{"id":187410,"date":"2013-03-11T21:23:00","date_gmt":"2013-03-12T02:23:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/2013\/03\/11\/this-is-fascinating\/"},"modified":"2013-03-11T21:23:00","modified_gmt":"2013-03-12T02:23:00","slug":"this-is-fascinating","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/2013\/03\/11\/this-is-fascinating\/","title":{"rendered":"This is Fascinating"},"content":{"rendered":"

An analysis by Robert Parry suggests that both Watergate and Iran Contra were about covering up collusion to subvert US foreign policy for electoral advantage<\/a>, something that the less sophisticated amongst us might call treason:<\/p>\n

\u2026\u2026\u2026<\/span>

<\/span>A favorite saying of Official Washington is that \u201cthe cover-up is worse than the crime.\u201d But that presupposes you accurately understand what the crime was. And, in the case of the two major U.S. government scandals of the last third of the Twentieth Century \u2013 Watergate and Iran-Contra \u2013 that doesn\u2019t seem to be the case.<\/span>

<\/span>Indeed, newly disclosed documents have put old evidence into a sharply different light and suggest that history has substantially miswritten the two scandals by failing to understand that they actually were sequels to earlier scandals that were far worse. Watergate and Iran-Contra were, in part at least, extensions of the original crimes, which involved dirty dealings to secure the immense power of the presidency.<\/span>

<\/span>Presidents Richard Nixon, George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan photographed together in the Oval Office in 1991. (Cropped from a White House photo that also included Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter.)<\/span>

<\/span>In the case of Watergate \u2013 the foiled Republican break-in at the Democratic National Committee in June 1972 and Richard Nixon\u2019s botched cover-up leading to his resignation in August 1974 \u2013 the evidence is now clear that Nixon created the Watergate burglars out of his panic that the Democrats might possess a file on his sabotage of Vietnam peace talks in 1968.<\/span>

<\/span>\u2026\u2026\u2026<\/span>

<\/span>Similarly, Official Washington and many mainstream historians have tended to dismiss Ronald Reagan\u2019s Iran-Contra scandal as another case of some overzealous subordinates intuiting what the President wanted and getting everybody into trouble.<\/span>

<\/span>\u2026\u2026\u2026<\/span>

<\/span>So, while congressional and federal investigators looked only at how the specific 1985-86 arms sales to Iran got started, there was no timely attention paid to evidence that the Reagan administration had quietly approved Israeli arms sales to Iran in 1981 and that those contacts went back to the days before Election 1980 when the hostage crisis destroyed Carter\u2019s reelection hopes and ensured Reagan\u2019s victory.<\/span>

<\/span>The 52 hostages were not released until Reagan was sworn in on Jan. 20, 1981.<\/span>

<\/span>Over the years, about two dozen sources \u2013 including Iranian officials, Israeli insiders, European intelligence operatives, Republican activists and even Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat \u2013 have provided information about alleged contacts with Iran by the Reagan campaign.<\/span>

<\/span>And, there were indications early in the Reagan presidency that something peculiar was afoot. On July 18, 1981, an Israeli-chartered plane crashed or was shot down after straying over the Soviet Union on a return flight from delivering U.S.-manufactured weapons to Iran.<\/span>

<\/span>In a PBS interview nearly a decade later, Nicholas Veliotes, Reagan\u2019s assistant secretary of state for the Middle East, said he looked into the incident by talking to top administration officials. \u201cIt was clear to me after my conversations with people on high that indeed we had agreed that the Israelis could transship to Iran some American-origin military equipment,\u201d Veliotes said.<\/span>

<\/span>In checking out the Israeli flight, Veliotes came to believe that the Reagan camp\u2019s dealings with Iran dated back to before the 1980 election. \u201cIt seems to have started in earnest in the period probably prior to the election of 1980, as the Israelis had identified who would become the new players in the national security area in the Reagan administration,\u201d Veliotes said. \u201cAnd I understand some contacts were made at that time.\u201d<\/span>

<\/span>When I re-interviewed Veliotes on Aug. 8, 2012, he said he couldn\u2019t recall who the \u201cpeople on high\u201d were who had described the informal clearance of the Israeli shipments but he indicated that \u201cthe new players\u201d were the young neoconservatives who were working on the Reagan campaign, many of whom later joined the administration as senior political appointees.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I really don’t think that “treason” is too strong a term here.<\/p>\n

The assertion here is that the Watergate break-in was about trying to find files implicating Nixon in deliberately extending the war for electoral advantage, and the arms deliveries to Iran were payback for holding the Tehran embassy hostages from being released until after the elections.<\/p>\n

It does provide some context to the “Third Rate Burglary” the brought Nixon down.<\/p>\n

There were files on his interference, and he could not find them because a Johnson aide had taken them with him, and he was desperate to ensure that they would not be used against him in the 1972 elections.<\/p>\n

Considering the 30,000 American deaths, and the million+ dead Vietnamese, Nixon and his merry band of rat-f%$#ers (their term) had to have been in a panic about this.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

An analysis by Robert Parry suggests that both Watergate and Iran Contra were about covering up collusion to subvert US foreign policy for electoral advantage, something that the less sophisticated amongst us might call treason: \u2026\u2026\u2026A favorite saying of Official Washington is that \u201cthe cover-up is worse than the crime.\u201d But that presupposes you accurately …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[970,1000,964,1011,978],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-187410","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-corruption","category-elections","category-foreign-relations","category-history","category-politics"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/187410"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=187410"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/187410\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=187410"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=187410"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=187410"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}