Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.. Let's THINK this time, 'kay?

[SoCalDem]

Iran Contra has long tentacles.. and if you go easy , you never know what's coming later

It's like the oldtime serials.. the bad guy lives to challenge another day..

We are still paying for "playing nice"

SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Wed Jul-20-05 06:08 AM

Original message


Now we know the true consequences of "going easy" on Iran Contra

Had the Dems (who DID control both houses of congress) pressed harder, and not contented themselves with the idea that GHWB (the wimp) would be easygoing, and inconsequential...well things would be very different now.,

Had Reagan/Bush gotten their just desserts for Iran Contra, and all the dirt been exposed, they would have left office, fully disgraced..GHWB probably would not have even gotten elected..Carter would be held in higher esteem...and There's no way in HELL that *² would have gotten appointed to the white house

The appointments to the SCOTUS that were made by GHWB would have been made by a democrat..Kennedy..Souter..Thomas would not be on the bench, and we would not be facing a right wing court for the foreseeable future.

The democratic party has always hated "piling on", and has been ready to "forgive and forget".

Look at all the key players in this administration.. Almost all of them have their roots in the Iran Contra Days, Grenada, Panama, and many other republican schemes.

We do ourselves and the country a great disservice when we let the "bad guys" off with a slap on the wrist.

republicans have no shame.. they wear their crimes like badges of honor..and like the energizer bunnies, they just keep on coming back..

This is why we cannot let them off the hook, and strong language and actions are necessary..

The only thing that republicans DO understand is PUBLIC HUMILIATION, and jail terms.


If you DO wrong, you need to be punished..not just turned out of office to go lick your wounds until next time :grr:

[debbierlus]

1. I am very concerned and very disappointed with this sweet as pie tone the dems are taking

These people are criminals. They have stolen OUR treasury. They have slaughtered innocent people. They are dangerous.

You don't sit there and try to work with people who will stab you in the back the SECOND they get a chance. The Republicans have NO interest in trying to work together. They have an interest in staying out of jail.

The Congress has a oversight responsibility. They better damn well do it!

[Individualist]

2. They do have a responsibility

Some don't understand or don't want to understand that impeachment is not a choice. It's a duty.

[blm]

6. And some are being responsible....it's their job to COVERUP for BushInc.

Because they, too, have become complicit.

Ever wonder why there isn't one MENTION of BCCI in Clinton's entire book? Kind of odd for a policy wonk, wouldn't you think?

[Dunedain]

24. Stop that

they're not naked, they're on our side. :sarcasm:

[blm]

27. heheh...thanks for that. Believe it or not, there are even some here who DO want

to pretend that Clinton never covered up for BushInc.

I believe that BushInc WANTS Hillary to be the Dem nominee because they know they can depend on Clinton to keep the books closed for Bush2 the way he did for Bush1.

[SoCalDem]

30. Yep. those presidential papers will never see the light of day

We're still waiting (chirp..chirp) for reagan's..That was the first or second thing junior did when he strutted into DC..sealed up St. Ronnie's and his daddy's papers..

They have been thoroughly "sanitized" by now..

who knows what's even left of them..

[blm]

32. I've heard that a certain investigating Senator kept files on everything he saw back then

in the expectation that there would come a time when those files would be needed.

[jwirr]

53. If you are talking about the investigating Senator I think you are

then I am very glad he is on the ball. I watched the Iran/Contra hearings in the front chambers but would have much rather been in the closed hearings that were taking place behind the scenes.

[AntiFascist]

40. What if Hillary were to end up running against Bush3, Jeb? n/t

[blm]

41. The corruption would still be off the table for both of them.

The same way Bill and Bush1 agreed not to bring up each other's sexual dalliances in 1992. Except Bush1 had outside people do it, just like the swifts were 'outside' group who attacked Kerry's service.

[Stinky The Clown]

20. Not just a duty ... an HONOR BOUND duty

We have no choice. If we say we're the party of social justice then we have to do the good and the ugly. Not just the good.

[SoCalDem]

5. AND a MAJOR theme of this election was CORRUPTION

If we FAIL to indict and punish corrrution, they win..

and they WILL be back..

I would love to see thorough investigations, with sworn testimony, and immediately AFTER *² leaves office in '09...the hammer drops and they get indicted.

No chance for exit-pardons..:evilgrin:

[blm]

8. Welcome to the Anti-corruption, open government wing of the Democratic Party.

Democracy dies without truth. Look how close we came to BushInc killing it off these last 6 years.

[napi21]

3. I agree! O've heard some of the talking heads say the Dems have to be careful

because of what we should have learned from the Pubs who went way overboard on Clinton. The problem is, way topo many people related to Clinton's lie, and know they would do the same thing if in the same circumstances. With ShrubCo there's absolute crimes!

[blm]

4. Robert Parry agrees with you, SoCal - the most IMPORTANT ARTICLE written post 9-11 is this:

And considering he is the reporter who broke most of the IranContra stories, he knows more than anyone how important it was to have ALL the documents released to the CITIZENS of this country. Imagine if there was NO 9-11, folks - - it's THAT SERIOUS.


Hey, Democrats, the Truth Matters!
By Robert Parry
May 11, 2006

My book, Secrecy & Privilege, opens with a scene in spring 1994 when a guest at a White House social event asks Bill Clinton why his administration didn’t pursue unresolved scandals from the Reagan-Bush era, such as the Iraqgate secret support for Saddam Hussein’s government and clandestine arms shipments to Iran.

Clinton responds to the questions from the guest, documentary filmmaker Stuart Sender, by saying, in effect, that those historical questions had to take a back seat to Clinton’s domestic agenda and his desire for greater bipartisanship with the Republicans.

Clinton “didn’t feel that it was a good idea to pursue these investigations because he was going to have to work with these people,” Sender told me in an interview. “He was going to try to work with these guys, compromise, build working relationships.”

Clinton’s relatively low regard for the value of truth and accountability is relevant again today because other centrist Democrats are urging their party to give George W. Bush’s administration a similar pass if the Democrats win one or both houses of Congress.

Reporting about a booklet issued by the Progressive Policy Institute, a think tank of the Democratic Leadership Council, the Washington Post wrote, “these centrist Democrats … warned against calls to launch investigations into past administration decisions if Democrats gain control of the House or Senate in the November elections.”

These Democrats also called on the party to reject its “non-interventionist left” wing, which opposed the Iraq War and which wants Bush held accountable for the deceptions that surrounded it.

“Many of us are disturbed by the calls for investigations or even impeachment as the defining vision for our party for what we would do if we get back into office,” said pollster Jeremy Rosner, calling such an approach backward-looking.

Yet, before Democrats endorse the DLC’s don’t-look-back advice, they might want to examine the consequences of Clinton’s decision in 1993-94 to help the Republicans sweep the Reagan-Bush scandals under the rug. Most of what Clinton hoped for – bipartisanship and support for his domestic policies – never materialized.

‘Politicized’ CIA
After winning Election 1992, Clinton also rebuffed appeals from members of the U.S. intelligence community to reverse the Reagan-Bush “politicization” of the CIA’s analytical division by rebuilding the ethos of objective analysis even when it goes against a President’s desires.

Instead, in another accommodating gesture, Clinton gave the CIA director’s job to right-wing Democrat, James Woolsey, who had close ties to the Reagan-Bush administration and especially to its neoconservatives.

One senior Democrat told me Clinton picked Woolsey as a reward to the neocon-leaning editors of the New Republic for backing Clinton in Election 1992.

“I told that the New Republic hadn’t brought them enough votes to win a single precinct,” the senior Democrat said. “But they kept saying that they owed this to the editors of the New Republic.”

During his tenure at the CIA, Woolsey did next to nothing to address the CIA’s “politicization” issue, intelligence analysts said. Woolsey also never gained Clinton’s confidence and – after several CIA scandals – was out of the job by January 1995.

At the time of that White House chat with Stuart Sender, Clinton thought that his see-no-evil approach toward the Reagan-Bush era would give him an edge in fulfilling his campaign promise to “focus like a laser beam” on the economy.

He was taking on other major domestic challenges, too, like cutting the federal deficit and pushing a national health insurance plan developed by First Lady Hillary Clinton.

So for Clinton, learning the truth about controversial deals between the Reagan-Bush crowd and the autocratic governments of Iraq and Iran just wasn’t on the White House radar screen. Clinton also wanted to grant President George H.W. Bush a gracious exit.

“I wanted the country to be more united, not more divided,” Clinton explained in his 2004 memoir, My Life. “President Bush had given decades of service to our country, and I thought we should allow him to retire in peace, leaving the (Iran-Contra) matter between him and his conscience.”

Unexpected Results
Clinton’s generosity to George H.W. Bush and the Republicans, of course, didn’t turn out as he had hoped. Instead of bipartisanship and reciprocity, he was confronted with eight years of unrelenting GOP hostility, attacks on both his programs and his personal reputation.

Later, as tensions grew in the Middle East, the American people and even U.S. policymakers were flying partially blind, denied anything close to the full truth about the history of clandestine relationships between the Reagan-Bush team and hostile nations in the Middle East.

Clinton’s failure to expose that real history also led indirectly to the restoration of Bush Family control of the White House in 2001. Despite George W. Bush’s inexperience as a national leader, he drew support from many Americans who remembered his father’s presidency fondly.

If the full story of George H.W. Bush’s role in secret deals with Iraq and Iran had ever been made public, the Bush Family’s reputation would have been damaged to such a degree that George W. Bush’s candidacy would not have been conceivable.

Not only did Clinton inadvertently clear the way for the Bush restoration, but the Right’s political ascendancy wiped away much of the Clinton legacy, including a balanced federal budget and progress on income inequality. A poorly informed American public also was easily misled on what to do about U.S. relations with Iraq and Iran.

In retrospect, Clinton’s tolerance of Reagan-Bush cover-ups was a lose-lose-lose – the public was denied information it needed to understand dangerous complexities in the Middle East, George W. Bush built his presidential ambitions on the nation’s fuzzy memories of his dad, and Republicans got to enact a conservative agenda.

Clinton’s approach also reflected a lack of appreciation for the importance of truth in a democratic Republic. If the American people are expected to do their part in making sure democracy works, they need to be given at least a chance of being an informed electorate.

Yet, Clinton – and now some pro-Iraq War Democrats – view truth as an expendable trade-off when measured against political tactics or government policies. In reality, accurate information about important events is the lifeblood of democracy.

Though sometimes the truth can hurt, Clinton and the Democrats should understand that covering up the truth can hurt even more. As Clinton’s folly with the Reagan-Bush scandals should have taught, the Democrats may hurt themselves worst of all when helping the Republicans cover up the truth.

[Gabi Hayes]

23. ha....saw the Robert Parry post, and clicked right to it. I should have

known it was you!

keep it up.

I've been reading Parry's stuff since 92

[AntiFascist]

39. K&R, very important! Also look at what's happened to the budget surplus...

gained from the Clinton era.

[blm]

42. It's now in the bank accounts of various BushInc loyalists.

And being used AGAINST us.

[SoCalDem]

48. Poof... straight into the bank accounts of Bush cronies

It's what republicans DO.. They lay back and wait until the mess the previous group of them created, is cleaned up..and the coffers re-stocked...and then they swoop in a "liberate" all that cash...

Democrats have been cleaning up republican messes since Coolidge

[pberq]

44. thanks for posting this article - Robert Parry was on Democracy Now! today

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/11/09/1444242

One of the best shows I have seen. Between Robert and Mel Goodman, an amazing amount of information about Robert Gates' role in Iran-Contra, and much more.

[blm]

45. Thanks - I will watch it. Robert Parry is hard to ignore on this story, but no doubt

the corpmedia will not call him as an expert reporter on this story. And the establishment Democrats won't want him out there speaking in MSM, either.

[porphyrian]

7. They deserve a fair trial, but they deserve a fair trial. - n/t

[chaska]

9. I see a good cop, bad cop thing starting to develop....

And that can be a good thing if we play it right. Let them play nice up there, but we need to keep the pressure on them. And let us not forget, it's very important that we don't, THE ELECTION SEASON FOR '08 HAS BEGUN. Be tough, but be smart.

[Generator]

10. It's like deja vu

Iran Contra again! They tried to undermine Congress back in Reagan's time and basically got away with it. So this CIA Iran-Contra, daddy's buddy is going to fix Iraq? Iran Contra reminded me they have ZERO respect for congress, checks and balances. They SO wish they could be dictators.

What is happening here? James Baker and Henry Kissinger. Can we ever move forward or do we just get to recycle the same old criminals decade after decade? Can America evolve? Another Vietnam. Another president that is SURE to resign in lieu of being impeached. (oh yes!) So corrupt this country is that it staggers the mind.

[SoCalDem]

11. They will NEVER go away until they are Done in..

they have to be humiliated and ruined..

They do it easily to OUR side, and yet we always stop just short of the final step..

They must be pardon-proof though for it to matter..

[Solly Mack]

12. Bravo!!! Beware those who call for a false sense of healing

Much like the false sense of security surrendering your rights brings, a false sense of healing is just as damaging - just as deadly. Just as stupid.


It's easy for those who have not suffered the losses - who have not felt the agony - brought on by the war criminals in the Bush Regime, to call for a phony healing - a healing without justice, without accountability.

If you're not the one being tortured, bombed or detained, you can tell yourself singing Kumbaya makes it all better.

If you're not the one sending a loved one off to war, or burying them after they are slaughtered for lies, then I guess being safely removed from the realities allows you the comfort of pretending it's not that bad.

Self-deluding, feel good, warm and fuzzy sentiments don't stop the injustices - actions do.

The words mean nothing without the actions.

And if anyone expects those who have born the brunt of Bush's policy to "just get over it" - well, they have another think coming.

They won't forget. Ever.

No justice. No peace. No healing.

The anger at America now is nothing compared to the anger coming if the Bush Regime is allowed to go free.

People can forgive when they feel justice has been achieved - but deny them justice and they will tell their children, who will tell their grandchildren - and the anger festers and spreads from generation to generation.

If people believe chickens come home to roost, then they need to understand that the chickens that will come home to an America that allows war criminals to go free will bring nothing but death and destruction.

We can seek justice now or pay the price later - and it will be a very steep price.

This is about what kind of America we will leave future generations...

The kind that holds the criminals in government accountable

or the kind that wants to ignore the crimes of government for a false sense of "healing" - no matter how big of a price we have to pay later.


**************************************************************************************

- for those who choose to mischaracterize a call for accountability as being a call for no investigations -

Hello!!! - DUH!! - investigations are an inherent part of holding someone accountable

[blm]

28. THANKYOU for the BOTTOM LINE TRUTH - - I hope more eyeballs see it, Solly.

It deserves its own thread, just so I can recommend it.

[Solly Mack]

33. Thank you, blm

I honestly don't expect America to hold the Bush Regime accountable - but I will continue to demand justice.

I would not be the least bit surprised if Lee Hamilton was named to a "special" committee to investigate the Bush Regime. I can't help feeling this way - I've seen all the signs before and they all lead to cover up, more lies, and no accountability.

If the people don't stop this revolving door thuggery now, we might not ever get the chance to again.

[blm]

34. I agree this is our LAST CHANCE. You should gather what you've seen over last 30 yrs and EXPLAIN

it in a post to the many here at DU who just haven't been able to grasp the whole picture.

Explain the signs of Dem capitulation and coverup, so that when it comes down, they will understand and FIGHT it.

I have been sorriest for not paying ENOUGH attention back then when patriots like you were in the streets over IranContra because you understood it EARLY and knew it needed to be fought in the name of the Constitution and democracy itself. I will never let it happen again. I don't care how unpopular it makes me here at DU.

[Solly Mack]

36. I don't deserve such credit

I witnessed Iran Contra unfold in a state of stunned horror.

Yes, I spoke out against Reagan and Bush well before Iran Contra was exposed but I was still stunned by the magnitude of it's implications. Odd, considering Nixon and Cointelpro...to be be stilled stunned, but I was..

Yes, I screamed and wrote letters and demanded justice...but I didn't do enough.

Government will never ever hold itself accountable - because all too often when the finger of blame gets pointed, it hits all over. The guilty will always protect the guilty - otherwise just how corrupt the system is will be exposed.

Yes, it needs to be exposed. Yes, America would be a better country should that happen....but I don't think it ever will.

House cards kind of thing...the corruption webs into all aspects of government and business

but we could build a much better house if we would just admit our government is broken and then get busy replacing the rotten parts...and never - ever - allow the rot to return.

I swear some in government foster the idea that exposing government corruption hurts America simply because they themselves are corrupt...they foster the idea that sending a President to prison hurts America because they know such a President isn't the only one guilty. The finger of blame thing again...if you point it, someone will tell on you too...so to save your ass, you protect others.

I want to be wrong, blm. I want to be so wrong. I want to believe America is better than that. I want it with all my heart.

[blm]

37. That's a good start for exactly what needs to be said - please lead the younger ones here, Solly

You are a wise and experienced voice here. People will listen when they hear your earnest voice. It comes through in all of your postings.

Seeing what is going on the past few months is making me sicker than ever, because I can see the coverup beginning so clearly. I expect that is what you have noticed too and explains the increased urgency in your own posts.

[baby_mouse]

13. You know...

I think you've convinced me... :-)

[earth mom]

14. We can't allow any of them to go back to playing politics as usual...

or we will be back in the same boat and the two parties may as well be the same one.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2662784

[SoCalDem]

16. Poppy thought he would have 8 years, but Clinton ended that dream

That's what started the "feud"..

He hunkered down in Texas (getting daily CIA briefings) and plotted his "revenge".. We are LIVING with that revenge...

Anyone who does not see GHWB's greasy handprints all over this admin, is blind..

*² couldn't even pick his own vice president or any of the staffers.. They were ALL holdovers from Poppy (or even before that)

Does anyone really think that these guys will go quietly into the night??

They never do..

[blm]

17. I don't think so. Poppy also thought he would get impeached when those diaries popped up

and as long as Clinton would agree to not pursue or support any further investigations of IranContra, BCCI and Iraqgate when he took office, Bush could still run the BFEE division of loyalists within the CIA.

Clinton obliged. Robert Parry analyzes that decision in an above post.

[SoCalDem]

21. I don;t think Clinton's hands were totally clean, but i think Poppy expected to win

and when he did not, you can bet he was not "done"..

No one get to the top with a clean conscience..

[blm]

35. In Poppy's book he admits he expected to be impeached.

I thought it was the most honest moment in his book.

[Maven]

15. K/R. This should be recommended at least 170 times.

;)

[blm]

29. Same here - this should be the most recommended thread on the board right now.

.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

18. They are THE FRICKIN' UNDEAD!

I mentioned this very point on another threat -- we need to drive a stake through them otherwise we are looking at their resurrection at a future time.

I don't know about you, but I do not relish 8 years of President Jeb Bush. :puke:

Crush them NOW before it is too late.

[smomfr]

19. Nancy should have said ¨we´re going to pump out the septic

tank¨.

[nicknameless]

22. Are Dems going to prove rethugs were right -- that they're "soft on crime"?

These rethugs are career criminals. They've robbed this country blind, are responsible for countless American deaths, the loss of an entire city, the World Trade Center buildings, the Pentagon damage, etc. ad nauseam.

Will the Democratic party leaders do the right thing and prosecute these crimes to fullest extent of the law?
Or will they cave like a bunch of worms, singing kumbaya and selling American citizens out once again?

You're correct that the only way to deter these criminals is through punishment -- prison and fines.
IMO, some of them should never see the light of day again.

Thank you for posting this!

:grr: indeed.

[blm]

66. Oh man - you should put that in a thread - GREAT FRAMING!

.

[nicknameless]

70. Thanks

I might just do that.

:)

[Nickster]

25. EXACTLY! Go one step further back, Watergate. The same people popped right

back up from the ashes of Watergate because of Ford pardoning Nixon. We can't let these weasels to remain walking around ready to seize power again.

http://www.watergate.info/ford/pardon.shtml

[SoCalDem]

26. I wish we could do something about pardons..

A president should not have the power to pardon people in his own admin..and I think pardons should be for "clearing a name", and not avoidance of jail time or prosecution for a crime..



________________________________

hey Dad, put Mr Baker on the phone

[tomp]

60. absolutely. so contrary to principles of justice.

these "willy hortons" should be used against them. recidivists! repeat offenders!

[Canuckistanian]

38. It should be a precondition of working in any high government office

NO CRIMINAL RECORD. Unless you're pardoned by a judge for sound legal reasons.

Do you think you could get a job with the police with a criminal record? Be a teacher?
Pilot a plane? Be a banker?

Of course not.

Then why can people with criminal records take jobs with even more responsibility?

[blm]

43. Or NO PARDONS for anyone indicted for a CRIME COMMITTED IN OFFICE.

That would settle that, wouldn't it?

[SoCalDem]

65. That's why Ford did not get elected..

[Lars39]

31. K&R

Thank you,SoCalDem.

[agincourt]

46. Kick

The Republican party is nest of crimminals who have been treated nice for too long.

[Cleita]

47. Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!

Corruption of any kind should not be rewarded. I am willing to forgive after an investigation leading to a confession, and forget after a prison term.

[bobbolink]

49. thanks! REcommended, and printed to share!

You've expressed this in such a cogent way, that I'm handing this out to all who are harboring *any* doubts about impeachment, or thumb screws..

Thanks!

:applause:

[Pooka Fey]

50. YES - K&R

[Karenina]

51. K&R!

:kick:

[robbedvoter]

52. Iran Cintra unindicted conspirators run the show now

Gates guy and the bunch of them.
Do not let them come up for air again!

[tomp]

54. agree 100%, and who is responsible?

if the dems had control of congress, who let the iran-contragaters off the hook?

that's why it turns my stomach to see clinton and bush I being so chummy these days.

[blm]

55. And why corpmedia is pushing for Clinton2 to coverup for Bush2, yet AGAIN.

.

[tomp]

57. you may be exactly right.

which is why i plan to give clinton, schumer and rangel (my reps) my views on the matter in no uncertain terms. though i don't have much hope for real justice.

[blm]

67. Is it just coincidence the same Dems who targeted Dean and Kerry are the same COVERUP Dems

who worked on the first coverup Clinton administration?

I think Schumer and Rangel like many Dems are just pawns for the Clintons and the Bushes.

[tomp]

71. i don't trust shumer or rangel either.

and no, i don't think it's a coincidence.

[BlooInBloo]

56. And Vietnam.

[tomp]

58. YES!!!!!!!

wow, this group really gets it. best thread on du in a long time.

[tomp]

59. i've been saying this from my early days at du

america has not learned yet. we need to go back and sum up all the lessons and apply them now. we need to hold "our" party to right action in this matter and hold them accountable.

THIS is the #1 priority. here, now, we will see who is really with us. if it doesn't happen now we're on our own.

[nam78_two]

61. K&R/nt

[InvisibleTouch]

62. Which is exactly why I posted this yesterday:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2659619&mesg_id=2659619

Didn't get much of a response, maybe the timing was bad. So here's a bit of a gratuitous self-kick. :)

[SoCalDem]

63. Well.. If you notice the date on the post within the post it's REALLY old

Lots of us know this is necessary..Now if we can only get our representatives to take us seriously :hi:

[robinlynne]

64. You are right. Otherwise we become a part of their evil game.

[tlsmith1963]

68. I Know This Won't Make Me Popular, But...

...I think we need to hold off on impeachment for now. The Republicans were thrown out because they over-reached. Because of the sellout media, the American people don't know enough about Bushco's crimes. They really don't strongly think he should be impeached because they have never had enough information. People who know things have been afraid to speak out. Now that the criminals no longer control Congress, these individuals may be more willing to tell what they know. Let things play out. I think we are about to get a lot of new information. And once we do, the American public will *demand* impeachment. I want impeachment, too, but I want us to do this right. I want us to win big in '08 because I *never* want these fascist creeps to come to power again.

[SoCalDem]

69. I am not advocating impeachment. There are better ways to deal

with these folks.

Investigations, unearthing of FACTS.and discrediting them once and for all..

I think impeachment (the formal kind0 would be a waste of time.

I want these freaks all under OATH, spewing their lies or taking the 5th..I want it on tape/film/digital-whatever....for posterity, so that when they re-emerge from the crypt in a few years, we will be able to make them dress up in their coats of shameful colors.

I do not want them "pre-pardoned" and sent out on the lecture circuit to recruit for their next incarnation