 The Congress last year required that the issue of binary munitions in our chemical warfare deterrent be examined to see whether there is a need for modernization of the deterrent or not. Have you appointed Ambassador Stessel and a distinguished panel of outside former servants and experts in the field to examine the question they've done so, they prepared a very thorough report which Ambassador Stessel would like to highlight the conclusions of today and summarize their views. Good, Mr. President. But we've been at this now for about eight weeks trying to respond to the question posed by the Congress. We do have conclusions which we our final report is still in process should be available very shortly. But we thought we should tell you about our conclusions which then if you approve could be useful in working in the Congress. Now the Congress has asked four questions. One, what would be the effect of modernization of our chemical munitions on trying to achieve a ban on chemical warfare? Our conclusion is that modernization would not have an adverse effect on this effort. On the contrary it should help. It should be an incentive to the Soviets to move ahead on a verifiable ban. Secondly, we were asked about the adequacy of the existing stockpile to deter the use of chemical warfare by the Russians. Our conclusion is that the stockpile is inadequate for this purpose. It's old. Some of the munitions go back to the 1940s. Much of it is deteriorating. The bulk of the munitions really is useless. There is some small fraction which has some deterrent value. But it's very small. All of the munitions are hazardous to handle. The Soviet capability in this field, as we all know, is very large. We feel that to prevent quick defeat. We know we stop by last night, but you weren't in, I guess. We were in last night, and I showed him, I showed him the fires. No, it wasn't. It was a day that should have happened in the meantime. Did you see Nancy on the Good Morning show? No. Oh, she was marvelous on the plane. Get them to run it for you, because it was marvelous. She was just fine. Well, and she never tells me anything about it. No, of course she doesn't. You look just wonderful. I'm going to mention that, actually. I've probably forgotten about it. I almost did. I simply didn't. Oh, correct. You know, like I did in Variety the other day, there ran the picture. I've never seen it before. Two-colon picture, and it tore what it was, and it said, I tell us the date on another page. I've never seen that in Variety. It was a while ago. 1954. 1950. There we are.