And in actual fact, Mr. Walsh, examination of the 1978
agreement re my authority as SPECIAL DIPLOMATIC ADVISER TO THE
U.S. PRESIDENT would substantiate that it was a written
condition of this agreement that the authority could only be
terminated by the U.S. President by advising me of such a
decision directly in a written form or face-to-face.
I believe said agreement will also reveal that this condition is
phrased to reflect the related condition that the authority as
held by me would continue beyond President
Carter's term of office according to steps taken to ensure
this with members of the American Republican Party--including
Ronald Reagan.
Mr. Walsh, i read a column by Allan Fotheringham in the September 2, 1987 edition of Vancouver's newspaper The Province titled, "'Hero' Ollie's going to the slammer for sure", that reports the scrupulous care you have taken to avoid listening to the U.S. Congressional Iran-Contra Committee Hearings or reading any newspaper reports about them or seeing any television report about them which would prejudice your decisions as INDEPENDENT SPECIAL PROSECUTOR. (As it happens, i met Mr. Fotheringham in 1978, and recall making a disclosure to the newspaper he then worked for because President Carter permitted press awareness of my work and i considered one to them would be appropriate.) I'm mentioning this and certain other matters which would at first appear to be contrary to your goals as noted here in this statement to you because if the authority of SPECIAL DIPLOMATIC ADVISER TO THE U.S. PRESIDENT or SENIOR ADVISER TO THE YEAR OF THE CHILD haven't been "terminated" properly--it seems to me that if you haven't been made aware of the documents cited in this statement and aren't able to use them as INDEPENDENT SPECIAL PROSECUTOR, there may be an attempt underway to lay foundations for mistrials or appeals of convictions from your prosecutions in future based upon the fact that it's hard to justify prosecutions and convictions for past wrongdoings...if they were part of practices and policymaking which continue to date without restriction or such prosecutions of those who continue these practices.
I pause here for you to consider this as a qualified and experienced expert in the field of the judiciary.
As i point out on 1. of
this statement to you, Mr. Walsh, already certain
individuals accused of wrongdoings have attempted to justify
their actions, particularly the arms sales to Iran, by relating
what they did to "concerns" for the hostages.
And included among those who have claimed such "concerns" has
been President Reagan himself.
As i write, there are still more than 20 hostages being held in
Lebanon.
While it may superficially appear that the potential obstacle to
your successful prosecutions would be surmountable if i were to
resign my authorities of SPECIAL DIPLOMATIC ADVISER TO THE U.S.
PRESIDENT and SENIOR ADVISER TO THE YEAR OF THE CHILD, appearing
to end this 'escape clause' for the wrongdoers--that would not
alleviate that the circumstances relevant to their cases would
extend to the actual moment of acceptance of such
resignations by the appropriate authorities.
And in terms of evidence really applying to the issues involved
but unrelated to the prosecutions, i frankly think you would
find, after evaluating the documents i suggest presently, that
it never was the arms sales to Iran which secured
David Jacobsen's freedom--just as it wasn't any arms
sales to Iran in 1980 which introduced the "non-interference"
proposal that ensuingly led to the breakthrough shift in
emphases in the negotiations' objectives and accordingly--the
hostages' freedom.
Thus, Mr. Walsh, to permit such misconceptions to
continue is to endanger the lives of the remaining hostages as
there can be no effected reinforcement of the credibility of
those countries of origin of the hostages if they permit
wrongdoers (known to the hostage-holders) to justify their
mistakes at the expense of the innocent hostages.
In effect, Mr. Walsh, if they do try to justify their
wrongs by relating them to the hostages, it would seem they
expect their freedom instead of the hostages'
freedom.
With all due respect for those who originally contributed to
and are represented by the body of my work, and certainly with
all due respect for your goals as INDEPENDENT SPECIAL
PROSECUTOR, i regard it as essential that the "commitment" to
the truth epitomized by it be maintained and that these facts be
brought to your attention now.
TAKE YOUR NEXT FOOTSTEP HERE TO SEE PAGE 6. OF THE FIRST STATEMENT TO LAWRENCE WALSH.