From dartvax!bu.edu!stanford.edu!agate!ucbvax!CABOT.DARTMOUTH.EDU!harelb Fri May 10 22:55:10 EDT 1991 Article: 12487 of alt.activism Path: dartvax!bu.edu!stanford.edu!agate!ucbvax!CABOT.DARTMOUTH.EDU!harelb From: harelb@CABOT.DARTMOUTH.EDU (Harel Barzilai) Newsgroups: alt.activism Subject: ARTICLE: October Suprise Update -- PART (1) (In These Times) Message-ID: <9105082128.AA15405@cabot.dartmouth.edu> Date: 8 May 91 21:28:40 GMT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Lines: 126 "I am appalled at the lack of interest in Congress. You would think they would immediately convene an investigation, or at least name a commission. This issue should bring down the Bush presidency." "Part of the beauty of this is that none of the key players were in government at the time" says Weinglass. "So George Bush could be compelled to testify under oath, because these alleged crimes occurred at a time when he held no office." - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ============================= T H E F I R S T S T O N E ============================= By Joel Bleifuss [In These Times, May 1-7, 1991, page 4] P r o b e s a n d p o s s i b i l i t i e s =============================================== The 1984 Reagan-Bush campaign's arms-for-hostages deal with Iran is still in the news. But as the scandal smolders, what next? Will it be smothered by the calculated indifference of a national media that is most in its element quantifying the frequent-flyer miles of Chief of Staff John Sununu? (He is, after all, a smoking top gun.) Or will this decade-old tale of treason ignite a wildfire of righteous indignation, ensuring that Bush's will be a one-term presidency? At the moment, that may seem farfetched, but two weeks ago, when the Frontline special titled "An Election Held Hostage" aired, 5 percent of all U.S. TVs were tuned in to Frontline. Millions now know of the deal. SPECIALLY PROSECUTED: Clearly, Iran-contra Independent Coun- sel Lawrence Walsh could look into the matter. In December 1986 the Washington, D.C., circuit court instructed Walsh "to investi- gate and, if warranted, to prosecute alleged violations of federal criminal laws by lt. Col. Oliver L. North, other U.S. government officials, or other individuals acting in concert with lt. Col. North or with other U.S. government officials, from in or around January 1985 (the exact date being unknown) to the present, in connec- tion with the sale or shipment of military arms to Iran and the transfer or diversion of funds realized in connection with such sale or shipment." The court's use of the temporal preposition "in or around" and the inclusion of the subsequent parenthetical clause, indicate that U.S. arms illegally traded to Iran in 1981 would fall under Walsh's purview. Will Walsh investigate? Sam Witucki, deputy press officer at the independent counsel's office, said: "We can neither confirm nor deny that." She did say that the office had received a lot of ques- tions on the subject, and she faxed me the documents that laid out Walsh's mandate. (If you have an opinion on the matter, the independent counsel's phone number is (202) 383-8940.) But wouldn't it be more appropriate for Congress to open up a full-scale investigation? Despite the flaws of its Iran-contra in- quiry, those hearings exposed more of that scandal than the lackluster non-partisan Tower Commission. AN INQUIRING CONGRESS: Frank Askin, a Rutgers law professor, is counsel to the House subcommittee on criminal justice chaired by Rep. John Conyers (D - MI,). In 1988, Askin, in his work with the committee, investigated charges that such a deal was made. In the fall of that year, he told me, "My personal opinion? Things were going on in high places. I think there is a significant amount of circumstantial evidence that indicates some representatives of the Reagan-Bush 1980 campaign were having secret negotiations with Iranian officials regarding the hostages. There is enough circumstantial evidence and [the alleged deal] is so important that it is certainly worthy of investigation. Who should do that in- vestigation? At least the historians and journalists." Well, journalists have investigated. It is now time for Congress to take up the matter. But will it ? Last week Askin said, "The issue [of he 1980 deal] has been mentioned but there is nothing formally going on at this moment." (If you think Congress should investigate the alleged deal, the House Judiciary Committee can be reached at (202) 225-3951.) LEGAL OPTIONS: In the fall of 188, New York attorney Leonard Weinglass also talked with former hostages about bringing suit against those Americans who allegedly made the deal with Iran. "The lawsuit never went ahead," says Weinglass.."But I won't say the issue is dead. And now with the renewed interest, there may be a second look at litigation." According to Weinglass, the ideal forum to air the issue would be congressional hearings. But he is not sure Congress has either the nerve or the verve. "I am appalled at the lack of interest in Congress. You would think they would immediately convene an investigation, or at least name a commission. This issue should bring down the Bush presidency. But there isn't a spark of in- terest in the moribund Democratic Party, which lost the presi- dency as a result of this conspiracy." he says. "For all of its weak- nesses, the only viable vehicle for getting at this and to educate the country is a congressional hearing. Granted, Congress dropped the ball in Iran-contra, but you have to remember that Congress was limited by the North prosecution. I would prefer to think in terms of the Watergate hearings that were more open- ended." Even if Congress fails to pick up the issue, the layers won't "Part of the beauty of this is that none of the key players were in government at the time" says Weinglass. "So George Bush could be compelled to testify under oath, because these alleged crimes occurred at a time when he held no office." ===================== ( C o n t i n u e d ) ===================== ############################################################### # Harel Barzilai for Activists Mailing List (AML) # ################################################################ { For more info about ACTIV-L or PeaceNet's brochure send } { inquiries to harel@dartmouth.edu / mathrich@umcvmb.bitnet } To join AML, just send the 1-line message "SUB ACTIV-L " to: LISTSERV@UMCVMB.BITNET; you should receive a confirmation message within 2 days. Alternate address: LISTSERV@UMCVMB.MISSOURI.EDU Qs/problems: Rich Winkel, MATHRICH@UMCVMB.["MISSOURI.EDU" or "BITNET"]