Gary Sick is a conspiracy nut who pushes the October Surprise theory. Even he doesn't claim that North played a part in the October surprise itself or worked with Iran during the Ford adm.
As for the October Surprise:
Senate Investigation
The US Senate’s 1992 report concluded that "by any standard, the credible evidence now known falls far short of supporting the allegation of an agreement between the Reagan campaign and Iran to delay the release of the hostages".[7]
[edit] House of Representatives Investigation
The House of Representatives’ 1993 report concluded “there is no credible evidence supporting any attempt by the Reagan presidential campaign—or persons associated with the campaign—to delay the release of the American hostages in Iran”. The task force Chairman Lee Hamilton also added that the vast majority of the sources and material reviewed by the committee were "wholesale fabricators or were impeached by documentary evidence." The report also expressed the belief that several witnesses had committed perjury during their sworn statements to the committee, among them Richard Brenneke,[8] who claimed to be a CIA agent.[9]
The Village Voice
Retired CIA analyst and counter-intelligence officer Frank Snepp of The Village Voice compiled several investigations of Sick’s allegations in 1992, and concluded that almost every single statement Sick made, and all the witnesses he had used turned out to be false or lying. Snepp alleged that Sick had only interviewed half of the sources used in his book, and supposedly relied on hearsay from unreliable sources for large amounts of critical material. According to Snepp, not one of Sick’s sources had any direct knowledge of the alleged plot. Snepp also discovered that in 1989, Sick had sold the rights to his book to Oliver Stone, who had refused to turn it into a movie. After going through evidence presented by Richard Brenneke, Snepp asserted that Brenneke’s credit card receipts showed him to be staying at a motel in Seattle, during the time he claimed to be in Paris observing the secret meeting[10
....
Newsweek magazine also ran an investigation, and they too found most if not all the charges made to be groundless. Specifically, Newsweek found little evidence that the United States had transferred arms to Iran prior to Iran Contra, was able to account for George Bush’s whereabouts when he was allegedly at the Paris meeting, and found little corroboration when Sick’s witnesses were interviewed separately. Newsweek also alleged that the story was being heavily pushed within the LaRouche Movement[12]
[edit] The New Republic
Steven Emerson and Jesse Furman of the The New Republic, also looked into the allegations and found “the conspiracy as currently postulated is a total fabrication”. They were unable to verify any of the evidence presented by Sick and supporters, finding them to be inconsistent and contradictory in nature. They also pointed out that nearly every witness of Sick had either been indicted or were under investigation by the Department of Justice. Like the Newsweek investigation they had also debunked the claims of Reagan election campaign officials being in Paris during the timeframe Sick claimed they had been, contradicting Sick’s sources.[13]
en.wikipedia.org
Apparently the October Surprise conspiracy theory, as discredited as it is, isn't good enough. You have to make up new allegations of your own that North was involved not just in Iran-Contra (true) but was involved in something nefarious with Iran a decade earlier.
Great job. Next tell us how Oliver North was involved in Watergate and the assassination of JFK. |
