Duration: 1m30s

It's not good he's telling everyone you initiated the hearings. He can't prove a goddamn thing. He certainly can't prove that I gave the file to Borden. We're not in court, sir. There's no burden of proof. Right. They're not convicting... (sighs) just denying. Why would Hill come here to tear me down? What's his angle? Do people need a reason to do the right thing? - As he sees it. - I told you, Oppenheimer poisoned the scientists against me, right from that first meeting. I don't know what Oppenheimer said to him that day, but Einstein wouldn't even meet my eye. (inaudible) Oppenheimer knows how to manipulate his own. And at Los Alamos, he preyed on the naivete of scientists who thought they'd get a say in how we used their work, but don't ever think he was that naive himself. ROBB: Doctor. During your work on the hydrogen bomb, were you deterred by any moral qualms? Yes, of course. ROBB: But you still got on with your work, didn't you? Yes, because this was work of exploration, it was not the preparation of a weapon. You mean it was more of a... an academic excursion. No, it is not an academic thing whether you can build a hydrogen bomb. It's a matter of life and death. By 1942, you were actively pushing the development of the hydrogen bomb, weren't you? Pushing's not the right word. Supporting it and working on it, yes. So when did these moral qualms become so strong that you actively opposed the development of the hydrogen bomb? When it was suggested that it be the policy of the United States to make these things at all cost without regard to the balance between these weapons and atomic weapons as part of our arsenal.