, al qaeda repeatedly per in ariely claims, takes respons

khrushchev took off his shoe and play it on the table and threaten to bury us. al qaeda, as it has repeatedly stated, been lot and himself said in his last --osama bin laden stated in his last significant appearance, that he intended to bankrupt us. i am not say that there is any anger between reality and their strategy. but they all believe their own propaganda. they have to. how can they sustain themselves. al qaeda finds that this message, which has dubious credibility, dubious resonance when they first tried it out in the summer of 2002, when the economy was going down and our gdp was stronger, no one paid attention to it. today, as the voice as it is from reality, al qaeda repeatedly claims responsibility for the economic travails of the united states. it promises is always if they are just patient, if they stay with the struggle, they will topple the united states much as the mujahideen defeated the red army, toppled russia in the 1980's. this is a message today that has a greater resonance than ever. secondly, there is an operational dimension, i would ar

so in other words during the cold war adversaries and the soviet union, we could have takeda khrushchev visiting the united nations taking off his shoe and dramatically banging it on the table and threatening to bury us. that is not al qaeda strategy. al qaeda acts accident is repeatedly stated in its propaganda in the last significant public appearance on october 31, 2004 before the presidential election. they intend to bankrupt us. i'm not saying there is necessarily any firm anchor between reality and their strategy but all terrorists live in a fantasy world. they all believe their own propaganda. they have to otherwise how could they sustain themselves? but in this case al qaeda finds that this message which had i would argue dubious credibility, dubious resonance when they first tried it out in the summer of 2002 when the economy was growing great guns than when our allen's of payment deficit was not what it was today when her gdp was much longer no one paid attention to it. however today as divorced as it may be from reality, al qaeda repeatedly per in ariely claims, takes respons