Advanced Search
Twin Typhoons Strike Japan
More than 300 people killed or missing and property damage in the millions as twin typhoons smash Tokyo and other parts of southern Japan. U.S. military bases are severely damaged but no Americans are reported hurt. Winds are clocked at 200 miles per hour. The aftermath of ships that were in the Pacific Ocean and didn't quite survive the two typhoon that hit them. CUS - Sunken ships. Fourteen ships were capsized or driven ashore. The ship Jutoku Maru that was driven ashore. Another sunken ship with just its the top is sticking out of the water. The aftermath of the two tropical systems that made landfall, everything was badly damaged or destroyed. A group of people looking through the wreckage trying to salvage anything that they can. Homes that were knocked down and caved in from the high winds of 115 MPH. CU The twisted thatched roof. People outside their homes looking through the aftermath. A car that was caught up in a land slide ending up up-side-down. The US Military assists Japan's military in any type of recovery. Neighboorhoods being cleared by land movers and smoking fields (controled burn).
Japan's Rocket Fails
Japan fails in its first attempt to put a satellite into orbit. Officials announce that an 84 pound payload of scientific instruments failed to achieve orbit after what appeared to be a successful launching. Japan will try again in December. On Kyushu Island, Japan a slender 4-stage rocket is rolled to the launching pad. A rocket technician speaking on the phone. The rocket on the launching pad slowly being raised to point up. Exterior shot - Tokyo s University Space & Aeronautics Institute. Interior shot - Two technicians sitting at the launching board. A crowd gathers in the field to watch the launch. CUS Camera men and their 16mm cameras. Rocket is launched off of the launching pad. LS Rocket launch.
Auto Stunt Spectacular
A 200 car "Demolition Derby" at Islip, New York, makes a figure eight track the site of madness and mayhem. Points are given for spectacular crashes. Stunt drivers leap over ramps onto parked cars, roar along on two wheels, and drive through fire. MS There are 200 automobiles on the figure 8 race track in Islip, New York. The cars go around the track with speed and mayhem and it's called "A Demolition Derby". One car is turned around and another car slams into it. A woman and two adolescent boys watch the derby from behind a fence, holding it with amused amazement. Cars are slamming into each other turning around and smashing into other cars. A boy in the stands pops up from his seat to watch with a huge smile. Car driving on two tires. A car drives up a ramp and lands on the top of cars. MS Car drives through a huge pipe, lands on another ramp and drives away.
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 29, 1974 (1/2)
[00.25.23] The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Michigan has expired. The gentleman of from California is seeking recognition Mr. WIGGINS. Mr. Chairman, the article having been read, is it open for amendment at any place? the CHAIRMAN-. The article open for amendment at any point. Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Chairman, Mr. WIGGINS. I am prepared to offer an amendment, but if we are going to have general debate on the article I will withhold. The CHAIRMAN. If the gentleman will defer? Mr. WIGGINS. Surely. Mr. McCLORY. Mr. CHAIRMAN. The CHAIRMAN, Mr. McClory. Mr. McCLORY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I would like to be recognized at this point to discuss generally this proposed article of impeachment. It seems to me that this really gets at the crux of our responsibilities here. It directs our attention directly to the President's constitutional oath and his constitutional obligation. There is nothing mysterious about this, and there, is nothing, evil and Malicious about it. It directs the attention directly to this responsibility that is and has been reposed in the President. This certainly is no bill of attainder. We care not thinking this up to as an offense and then charging the President with a violation of it. We are calling the President's attention to the facts that he took an oath of office, and that he had in his oath of office a solemn obligation to see to the of faithfully of execution of the laws. This is quite different and distinct from the elements of criminality that are involved in article I charging the President with a conspiracy, and with all kinds of criminal acts of misconduct and obstruction of justice and so on--an article which I did not support because I do not believe the facts support that kind of charge. Now. some of those who have been expressing themselves in support of article I clearly have included feelings of deep hostility, and bitterness and political bias. On my part, article II, based on 'the take care clause of the Constitution which specifies a solemn obligation of the President to take care to see to the faithful execution of the laws, I want to make perfectly clear that I harbor no malice, I attribute no evil thoughts or conduct to the President of the United States. I express no bitterness, no hostility. What I do want to make clear that the President is bound by his solemn oath of office to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution and to take care to see that the laws are faithfully executed. While many of the paragraphs contained in article II may appear similar to those that are found in article II, which I opposed, it important to note carefully that the pattern of conduct which is delineated in article II is quite distinguishable from that in a article I. For one thing, I would point out there is no clear proof In The fact that, others surrounding the President have been guilty of acts of gross misconduct. However, there is a clear violation of the President's responsibility when he permits multiple acts of wrongdoing by large numbers of those who surround him in possession of greatest, responsibility and influence in the White House. The establishment of the Plumbers, and many of the attributed to them are wholly unrelated to the Watergate, and that is the same case -with respect, to his misuse of the FBI and the CIA and the IRS. Nothing to do with Watergate for the most part. But these clear acts of misconduct which, it seems to me, are important for us to take note of. In other words, the acts and conduct upon which I feel an article of impeachment should be presented to our colleagues is strictly constitutional, which relates narrowly and directly to The President himself and his personal oath of office. While this article may seem less dramatic and less sensational the Watergate break-in and coverup, it is nevertheless a positive and specific responsibility, and a positive and responsible approach to our power On our part as investigators of misconduct. One purpose of the impeachment process, it seems to me, is to Set a constitutional standard for persons occupying The office of the President. Thus. if we approach our task in constitutional terms, we will be setting such a standard. I view the duty of the House of Representatives as something other than serving as a district courthouse to hold the President accountable for statutory violations of the criminal law. I think we can agree that the President should not commit crimes, If we are to set a constitutional standard, we must take a different view of the facts. We must phrase our charges in constitutional terms so that the Presidents to come may know what is meant by our actions. If we are to establish our proceedings as a guide for future Presidents, we should speak- in terms of the Constitution and specifically in terms of the President's oath and his obligation under the Constitution. It Will be of limited value to admonish a future President not to obstruct to justice or engage In a coverup. However it will aid future Presidents to know this Congress and this House Judiciary Committee will hold them to an oath of office and an obligation to take care to see that the laws are faithfully executed. I realize that there is no nice way to impeach a President of the United States. I realize also that the distinction between the criminal conspiracy theory of article I and the purely constitutional aspects of article II may be misunderstood. But, its a member of this committee, the most I can do is to exercise my independent, judgment and to search deeply my own conscience. Both reason and wisdom dictate the judgement I am going to make in support of this article II is right. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. The time of gentleman has expired. Under the rules of Jefferson's Manual and the rules of the House. The chair IS constrained to state that perfecting amendments take precedence, and the Chair did state this. The members, however, who want to speak to the substitute will have their time reserved for them. I am going to recognize at this time those members who wish to Offer perfecting amendments. [00.31.45]
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 29, 1974 (1/2)
[00.37.41] Mr. SEIBERLING. Will the gentleman yield'? Will the gentleman yield? Mr. WIGGINS. Of course, if I have time. Mr. SEIBERLING. I -would like to ask the gentleman if his amendment would cover a situation such as we have testimony on. where the President would give instructions, sometimes saying "Now, I want you to get this done, but I don't care how you do it, don't bother me with the details." Would that be sufficient to cover the instructions under the gentleman's amendment? Mr. WIGGINS. Well, I think the instructions are subject to interpretation. I know the incident to which the gentleman refers, and I could not conceive that the President was by that instruction authorizing doing of an illegal act. So long as the act is consistent with a reasonable interpretation of his policy and direction, I have no quarrel with attributing that conduct to the President. The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from California, Has expired. I recognize the gentleman from Texas. Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Chairman. an, I oppose the gentleman motion. The specific act included within the scope of this article involved an awesome, array of impeachable offenses against the U.S. Constitution and the American people. The evidence that we have gathered clearly establishes that Richard M. Nixon and his agents sought and obtained confidential tax information from the Internal Revenue Service, in a manner unauthorized by law and for unlawful purposes. Specifically he and his subordinates made repeated attempts to influence the selection of citizens to be targeted for audit and other special action by the Internal Revenue Service. In a sworn affidavit to this committee, Johnnie Walters, former IRS Commissioner. stated that in the summer of 1972 John Ehrlichman requested the, IRS to check out the income. tax returns of Democratic National Committeeman Lawrence O'Brien. The IRS checked O'Brien's returns and conveyed the relevant information to Ehrlichman through then Secretary of the Treasury Shultz. Ehrlichman was not satisfied and because of his demands. O'Brien was Interviewed on August 17, 1972. The IRS furnished a copy of the O'Brien conference report to Secretary Shultz. A short, time, later Shultz informed Walters that Ehrlichman was still not satisfied. Walters told Shultz that there -was nothing else the IRS could do. On August 21, 1972, in a joint telephone call to Ehrlichman by Secretary Shultz, Walters and his assistant IRS Commissioner Roger Barth, Ehrlichman was told that O'Brien's returns were closed, that there was nothing further for IRS to do. Ehrlichman then told Walters, "and I wanted them to turn up something and send him to jail before the election and unfortunately it didn't," Ehrlichman told Walters, and I would repeat that that is not that--right quote. I turned to the wrong page. What Ehrlichman said on page 235 was, indicating disappointment, "and he said to me I am god-damned tired of your foot dragging tactics." And then when Ehrlichman was so interested in the IRS status of O'Brien's operation in testimony before the Watergate committee, Ehrlichman arrogantly stated the reason that-I previously stated. He wanted something turned up before the. election. Unfortunately it didn't materialize. On September 11, 1972, John Dean gave Walters a list of Democratic Presidential nominee staff members and campaign contributors , instructing the IRS to begin investigations or examinations of the People named on the list. Walters testified that he advised Dean that compliance with the request would be disastrous for the IRS and for' the, administration, and that he would recommend to Shultz that the IRS do nothing with the request. Four days later, Mr. Haldeman and Mr. Nixon met and discussed among other things Dean's working through the IRS. Our transcript of these September 15 meeting had -the following exchange: [quoting] HALDEMAN. Between times, he is doing, he is moving ruthlessly on the Investigation of McGovern people, Kennedy stuff, and all that, too, I just don't. know how much progress he is making because I-- PRESIDENT. The problem is that's kind of hard to find. HALDEMAN. Chuck--Chuck has gone through, you know, has worked on the list and Dean's working the thing through IRS and, uh, in some cases I think some other (unintelligible) things he has turned out to be tougher than I thought he would which is what--- PRESIDENT. Yeah. [end quoted section] [00.43.01]
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 29, 1974 (1/2)
[00.56.31] The CHAIRMAN. I recognized the gentleman from California. Mr. Danielson. I Mr. DANIELSON. Mr. Chairman, I, too, oppose the amendment offered my colleague, Mr. Wiggins. I respectfully submit if this amendment were put in to the article, it would unduly and unnecessarily limit restrict the proofs which the managers will be compelled to make fore the Senate. I concede that the managers must prove each and very charge before it can serve as a basis for an impeachment, but they should not be unreasonably and unrealistically limited in that proof. there is The wording of this proposed amendment would require that there is proof that the President in each and every instance knew in advance of the precise act that was going to be carried out by his agents and subordinates. I respectfully submit that that is unrealistic. Let's look at, for example, Segretti, Do you suppose as a-- is it reasonable to suppose if Mr. Segretti, if we were to prove that he was authorized by the President to commit these dirty tricks; do you suppose that he picked up the phone every time just before' he did one of them and the President, and said, "Mr. President, I am now about to order 100 pizzas for Mr. Muskie's fundraiser?" That is unrealistic and yet the language of Mr. Wiggins' amendment would require that type of prior action by the President in each and every instance. I respectfully submit that the managers before the Senate must prove each and every charge against the President, but this must be one in the context of the real world. If they should prove that the President knowingly and intentionally set One of these forces in motion, then the President is responsible for the natural and probable consequences of having set that force in motion. I mention Segretti's dirty tricks. This goes to many other things. Let's take a look at the Watergate burglary. Someone mentioned properly the other day that it was improbable that the burglars called the President down in Key Biscayne and said--I believe, it was my colleague, Mr. Rangel, "Mr. President we are about to make a hit." Of course, they didn't. But if it can be, shown that, he set this force in motion and that the activities of the Perpetrators were a natural and probable culmination of the force he set in motion I submit that he, is responsible. You know, we hold the, President to a higher standard of conduct than that, of the marketplace. He is the person who, is to set the and ethical standards of the Nation, of the entire Republic. that Mr. Wiggins; amendment would unduly and unnecessarily strict proof and for that reason it should be defeated. I yield to my--- Mr. DENNIS. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. DANIELSON. To Father Drinan. Mr. DRINAN. Thank you very much for yielding, and I would like to raise a basic question as to the authorization that is in the, proposed amendment by quoting the President just before the establishment of the Plumbers. The President speaking to Haldeman and Mr. Colson according to Mr. Colson's affidavit in the Ehrlichman case, said this: The President said: "I want these leaks to be stopped, I don't want to told why it cannot be done. I don't want excuses. I want results. I want it done, whatever the cost." Mr. DRINAN. I have difficulty in accepting the. proposed amendment in view this type, of blanket authorization. I yield back to the gentleman. Mr. DENNIS. Will the gentleman yield ? Mr. SEIBERLING. Mr. Chairman. 1 would like. to add one more point. Of course, I do not believe and I do not think any other member believes that the, President should be held responsible for the acts of his subordinates under general doctrine, of respondeat superior which simply says that he is; liable for whatever his agents do within the scope of their general authority, but where the President has failed to take the actions, to make sure that his agents have stayed within scope of their legitimate authority and furthermore, as Father Drinan indicated, has told them " I don't care how you do it, just get it done," implying that he didn't care about the niceties of the law or anything else, why, -we have a totally different, situation and yet the amendment proposed would not take into account that type of situation. Mr. DANIELSON. I should like to conclude by stating, Mr. Chairman that if the President set forth a general policy or general instructions and pursuant thereto his aides misuse the President's power, then the President alone can be held to account. The CHAIRMAN. The time, of the gentleman has expired. The Chairman would like to observe that the proponents of the amendment have consumed 10 minutes and those in opposition have consumed 12 minutes and the gentleman from -Now Jersey, Mr. Sandman, is recognized in opposition to the amendment. Mr. SANDMAN. Oh, no. I want to be recognized in support of the amendment, sir. [Laughter.] Mr. SANDMAN. It wouldn't be truthful---- The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes. Mr. SANDMAN. It -would be untruthful for me to say I am surprised because so many things have happened here that would surprise anybody, so I guess we are following a normal course. But isn't this really the crux of what it is all about? The gentleman from California truthfully adds only two words, that is all be adds, for him to be responsible so that he can be removed from office. My colleague, from California says he either has to have knowledge of wrongdoing before it happens or he has to be the person directing that the wrong be committed. Now, maybe we are making new laws for Presidents and I want to say to my colleagues on the other side some day you might have a Democratic President and you want him to live up to all these kinds of new laws that you are making. We heard yesterday that the fifth amendment and due process has become outmoded. You want that to apply to your Presidents like you are trying to apply it to this one. you want all of these things to be done the hard way. Now, let's go through just a couple of things. And I am not going to prolong the argument on specificity, that long Word. But, isn't this why you will not, agree to that particular thing? Which one of these abuses are you going to attempt to prove, which one of them? And now we understand that, the gentleman from California, Mr. Danielson, says that it is all right even if you can show that, the President did not know about it or that he did not direct it. No other human being can be held responsible for the acts of his agents---- [01.04.04--TAPE OUT]
Goood ? - ?? castle, Alpen (?) horn - ?? - Eveleyne valley
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 29, 1974 (2/2)
[01.03.57] Mr. SANDMAN. Mr. Danielson, says that it is all right even if you can show that, the President did not know about it or that he did not direct it. No other human being can be held responsible for the acts of his agents in any kind of a criminal conviction unless he has one or the other of those conditions present. Mr. DANIELSON. Would the gentleman yield for a response? Mr. SANDMAN. When I am through if I have some time. Now, I have asked that we make a simple sentence out of each charge. The opposition have danced around that request for several days. Now, this is I think points to precisely why you will not do it. Through some mistake I suppose I got some of the arguments that the staff gave fellows on that side to use, but one of these things starts out with early 1970. Mr. HUNGATE. Pardon me. Mr. SANDMAN. Haldeman directed Mollenhoff. It is my time. That Does not say that the President did it, it says that Haldeman does. That was in 1970. 'The next thing that you have here on page 2 is John Caulfield, a member of Dean's staff, he did something at the request of Haldeman. It does not, say at the request of the President. Now. are you talking about the incident of March 13? We are entitled to know because if that is the one you are, concerned about you are not going to have much of a case. And then You have another one here in the spring of 1972, Ehrlichman wanted some information on O'Brien, but there is nothing in the information in front of me here, that was handed to me by the staff that that involves the President. Another time Ehrlichman---- Mr. HUNGATE. Would the gentleman yield for a question? Mr. SANDMAN. Not yet, Ehrlichman told Shultz. It does not say the President told Shultz. Then we get down to Ehrlichman told Kalmbach. The President did not tell Kalmbach. Ehrlichman told Kalmbach, and this is another date September 1972, Is that the one that you are going to rely on? We should know. Now, in addition to that,, the biggest one of all that you are relying upon, apparently is the conversation of September 15. 1972, where if you listen to that tape there is no question that the President is extremely disturbed on what Dean is telling him, and it is there that he explodes about Shultz. And these are ugly words taken by themselves, they are terrible. But, the important thing about that conversation of September 15, 1972, there is no proof that has been presented by this committee or any other committee that shows that the President followed that up by talking to Shultz or anyone else. And in addition to that, why don't we for the first time, admit that not a single audit was made on a single soul on that list. This is important. This again is why you would not agree on specifics. You will nail down one date, that one act, and now low and behold, you are taking away the right of requiring that the President have knowledge of the wrongdoing or that be direct it. You are entirely wrong and you know it. This should be adopted. The CHAIRMAN. The, time, of the gentleman has expired. Mr. HOGAN. Mr. Chairman? The CHAIRMAN. recognize the gentleman from Maine. Mr. COHEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Sandman just indicated that the motion of Mr. Wiggins adds just two things. But, he failed to state. that it omits one very important a thing, and that is the question of ratification. And I notice that the gentleman from California was rather reticent about expressing this word "ratification" in his proposed amendment. Now, there. are two major areas which are of concern to me in this subject, of abuse of agencies under the Internal Revenue Service and the FBI. Now, for example, we do have direct evidence, before committee, taken before this committee and given by John Dean, that on September 11 he did have a conversation With the Director of the Internal Revenue Service during which time, he presented a list political enemies for the purpose of having those enemies audited. Now, there is no evidence, before this committee, in my opinion, would justifying saying the President knew in advance of Mr. Dean's activities. However, on September 15, the, conversation to which Mr. Sandman just referred to, we do have direct evidence that the President was indeed interested in having this matter pursued. Mr. Sandman forgot to indicate that or failed to point out, I should say, that we were missing 17 minutes of this September 15 tape which was not presented to the, committee, which we have Subpenaed. This is the portion of the tape, according to Mr. Dean, whereby the President directed Dean to go back and see George Shultz and if he did not get cooperation to let him know. Now, the question is, is Dean credible? Well, we have direct evidence from the, Internal Revenue Commissioner who testified before the Senate select committee that, indeed, Dean did come back to him on September 26, just several days after his conversation with the President, presenting a reduced list and again asking for audits. Now, I suggest and submit to this committee that the President's activities on September 15 would, indeed, constitute a ratification of the, prior act, which would make him responsible for- such activities. With respect to the FBI abuse, I am referring specifically to the investigation of Daniel Schorr. that there is evidence before this committee that Daniel Schorr- did criticize one of the President's speeches, and that while aboard Air Force One, Mr. Higby and Mr. Haldeman asked the FBI to conduct an investigation. Again we have no evidence before us to say that the President knew that they had called while aboard Air Force One, to ask for that investigation. but we do have direct evidence before the committee taken from the lips. Of Mr. Colson, and Mr. Colson told this committee that once that FBI investigation was exposed by the press, that he then came to the President and said we've got a problem here, we are in a jam, what do you think about sending out a statement that indicates that Mr. Schorr is being investigated because we are considering him as a consultant to the White House, to which the President approved. I would submit to this committee that that in turn would constitute ratification of the prior activities on behalf of the FBI, which I think were an abuse. And for those reasons, I cannot, without express wording in the motion offered by Mr. Wiggins, support that without the word ratification. And I yield to the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Butler. [01.10.45]
Hercules Versus The Moon Men
Reels A, B & C are on Preview Cassette # 215827 (Pt 1 & 2) This is a fantastic low-budget Italian sword and sandal action/adventure film about the legendary exploits of the mythic and tragic Greek hero Hercules. Although not starring the oft-associated Steve Reeves, this is an admirable apendage to the series, here starring the bronzed musculature of Alan Steele. Also starring Jany Clair. Directed by Giacomo Gentilomo. A French and Italian co-production with all the necesarily poor overdubbing one expects. A: Set during the Golden Age of Rome. Opens with a mini-model set of an undeveloped Italian landscape being struck by a meteor which then causes all sorts of natural disasters like wanton fires, earthquakes and general destruction (very, very cheesy); and as a result of this cataclysmic, stellar event there must be an appeasement to the gods, a simple offering of human sacrifice on the "Mountain of Death". Tight LS's of Roman soldiers leading a daisy chain of adult sacrifices up the mountain. MS's and tight LS's of Hercules riding a white horse through a rugged and deserted mountainous landscape until--- avalanche! Herc spurs on but it's a trap set up by an unruly group of hill people. Tight LS of Herc and the horse taking a rather nasty spill but both are (hopefully) unharmed. Hercules then wages mighty battle against the bad hill dwellers; great series of MS's of Alan in well-choreographed fisticuffs; great fight scenes with all sorts of punches and wrestling moves. The story's evil queen wanders in a wind-blown, linen-billowing chamber of her castle; she gets visited by the Moon Man, a tall alien wearing robes and a leather skull mask. Tight LS and MS's of the young and beautiful princess meeting her equally young and handsome counterpart on the sly in a manicured courtyard on castle grounds. MS of the queen's soldiers marching through the halls of the castle, towards the camera; Hercules and a young woman follow stealthfully behind, then sneak into a chamber. MS's of Hercules and Claudius, an elder castle scribe, meeting and talking in the chamber. MS of Claudius opening a hidden door and entering a secret tunnel, Herc in tow. MS of a hidden peephole, a pair of evil eyes peering into the room. MS's of Claudius and Hercules wandering the tunnels and dark passageways. MS's of the young girl wandering after them. MS of Claudius walking along passageway only to spring a trap: several spikes pierce the old man. CU of Herc falling into a pit, also a sprung trap. High angle MS of Hercules in the pit as gallons of water come rushing in, filling it. Great CU of the girl screaming at the sight of her dying her father, then running to his side. REEL A ENDS AT 645'. B: 0' to 600'.......... MS's of Hercules in the pit, getting soaked, struggling to find a way out. MS's of the girl wandering the tunnels in search of Herc, calling out his name. Herc breaks through one of the pit's walls only to face a hideous tunnel monster-- okay, some guy in a gray ape suit with sabertooth fangs glued to the mouth's lower palette; good MS of the monster waiting in anticipation, then a series of MS's as the two fight in the cave. Herc kills the beast then, in MS, bends the steel bars holding him inside the cave. High angle MS of a balding centurion, a blazing torch in hand, climbing ladder. 600' to 1000'.... tight LS's of the Queen's Roman soldiers riding horses through desolate landscape. MS of the good Prince getting an arrow to the chest. MS of the Prince and bad soldiers talking with swords but the Prince gets overwhelmed unitl Hercules saves the day, beating the baddies senseless. High angle MS of the Prince lying on his back and babbling while others attend to his chest wound (ew!). MS's and tight LS's of the Queen's soldiers dragging men and women peasants from their homes. Excellent fight sequence (in MS) of Hercules battling the soldiers in a tavern: Herc bodyslams, gorilla presses, punches and throws the bad guys through furniture and into barrels of water (very well choreographed; Alan has a magnificent smile the whole time he fends them off). Cut to MS's of the sacrifices being led up a winding mountain path by the queen's soldiers. 1000' to 1375'..... MS of Hercules leaping from a 20' cliff to the sand below, an act meant to surprise the soldiers but they throw a net over him instead. Wide MS of the Moon Man , the Queen and the captive Princess in an underground lair. Great MS of 2 rock soldiers (yep, that's right, they're tall and lumbering and made of rock-- okay, it's 2 guys in rubber costumes but it sure looks convincing) ambling towards the camera. Wide MS of several rock soldiers, a veritable rock army, surround the recalcitrant Princess. CU's of the Moon Man talking, his leather mask moving with his jaw. MS's and tight LS's of Hercules bound and chained in a Venus Flytrap-like death device being run by a millstone helmed by slave; the Queen and her soldiers watch; CU's of Hercules' bare and flexing chest and arms as he fights the device; CU of a rope fraying, then snapping; MS of a heaving and victorious Hercules. REEL B ENDS AT 1375'. C: 0' to 400' ........... MS of the Queen taking Hercules' hand and placing it at her throat. MS of Herc pretending to pass out on the Queen's bed, as if drugged. After she leaves he smiles and falls happily asleep. MS's of soldiers breaking into a house, killing a man, then capturing the Prince and Claudius' daughter. 400' to 850'......... MS's of Hercules fighting the Queen's soldiers: punches, slams, presses, kicks, swords, spears, etc.: very acrobatic, very well choreographed, great fights, well paced, very quick... he even lifts a steel wall from its hinges and drops it unceremoniously on 20 or so soldiers! Cut to a MS of the Moon Man sending his rock soldiers to wobble over to the Queen and (eventually) kill her; MS of the Queen getting crushed to death by the circle of rock soldiers. MS's of the good guys wandering through a thick dust storm atop the mountain of death. 850' to 1130'....... MS of the Moon Man slowly opening his arms while watching the ancient ritual before him (okay, it's only a blood transfusion). Low angle MS of the moon as seen through a craggy rook in the cavern's ceiling. Montage of furious weather changes: stormy seas, rolling storm clouds, lightning, volcanos, lava, etc. MS's of Hercules battling the rock soldiers (lifts one over his head and tosses him away), fighting the Moon Man, breaking one of the supporting columns and destroying the secret lair; Hercules pushes an idolatrous statue of the goddess being reborn and halts the transformation process. Ends with MS of Hercules and the love interest (Claudius' daughter) riding a white horse onto a sunset-soaked beach. END AT 1130'.
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 29, 1974 (2/2)
[01.15.35] [members stand to leave for HOUSE vote, LEHRER v.o.] LEHRER describes the upcoming debate on the ABUSE OF POWER article as an issue of NARROWING the charge. [dissolve-- committee room after the recess] The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order. At the time the committee recessed, the opponents of the, amendment of the gentleman from California had consumed 18 minutes, and had 2 minutes left and the proponents of the gentleman's amendment had consumed 15 minutes and have 5 minutes left. I will recognize now the gentleman from--Mr. Mayne. Mr. MAYNE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I must speak in opposition to the amendment of my friend from California because I certainly do not want to do anything to dilute or limit in any way whatever responsibility the President may have for the very outrageous attempts to use the Internal Revenue Service for political purposes. I consider the evidence shows that the approaches that were made by Mr. Dean and Mr. Ehrlichman to Commissioner Randolph Thrower and Commissioner Johnnie Walters to be absolutely indefensible. Our tax collection system in this country is based on a voluntary contributions basis, with contribution assessed and paid by people on a voluntary basis and it will certainly be destroyed if people cannot have confidence that it is not used to reward political friends and to harass political opponents. I think that not only does the President have a responsibility not to directly approve such indefensible action but he has ,I responsibility not to ratify it after it has occurred and has a responsibility over and above that to have enough idea of what is going on in his administration to be very sure that this kind of political prostitution of Internal Revenue Service does not occur. There is nothing in this record which to me Is more disappointing or more cause for concern of the continuation of free government than in the way in which this Internal Revenue Service was attempted to be used for this base purpose. The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. All time for those in opposition has expired. I recognize-is there anyone seeking recognition in support of the amendment? Mr. SMITH. Mr. Chairman? The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Smith. Mr. SMITH. I would like to yield my time to the gentleman from California if he wishes some more. Mr. WIGGINS. I appreciate that courtesy, Mr. Smith, but it is not my intention to use any more time. I think the case has been made. Mr. SMITH. I yield back the balance of my time, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. The question occurs now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California. All those in favor of the amendment please signify by saying aye. [Chorus of "ayes."] The CHAIRMAN. All those opposed? [Chorus of "noes."] The CHAIRMAN. The, noes appear to have it. Mr. SANDMAN. On that I demand the yeas and nays. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from New Jersey demands the yeas and nays. The, clerk will call the roll. All those in favor of the amendment of the gentleman from California please signify by saying aye. All those opposed, no. The clerk will call the roll. The CLERK. Mr. Donohue. Mr. DONOHUE. -No. The CLERK. -Mr. Brooks. Mr. BROOKS. NO, The CLERK. -Mr. Kastenmeier. -Mr. KASTENEMEIER. No. The CLERK. Mr. Edwards. Mr. EDWARDS. NO. The CLERK. Mr. Hungate. Mr. HUNGATE. NO.. The CLERK. Mr. Conyers. Mr. CONYERS. NO. The CLERK. Mr. Eilberg. Mr. EILBERG. No. The CLERK. Mr. Waldie. Mr. WALDIE. No. The CLERK. Mr. Flowers. Mr. FLOWERS. No. The CLERK. Mr. Mann. Mr. MANN. NO. The CLERK. Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. SARBANES. NO. The CLERK. Mr. Seiberling. Mr. SEIBERLING. NO. The, CLERK. Mr. Danielson. Mr. DANIELSON. NO. The CLERK, Mr. Drinan. Mr. DRINAN. NO. The CLERK. Mr. Rangel. Mr. RANGEL. No. The CLERK. Ms. Jordan. Ms. JORDAN. NO. The CLERK. Mr. Thornton. Mr. THORNTON. NO. The CLERK. Ms. Holtzman. MS. HOLTZMAN. NO. The CLERK. Mr. Owens. Mr. OWENS. No. The CLERK. Mr. Mezvinsky . Mr. MEZVINSKY. -No. The CLERK. Mr. Hutchinson. Mr. HUTCHINSON. Aye. The CLERK. Mr. McClory. Mr. McCLORY. No. The CLERK. Mr. Smith. Mr. SMITH. Ave. The CLERK. Mr. Sandman. Mr. SANDMAN. Aye. The CLERK. Mr. Railsback. Mr. RAILSBACK. No. The CLERK. Mr. Wiggins. Mr. WIGGINS. Aye. The CLERK. Mr. Dennis. Mr. DENNIS. Aye. The CLERK. Mr. Fish. Mr. FISH. No. The CLERK. Mr. Mayne. Mr. MAYNE. No. The, CLERK. Mr. Hogan. Mr. HOGAN. No. The CLERK. Mr. Butler. Mr. BUTLER. No. The CLERK. Mr. Cohen. Mr. COHEN. No. The CLERK. Mr. Lott. [ No response.] The CLERK. Mr. Froehlich. Mr. FROEHLICH. Aye. The CLERK. 'Mr. Moorhead. Mr. MOORHEAD. Aye. The CLERK. Mr. Maraziti. Mr. MARAZITI. Aye. The CLERK. Mr. Latta. Mr. LATTA. Aye, The CLERK. Mr. Rodino. The CHAIRMAN. NO. The CLERK. Mr. Chairman? The CHAIRMAN. The clerk will report. The CLERK. Nine members have voted aye, 28 members have voted no.
Grimsel, frozen lake
Lake of Lugano
Evelene, Montreux valley, grape terraces
Zermatt? museum, Matterhorn
Mt. Blanc
Bullfight
Palma, Bullfight, Majorca Spain
Above Lucern
Lucerne
Montreux, children, ?? castle
Near Lugano, village Melite
Swiss misc.
Appenzal
Swiss wood carver
Matterhorn