Whut they're saying
i I -S&
about FACTS FORUM
... We are exceedingly interested in what
we as Americans can do about the growing
apathy. . ..
Mrs. E. H, Hampson
6202 S. Morrill Ave., Whittier, Calif.
I think you are very optimistic in thinking you can waken the American public to
more interest and action .. . Personally, I
render deep thanks for your most informative
broadcasts and wish you luck.
Mrs. R. W. Brink
269 Weirfield St., Brooklyn. N. Y.
You are to be commended for your work
in "the battle to preserve freedom," and I
concur that "Facts Forum is everyone's organization".
Saul C. Roemer
741 First National Bank Bldg-,
Houston 2, Texas
You are doing a magnificent work in informing the American people of the true
facts of the events in the making.
78 Rockland Ave., Yonkers, N. Y.
. . . would appreciate receiving copies of
your radio broadcasts which have been given
W. L. Richardson, Supt.
Safety and Protection Division,
Carbide and Carbon Chemicals Co.,
P. 0. Box P, Oak Ridge, Tenn.
1 listen every Sunday night to your broadcasts and I think, with Voltaire: "Was there
ever so abominable a fellow? He exposes
truth so odiously; he sets before our eyes
the arguments on both sides with horrible
impartiality; he is so intolerably clear and
plain that he enables people who have only
common sense to doubt, and even to judge."
I loved the way you trimmed Time down....
Miss Elizabeth Winslow
1330 L St., N. W., Washington, D. C.
... an excellent and inspiring discourse....
I would like it for my files at the Girl Scout
Mrs. H. B. Norwood
P. 0. Box 1282, Decatur, Ala.
... would appreciate a reprint to have in
our office reception room....
Dr. and Mrs. Ernest B. Decker
Atlantic Bldg., 550 Seabreeze Blvd..
Daytona Beach, Fla.
...would like to extend my congratulation- to your organization and its; sponsors
for the excellent work that you have done.
Howard R. Parker
619 Buckalew St., Dallas 8, Texas
Keep up the good work and send us Facts
Forum News for the coming year.
Bess Stinson, Special Servicw
First National Bank of Arizona,
(Continued from Page 40)
Groves, would you say that represented
on Dr. Oppenheimer's part an honest
judgment as to what in his opinion
would produce the best operating results
among the scientists on the project?
A. . . . Here I am just giving my surmise as to what I thought.
First, that he personally felt that was
right in view of his background of
Second, that he felt it was necessary
in order to attract the kind of men lhat
he felt he had to have at Los Alamos. I
agreed that it was a very decided factor
... in getting such men. I also felt that
In- was very much influenced at that
time by . .. Dr. Condon, who was for
a very brief time the associate director
there and, as you all know, a very complete disappointment to me in every
I would like to emphasize now .. . that
1 was not responsible for the exact selection of Dr. Condon but I was responsible
.. . because 1 insisted when Dr. Oppenheimer took the directorship that he
have as his No. 1 assistant an industrial
scientist; and we just made a mistake
when we selected Dr. Condon. Who gave
his name the first time. I don't know.
but Dr. Condon turned out to he not an
industrial scientist, but an academic
scientist with all of the faults and none
of the virtues. That was my opinion.
He did a tremendous amount of damage at Los Alamos in the initial setup.
How much influence he had on Dr.
Oppenheimer I don't know. But he was
given certain responsibilities with my
full approval- in fact, you might say
my very insistent suggestion—that Dr.
Condon with the industrial background
should be the one to establish the work-
ing rules and the administrative scientific rules .. . while Dr. Oppenheimer
was thinking about how the actual
scientific work was to be done.
I could never make up my own mind
as to whether Dr. Oppenheimer was the
eeiii- who was primarily at fault in breaking up the compartmentalization or
whether it was Dr. Condon....
Q. How long was Dr. Condon on the
A. I think a very short time ... my
impression would be only six weeks to
two months. . . . His departure, of course,
was at his own volition. I always thought
it was because he- thought the project
would fail and he was not going to be
associated with it. His record showed
since then he has never been satisfied
anywhere he was. He was always moving. It was a mistake to get him out
there ... for which the responsibility
was maybe 75 per cent mine and 25 per
cent Oppenheimer's; or maybe my »
was even more than that. .. becausi
would never have been there if 1
not told Oppenheimer what kind ol
sistant he should have... .
Interrogator: Chairman Gray
Q. You said that Dr. Condon
been unsatisfactory in every resP| a '
Does that include security? Did you "pas
anything in mind on security in "lacki
regard, or loyalty? hesl
A. 1 would say not in giving an? eoul,
formation but in setting up. He s<Jsucn
the rules at Los Alamos—at least 'jtrust
ways fell he was the man respond snna
for the rules that tended to break u*the
compartmentalization. He was the 'effec
who was primarily responsible f°r!of <
the friction which existed. There ""eneii
have been friction anyway; but the q.
tensity of the friction that existed'don.
e .<• rr- 1 M assu
tween the military olhcers who 'iie|e
trying to do the administrative "I'pcrs
tions out there so as to enable the - A
tisls to work at science—Condon "ley.
the one who built all of that up- and
.. .Of course later when he w'0'1' »
at Berkeley—he didn't do what I *to •
an honest day's work—1 might ad» f m
ilarification that the work he.!1."
that required a man of his eapa
engaged on at Berkeley was so""1 '"
Dr. Condon was a first-rale physical
Lawrence and myself did ""' ^
that this particular phase of the " .
was at all interesting to us. We th" j( j
it was just no hope at all. But w,ejDec
felt that we could not allow this *
to go unexplored just because
stone opinion—which is rca
Lawrence's and mine were, becau1
didn't know anything about
bad Condon working on that
small group of juniors. By doin&L.-
" . „- J tL,.t r..rP P . .
we definitely proved that we were ^.^
in saying that we should neglect ' t;(r^
was kept on there al Berkeley on Ksa%.
of part-time basis, traveling back . u.
forth. He was very unsatisfactory of
In other words, he just didn't bd
honest day's work in our opinion- hn[
He would also be going lo Pitt*0 rati
for his own family convenienc^jdon
.«. ..... ...... ........j ............
would be leaving Pittsburgh bees'* (j
wanted to gel mil to Berkeley • "' "v;
sonal reasons. Then of course the ;
tion came up with his attempts to I ."
Russia, just before the bomb "M1'
to that scientific conference u'''p
member of our Slate Depart""'' jn
the Army from knowing about ■
invitations. I found out about ' .
cause our scientists told me th"^
had received invitations. So we C'V
our project lo see lhat none of »"
FACTS FORUM NEWS, Januarih