The New York Times

[acecipher]

America's Paper of Record

[acecipher]

Oliver North Denies any wrongdoing on his part

Col. Oliver North, as seen in testimony in front of the Congressional Investigation

This week saw six straight days of the man who has come to be the focus of all that is known about Iraq-Contra, Col. Oliver North. His testimony proved hard-hitting and surprising, but perhaps only furthering the confusion over the existence of any potential arms sales.

Overall, while he did acknowledge incinerating key documents, he denied any wrongdoing on his part, noting that he was acting in accordance with orders, and that it was the CIA that obfuscated the normal chain of reporting to Secretary-level positions, and that his aims were to ensure "plausible deniability" to his superiors in the NSC.

However, he remained staunch in his defense of the lack of any arms sale: While dual-use technology (specifically heavy earthmoving equipment) was supplied to Sadam at a vital time in the war, stalling an Iranian advance, he maintained the Administration line that there were no weapons involved in the sale. How this shakes out with the American Public is yet to be seen.

However, the truth of the matter is but perhaps only a fraction of what has kept observers rapt over these last few days, noting the antics North has deployed, including challenging the Abu Nidal organization directly (seen as a direct shot across the bow of the blossoming Intifada). Also notable has been his chastisement, most notably by Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-HI) and his lecture on responsibility to disobey unlawful orders.

Overall, coverage has been tight, and surely the American Populace will see what truth comes from this investigation.

Reagan Breaks Silence on Iraq-Contra

President Reagan as he appeared on TV Tuesday night

Throughout the 11 weeks of the Iraq-Contra hearings, President Reagan declined to say anything substantive about them. Last week, in a nationally broadcast speech, he broke his silence, claiming no involvement, but complete responsibility, for whatever action occurred with the covert funding of rebels.

In one particularly powerful moment, he exclaimed:

I was aware the resistance was receiving funds directly from third countries and from private efforts, and I endorsed those endeavors wholeheartedly; but - let me put this in capital lettters - I DID NOT KNOW ABOUT THE DIVERSION OF FUNDS. . . . Yet the buck does not stop with Admiral Poindexter, as he stated in his testimony; it stops with me.

He claimed that he was "aghast that weapons would be sold to the Iraqis in defiance of international agreements to cease arms sales to stem the tide of the war, and generally draw down the conflict," promising to launch investigations into how such a brazen breach of official policy could have been, though noting that he "hope[ s ] this investigation... will lead to the right truth coming out, and that hopefully such a truth is that charges of arms sales are an overextension of the truth by greedy and overzealous investigators seeking a shocking story more than the truth."

However, the largest section of his talk was his commitment to peace and freedom, noting his pride in seeing many of the world's governments opening up and allowing reform, whether they were allies or percieved as enemies, and that it held hope for the world. He especially emphasized the progress being made on nuclear disarmament:

In the months ahead, I also hope to reach an agreement, a comprehensive and verifiable agreement, with the 'Soviet Union on reducing nuclear arms. We're making real progress on the global elimination of an entire class of nuclear weapons—the U.S. and Soviet intermediate-range, or INF, missiles. I first proposed this idea to the Soviets back in 1981. They weren't too keen on it and, in fact, walked out of the negotiations at one point. But we kept at it. Until recently, the Soviet Union had insisted on the right to retain some of its INF missiles. But in mid-July, General Secretary Gorbachev announced that he was prepared to drop this demand. That was welcome news, indeed.

We've come this far because in 1980 you gave me a mandate to rebuild our military. I've done that. And today we're seeing the results. The Soviets are now negotiating with us because we're negotiating from strength. This would be an historic agreement. Previous arms control agreements merely put a ceiling on weapons and even allowed for increases; this agreement would reduce the number of nuclear weapons. I am optimistic that we'll soon witness a first in world history—the sight of two countries actually destroying nuclear weapons in their arsenals. And imagine where that might lead.

We're also ready to move ahead on a START agreement that would cut intercontinental nuclear forces by 50 percent, thereby eliminating thousands of nuclear missiles. I urge the Soviets to move ahead with us. And I say to General Secretary Gorbachev, both our nations could begin a new relationship by signing comprehensive agreements to reduce nuclear and conventional weapons.

What we seek in our relationship with the Soviet Union is peace and stability. That is also what we seek in the Persian Gulf, and the Middle East more generally. And bringing stability to this troubled region remains one of the most important goals of my Presidency.

He finished by reading off a joyous letter from a small Iraqi child sent to him, congratulating him on her father being able to come home, now that the war had been brought to a peaceful close.

It remains to be seen how this matter will shake out, with the war now being largely drawn to a close, and the ongoing investigations, both internal and external of the White House. Popular opinion certainly has been shaken by the magnitude of this scandal, with international condemnation coming in from all sides. It remains to be seen how much of a legacy this will leave with the President as he enters his last two years in office.

[acecipher]

The "Intifada": A violent revolution?

A band of violent Palestinian Militants in Gaza

The ongoing violence in Palestine has shocked international audiences with its scope and scale, as the bodies continue to pile up day by day. The fighting only seems to intensify by the hour as armed groups pop up among the Palestinian populace in response to IDF forces initiating violence. With the death of Yasser Arafat, it seems that the last voice for peace may have been silenced, and the Camp David Accords abrogated.

The US has been slow to respond to this situation--a move largely attributed by State Department sources to not simply replicate the insufficient Camp David Accords. They further blame hostility to what top analysts call a "violent and dangerous mob mentality" that comes from the Palestinian groups, comparing giving any tacit support to them like the USSR giving tacit support to the Watts Riots.

Nonetheless the desire to see the fighting stop has certainly come into many American homes. While the majority of the criticism has fallen on Israel for instigating the violence, and leading the airstrike that led to Yasser Arafat's death, there has recently been a loud and vocal reaction against the Palestinians led by some of America's prominent Jewish organizations. The Anti-Defamation League has criticized several pro-Palestinian statements as anti-semitic, for giving voice to the views of others who deny the Jewish Holocaust during World War II, and even going so far as to call for further Genocide of the Jewish people. The lack of ability for the Palestinian Liberation Organization to clamp down on these extremists, they say, belies their caring for actual justice and only for the continuance of the work of Adolf Hitler.

The Muslim Community within the US, however, stands United with the Palestinian people, and is largely critical of the violence. Many leaders still call for peace over further violence, but seem to expect the Israelis to back off first, something the ADL and others find to be completely unacceptable until the calls for further anti-Jewish violence cease.

As it stands, we have no knowledge how this will end, or how long the violence will continue, in spite of all the calls for peace.

[acecipher]

Reagan Takes the Embargo Head-On

The President Speaks before Congress.

President Reagan addressed Congress last night in the State of the Union, his first since the Iraq-Contra scandal broke. While his comments on the scandal were light, he did accept responsibility for the shipping of materials, although he stuck to his guns on the issue of weapons, saying directly, "The US promised the international community that we would cease arms sales to Iraq for the sake of peace, and the US does not break its word when it is working towards peace: For a lasting peace cannot be built upon falsehood, but only on the solid bedrock of truth and mutual understanding."

However, what took up more of the speech was his stance that "International independence requires domestic independence first, as a prerequisite." Blasting OPEC for using politics as "an excuse to interfere in the market and with the lives of everyday citizens around the globe" and to "cover their own inability to reach out and solve solutions diplomatically," he announced an effort to create greater independence for Americans and their transportation needs by encouraging a switchover to Natural Gas. "Many Americans know that this product is cleaner and safer than the oil we have to import from abroad, often under questionable circumstances and sometimes indirectly funding our enemies, but few realize the potential America has in gaining self-sufficiency through using our own Natural Resources that God has gifted this great land with."

He finished with express wishes for peace to come to the foreign lands, that once energy independence is achieved, the small business owners and entrepreneurs may make way in their own markets, and that they may make peace with their neighbors. He expressly called upon an end to violence on all sides of the current conflict in Palestine, saying "Anyone who funds any violent actor in the conflict going on in Israel right now has to ask themselves at night exactly what they are fighting for, whether it is peace or it is bloodshed, and what their ultimate goal really is: whether it is the liberation of a people as many would claim, or it is their extermination, as not many would admit." However, he did finish on a hopeful note, that he already has a table waiting for those who wish to end the conflict, and that he expects talks to begin sooner than others may hope, "even in the face of those who will despise such talks in their unrelenting pursuit of violent terror."