# Oliver North SOF Book Out Now



## Smurf (Jan 30, 2011)

Saw this at Barnes and Nobles the other day- looks like it's really well done; good read, lots of info and great pics in it.

http://www.bhpublishinggroup.com/fidelis/books.asp?p=9780805447125


----------



## Burr (Jan 31, 2011)

I added it to my wish list, maybe next month!


----------



## ÉIREGOBRÁCH1922 (Feb 1, 2011)

Looks like an interesting read.


----------



## HOLLiS (Feb 1, 2011)

What he was when he was a BNG LT:


----------



## Ravage (Feb 2, 2011)

Read the reviews, the book got mixed opinions.


----------



## Marauder06 (Feb 2, 2011)

What's Oliver North's credibility?  Other than being busted for lying to Congress?  Asking because I don't know.


----------



## HOLLiS (Feb 2, 2011)

Graduated from the USN Academy.   Was in 3/3 in 1969 plt leader in RVN..  Protected the President in the Iran Contra Affair.   Was a Lt Col or Col when he left the Marines.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Feb 2, 2011)

He was a LTC and was made a scapegoat during the 80's, he ended up with major felony convictions that were later overturned. He was involved in funneling funds through covert means into groups we were supporting in South America, and he was possibly involved with the sale of weapons and drugs for the same means.

I think he was made to be a fall guy and he took like a man IMO.


----------



## DA SWO (Feb 2, 2011)

JAB said:


> He was a LTC and was made a scapegoat during the 80's, he ended up with major felony convictions that were later overturned. He was involved in funneling funds through covert means into groups we were supporting in South America, and he was possibly involved with the sale of weapons and drugs for the same means.
> 
> I think he was made to be a fall guy and he took like a man IMO.



He also came up with the plan to capture the achillio lareu thugs (though our friends the Italians gave them up).

He was a sharp individual, who saw the danger the Communists posed in Central America

He wasn't busted for lying, they  tried to nail him for accepting a security fence (after his family had been threatened).
FWIW- There was misconduct by at least one juror who said (in an interview) that the prosecutor hadn't proven his case, but they thought he was guilty of something; so the jury found him guilty on the lowest charge presented.


----------



## Marauder06 (Feb 3, 2011)

> He wasn't busted for lying, they tried to nail him for accepting a security fence (after his family had been threatened).



Was that the security fence to protect against a then-little-known terrorist group called Al Qaeda?


----------



## Polar Bear (Feb 3, 2011)

Marauder06 said:


> What's Oliver North's credibility? Other than being busted for lying to Congress? Asking because I don't know.



You are as old as I am, you don't remember the coverage? .....He did not lie


----------



## DA SWO (Feb 3, 2011)

Marauder06 said:


> Was that the security fence to protect against a then-little-known terrorist group called Al Qaeda?



It may have been.


----------



## Marauder06 (Feb 4, 2011)

Polar Bear said:


> You are as old as I am, you don't remember the coverage? .....He did not lie



Wasn't he convicted for lying to Congress?  Or am I confusing him with someone else?

Edit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_North




> During the hearings, North admitted that he had lied to Congress, for which, among other things, he was later charged.


----------



## HOLLiS (Feb 4, 2011)

"During the hearings, North admitted that he had lied to Congress, for  which, among other things, he was later charged. He defended his actions  by stating that he believed in the goal of aiding the Contras, whom he  saw as freedom fighters, and said that he viewed the Iran-Contra scheme as a "neat idea"'

If you missed out on what was happening at the time, the political climate in the US in relation to Iran and Nicaragua, I might be able to explain it.   He protected the President and served the US, something that many of the members of congress seems to fail to do and was failing to do it then.    One might said, he took the bullet for the President.

Because many do not understand what was going and tend to go along with the partisan BS and propaganda at the time,  they will tell you that the US Support Saddam in the Iran/Iraq war,  which was far from the actual fact.  The Iran/Contra affair was all a part of that.   Not much different than President Roosevelt supporting Britain before the US was actually officially at war with Nazi Germany.  The political climate at the time, was to do the wrong thing.


----------



## Scotth (Feb 4, 2011)

Don't sugar coat it.  He sold 500 TOW missles to IRAN and used the proceeds to fund an illegal war in Central America that defied an act of Congress.  If you read Micheal Smith's Killer Elite North is also blamed for blocking rescue attempts for the 7 people taken hostage in Lebanon at the time.  North didn't want a rescue attempt to screw up his deal with the Iranian's.

Admiral Poindexter fell on the sword to protect the President and said it never went above him.  North didn't protect the President.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Feb 4, 2011)

Scotth said:


> Don't sugar coat it. He sold 500 TOW missles to IRAN and used the proceeds to fund an illegal war in Central America that defied an act of Congress. If you read Micheal Smith's Killer Elite North is also blamed for blocking rescue attempts for the 7 people taken hostage in Lebanon at the time. North didn't want a rescue attempt to screw up his deal with the Iranian's.
> 
> Admiral Poindexter fell on the sword to protect the President and said it never went above him. North didn't protect the President.



Thats a shit load of pull for a O5 LTC don't you think? Just sayin.


----------



## Scotth (Feb 4, 2011)

JAB said:


> Thats a shit load of pull for a O5 LTC don't you think? Just sayin.



I agree.  I don't think it stopped at even North's bosses desk either.  I don't think two military men go off reservation with out higher approval but Poindexter did what he had to do to save the POTUS and took responsibility.


----------



## HOLLiS (Feb 4, 2011)

1) partisan Politics............. anything to shame Reagan
2) In the US, supporting Iran would be the political kiss of death for the politician not the country
3) allowing Iran to fall into the Soviet Sphere of influence would have grave military consequences in the region.
4) With the GC executing 30-50,000 leftest in Iran post civil war, The SU would give Saddam the go ahead.

Saddam was a lackey of the SU.  He know with the seizing of the US embassy, Iran was alone.  Iran would receive no support from the West and with  SU backing Saddam had a easy victory.    Again Saddam proved he was not a very good general or Cpt or butter bar when it came to leading his country.

The West supported Iran but had to do it, with the public knowing it.

BTW,  KGB/Stasi was everywhere the CIA was,  People tend to forget about the KGB global involvement.

So it boiled down to........... somebody had a job to do that was politically suicidal.

IN 1985,  the US offered the hand of friendship to Iran.  By then the Iranian were able to reverse Iraqi military gains and instead of thanking the West, told the West to piss off.   Aid was stopped, the war lingered at a stand still for about another 3 years.  About 1,000,000 lives lost.

Aftermath:
Pretty much establishing that the GC can never be trusted.
North is a fair game political target. For liberals he is a traitor and for conservatives he is a hero.  IMHO, he just did his job.
People still think we supported Saddam
The SU is no more
Saddam is no more
Soviet sphere of influence is over.
New turds rise from the toilet bowl to try to replace Saddam, the SU and ???


----------



## Scotth (Feb 4, 2011)

By all accounts I have read Iran/Contra had nothing to do with supporting Iran. Reagan had 2 goals driving this mess. 1. Was fighting communism and supporting the Contra in that process. 2. was getting the 7 hostage held in Lebanon back. They sold TOW and HAWK missles from Isreal's stockpiles to Iran in exchange for Iran using there influence to free the hostages. The problem was after the first couple shipments of missles the hostage takers released 3 hostages but 3 more people were kidnapped in the process. At that time Isreal feared Iraq more than Iran and happily joined in on the sale.

North wasn't a partisan issue. The issue is he broke the law in many ways. Namely they broke laws on arms shipments, on diverting public money, on funding an organization in direct contradiction of laws, failed to report there actions for congressional oversite and then shredded documents to cover up there illegal activity. The only reason North wasn't charge with a whole boat load of felonies and beat the charges he was convicted of on appeal was congress stupidily gave Poindexter and North immunity.

The Independent Councel Report:
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/walsh/

The one good thing North gave us was a hot secretary.

The good old days of big hair.:)


----------



## HOLLiS (Feb 4, 2011)

> The only reason North wasn't charge with a whole boat load of felonies  and beat the charges on appeal was Congress stupidily gave Poindexter  and North immunity.


........................

Congress is not that stupid...............


----------



## Scotth (Feb 4, 2011)

HOLLiS said:


> ........................
> 
> Congress is not that stupid...............



Take a look at the economy and the national debt and tell me that again.


----------



## Ravage (Feb 5, 2011)

So anybody read the book yet?


----------



## Polar Bear (Feb 5, 2011)

Marauder06 said:


> Wasn't he convicted for lying to Congress? Or am I confusing him with someone else?
> 
> Edit:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_North



He might of been convicted but it does not mean he is guilty


----------



## SpitfireV (Feb 5, 2011)

By definition it does.

You know, the legal system and all that.

Unless you're talking about innocence, which is something altogether different.


----------



## Scotth (Feb 5, 2011)

North was convicted of three minor charges but it was over-turned on appeal. Basically the appeals court said the case against him were indirectly built on the testimony he gave to congress while he was under immunity. He was guilty as hell and admitted to it all because he had immunity. There is no doubt of his wrong doing.

From the Independent Council Report:


> 45 Ibid., pp. 7196-97.
> North testified that he had $15,000 in cash in a metal box bolted to a closet floor in his home, saved from pocket change and a decades-old insurance settlement.46 This, North said, was the source of funds for a car he bought in October 1985. North could not explain why he paid for the car in two cash payments -- the second after North had visited Secord. He said he could not recall the October 1985 payment.47
> 46 Ibid., pp. 7145-49.
> 47 Ibid., pp. 7145-53.
> ...


_
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/walsh/chap_02.htm

Not to mention he admitted shredding documents and he took classified document as well among the many other things he did._


----------



## HOLLiS (Feb 6, 2011)

I guess the term clandestine is elusive to you.   There is a reason for clandestine operations.   The mob can not handle it and partisan political opponents will use it again a person, even if it jeopardizes national security.

1) Iran needed the aid
2) Sandanistas needed to be gone
3) cold war, well we found out a few years later,  We Won!
4) and the political environment in the US would have none of it.

Were mistakes made,  "To er is to human"  Or " Even the best laid plans of mice and men often goes astray"  (or something like that)

Still even better, "I voted for the war before I voted against the war"  JK.


----------



## Scotth (Feb 6, 2011)

Clandestine op's doesn't make it ok to break laws.  It's not ok to be running clandestine op's out of the White House to avoid congressional oversight.  It's actually a very serious power grab by the Executive Branch and a serious blow to our countries shared powers principles that was setup in the constitution and circumvents the checks and balances that were built into our system by our founding fathers.  Clandestine op's doesn't make it ok to destroy documents and emails to hide your crimes.  By the very nature of a cover up your admitting what you did was wrong.

Could Clinton have said the hummer he got was a clandestine op and it was ok to lie about it?


----------



## HOLLiS (Feb 6, 2011)

Where you ever in the military?   What laws?  Do you know that the jurisdiction of US Laws are limited and only enforceable in those jurisdictions?   BTW what law school did you graduate from?  Clinton jerking off or using a aid a sexual toy is not clandestine operation, let's not play with words.

People say it is illegal to use a Drone to take out a enemy combatant (AKA terrorist)   They call it assassination, murder and other terms that imply illegality,  IMHO it is damn good shooting.   They say the same about snipers too.   I also say, "damn good shooting."

Shared powers, seem as you mention congress and E branch did not care,  obviously the third branch the SCOTUS does not care either,  but you care?  Are you the self defender of the balance of power?  when the E-branch, Congress and SCOTUS chose not to do anything?

Cover up  only means a cover up,  what you attribute to it, is your call.   IMHO, partisan political dia-tripe is just that.  We have plenty of politicians who would sacrifice this country, the men and women who honorably serve it to advance their careers.

I would have been honored to have been the criminal (your accusation) that Lt. Col North was.


----------



## Scotth (Feb 6, 2011)

Your right I am no lawyer but I can read. I have linked the independent counsel's report on the matter several time in this thread. He is a lawyer and he did get a lot of convictions for what happened during Iran/Contra and his report does out-line much of what happened, as far as he could prove. It's not my opinion that North was a criminal it's the historical record that says he is and much of it by his own words.  Because of the grant of immunity he avoided jail time but it doesn't change the legality of his actions.

You can say Iran/Contra was partisan just like impeaching Clinton was partisan. At the end of the day Clinton was guilty of lying and North and a bunch of other people were guilty for doing what they did. Partisanship in the process doesn't change the facts of what they did.


----------



## HOLLiS (Feb 6, 2011)

One can say anything.   BTW why do you think lawyers will tell you, "This is my opinion"  they do not state it as fact.   No it is your interpretation of the So called historical record.    Just like the same historical record that people claimed we supported Saddam.  We never did.

Look at POTUS, prior the election all the slamming of Bush about Gitmo.   "Elect me" and Gitmo will be closed.    He is elected and say," "Wwe will review Gitmo for a year."  That means the reality of Gitmo and the partisan political BS just collided.  I told people then,  "Gitmo is not going to be closed".      So where is all the excitement for the past TWO years on closing Gitmo?

So is POTUS a war criminal for keeping Gitmo open, like Bush was?   No, reality, those tangos are something no body wants.  Outside of exiting out a C130 at 20,000 ft over the Atlantic,  Gitmo is where they will say.   None of the opponents to Gitmo wants them either.   Same with North a political football.

Believe as you want.   North served his country and did what most people would not do.  Needed to be done.  Just like most Viet-Nam vets, the "so called historical records" paint them as evil too.


----------



## TLDR20 (Feb 6, 2011)

HOLLiS, Scott is making the point that what he did was illegal. Just because it is illegal does not always make it wrong. To me if a father of a raped and murdered little girl kills the murderer/rapist, it is not wrong. But it is illegal right? I think you are confusing right and legal. What Oliver North did might have been "right" but it was most certainly illegal.


----------



## HOLLiS (Feb 6, 2011)

cback0220 said:


> HOLLiS, Scott is making the point that what he did was illegal. Just because it is illegal does not always make it wrong. To me if a father of a raped and murdered little girl kills the murderer/rapist, it is not wrong. But it is illegal right? I think you are confusing right and legal. What Oliver North did might have been "right" but it was most certainly illegal.



I understand that.  But...  it takes a court to determine if a crime was committed and by whom.  Being accused is insufficient.  Maybe a legal technicality,  but if the law is the law,  then that is the way it is.

needed to add:

I think the correct term would be he is alleged.  Unless his was conviction was never vacated he is not quilty:

"Relief from judgment in the United States district courts is governed by Rule 60 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit noted that a vacated judgment "place the parties in the position of no trial having taken place at all." _United States v. Williams_, 904 F.2d 7, 8 (7th Cir. 1990)."


----------



## Scotth (Feb 6, 2011)

HOLLiS said:


> One can say anything. BTW why do you think lawyers will tell you, "This is my opinion" they do not state it as fact. No it is your interpretation of the So called historical record. Just like the same historical record that people claimed we supported Saddam. We never did.
> 
> Look at POTUS, prior the election all the slamming of Bush about Gitmo. "Elect me" and Gitmo will be closed. He is elected and say," "Wwe will review Gitmo for a year." That means the reality of Gitmo and the partisan political BS just collided. I told people then, "Gitmo is not going to be closed". So where is all the excitement for the past TWO years on closing Gitmo?
> 
> ...



Do you understand why North wasn't charged with the destroying government records and all the other things?  Even the three minor charges he was convicted of were all over-turned for one reason.  They gave him a Grant of Immunity to testify at the congressional hearings.  He couldn't be charged with a crime for anything he said then.

What I can't understand is the denial that what he did was illegal.  It's not opinion and speculation it's fact if you spend a little time reading Walsh's report.   I can understand if you think North did the things that needed be done and that makes him a hero in your book but you can't white wash away the facts of what happened and that laws were broken.


----------



## HOLLiS (Feb 6, 2011)

Scotth, I'll let you discuss this with a lawyer.     Seems you have a personal issue with North.  Clinton also lied to congress.  Judgment was vacated not over turned.  Also seems the law/courts don't share your same opinion.   You can post illegal all you want, but without a judgment, it is only meaningless  to slander.

This is as I understand the issue.

A legal search found this;



> He is not a convicted felon.  An appellate reversal vacates a  conviction.  The government could have retried the case, but chose not  to do so, because it could not have proved its case in light of the  appellate court's holding.  The record is not "erased" -- it shows a  conviction that was vacated, and charges that were thereafter dropped.


----------



## Polar Bear (Feb 7, 2011)

Scotth said:


> Clandestine op's doesn't make it ok to break laws.



Who's law?  Us? Whatever


----------



## Grey (Feb 7, 2011)

Ravage said:


> So anybody read the book yet?



Getting back to the topic of the actual book, I just picked it up after seeing this thread. So far it's good but thats as I expected, like the book Shadow Warriors, just with more current information and the like.


----------



## Kraut783 (Feb 10, 2011)

On the fence issue....he mentioned he was scared for his family due to AQ and named UBL as a threat.


----------



## RetPara (Feb 11, 2011)

Marauder06 said:


> Was that the security fence to protect against a then-little-known terrorist group called Al Qaeda?


 Abu Nidal....  AQ didn't come on the scene till after DS/DS....  damn kids....


----------



## Marauder06 (Feb 11, 2011)

Hm, looks like RetPara was right.

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/north.asp


----------



## Manolito (Feb 11, 2011)

I don't know the law and don't know the Iran Contra truth. What I do know is as a Lt he received Silver Star, Bronze Star, two purple hearts. For those that have been to the pentagon a LT COL is pretty common and does not carry a lot of authority in a world of senior officers. At this time the Commandant of the Corps didn't even have an office at the pentagon he was located off sight. I will never believe North was anything but a trusted man who did what he was told and loyal to a fault by protecting those he served.
If you lay down with dogs you are apt to get fleas.
Respectfully,
Bill


----------



## Marauder06 (Feb 12, 2011)

I didn't know about his combat decorations, that probably entitles him to a bit more respect than I was planning on giving him.  Some more sites about him that I found when checking out his awards:

http://www.olivernorth.com/
http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/north.asp
http://www.airborne-ranger.com/ranger/wannabees/OllieNorth.html


----------



## HOLLiS (Feb 12, 2011)

From what I know, North was liked by his Marines when he was in Kilo 3/3.   You can good Mutters Ridge, one of their hang outs when he was there.   It was easy to loose a company or two on Mutters Ridge.   3rd Marines also shared their TAO with 9th Marines.   9th Marines also had the infamous unit Bravo 1/9 AKA the Walking Dead.

BTW, this is first hand information.

Cam'on
Hollis
IIIMAF, L 3/3, I 3/3 1969.


----------



## SpitfireV (Feb 12, 2011)

He knew that coke was being shipped to his fellow citizens in the US.

That makes him a shitbag. You don't help a third world shithole at the expense of your own people.


----------



## HOLLiS (Feb 12, 2011)

SpitfireV said:


> He knew that coke was being shipped to his fellow citizens in the US.
> 
> That makes him a shitbag. You don't help a third world shithole at the expense of your own people.




Do you have a reliable source for that?


----------



## HOLLiS (Feb 12, 2011)

My interest is simple.  Not for North but for about 3 million Americans who for about 20 years lived under a dark shadow of innuendos and out right lies.  A war that cost about 65,000 American lives and a higher number of disable Americans.  The dark cloud also cover those men and women who served in out ally's forces in that war.

A good site:

http://www.25thaviation.org/johnkerry/id27.htm

In the US partisan politics rule.   For those of us who serve or had serve it is not the politician that we can trust.   When it gets down to it, it is only our own brothers and sisters that we can trust.

Lies and rumors are spread and those lies and rumors are echoed over the year where it seems they are no longer lies or rumors but fact.  When the Gulf War broke out, many Viet-Nam vets swore what happened to us would not happen to those who will fight.   Support the troops.......... is still be echoed, but is it?

When we can not separate fact from rumor, fact from lie, and people jump to conclusions then yes, this war will be just like the Viet-Nam war.

For me, it is simple, I don't care about the politicians or our leaders,  I only care about those who serve or have served.

Semper Fi

Hollis


----------



## SpitfireV (Feb 13, 2011)

"*The Kerry subcommittee*              did not report that U.S. government officials ran drugs, but rather,              that Mr. North, then on the National Security Council staff at the              White House, and other senior officials created a privatized contra              network that attracted drug traffickers looking for cover for their              operations, then turned a blind eye to repeated reports of drug smuggling              related to the contras, and actively worked with known drug smugglers              such as Panamanian dictator *Manuel Noriega*              to assist the contras. The report cited former Drug Enforcement Administration              head John Lawn testifying that Mr. North himself had prematurely leaked              a DEA undercover operation, jeopardizing agents' lives, for political              advantage in an upcoming Congressional vote on aid to the contras              (p.121)."

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB113/

His notebooks are there. In them- the ones he didn't destroy, which I understand is a federal crime in itself?- are many references to drugs.

Here are some of the entries:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB113/#doc1


----------



## HOLLiS (Feb 13, 2011)

I read that report too,  One can find anything on Google.  BTW,  do you know who John Kerry is?  So you really don't have any real information.  Imagine something happens to you, the media reports the allegations of what you have alleged to have done, some other people add their spin and reports when they conclude you are something that you are not (a shit bag).   But what the heck,  a lot of people will believe what they say about you, that you are SB.   Fact is fact,I would like to make it real clear, I am not calling you a SB, just using your term to for my example.  There are a lot people who are face a unjust trial by the media and are found guilty or innocent with any bases of fact proven.  This also happens today and we have had it happen to those who have served.  What happens is that many people will remember the guilty verdict by the media and political pundits but not the "Found Not Guilty" by the real court of law.   That was way to common during the cold war.

As I mentioned earlier, the US is runned by partisan politics,as with most "free" countries and during this time the cold war was going on.  I know how old you were during the cold war but everything was super spun during that time.  Just like those myths that I posted about the men and women who served in Viet-Nam.

If the allegations where true, LtCol North would he not still be in jail?  Now that North works for Fox news and with his previous republican leanings he is fair game by all those on the liberal to left.

How true are those allegations?  I don't know, but I know people who say they are not true and they are less than one or two people away from what happened.  I like google to check my memory not to gather facts.

So for me, he is not a shitbag until proven.

BTW, the D's/liberals/leftist would have love to have his butt nailed,  never happened.  obvious reason, no facts, or laws broken, or he had a really good lawyer, or ???.  Connelly and Williams would say they were (if I remembered their names right)


----------



## Marauder06 (Feb 13, 2011)

OJ was found not guilty too... just sayin'.


----------



## HOLLiS (Feb 13, 2011)

Marauder06 said:


> OJ was found not guilty too... just sayin'.


Yeah, but I could give a rats touchas about celebrities.  While they are paid big money and people think they are heroes and to be admire, I tend to think they are not, my heroes wear the military uniforms of their country, don't get paid much and are asked to do things that many would not do for any price.


Also OJ was found culpable in civil court.


----------



## Manolito (Feb 13, 2011)

Mara I would hope there is a little difference in a congressional hearing and 12 liberal thinking do gooders. But then I am a little positive today. I give up on trying to convince people that military people follow orders they don't go around making up their own operations.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Feb 13, 2011)

Every once in a while I get a big smile when I read what the FOG’s (no disrespect meant) have to post, it reminds my young ass to STFU and listen. I could not agree more with you Hollis and Manolito, you gentlemen have my respect…


----------



## SpitfireV (Feb 13, 2011)

Hollis, I did not at any point say he was complicit in the drug smuggling as you seem to imply. What I said was that he knew about it and did nothing over it. You can't try to forward the foreign policy of your country at the expense of your own citizens.

I won't be participating in this thread from this point; It seems futile.


----------



## Marauder06 (Feb 13, 2011)

HOLLiS said:


> Yeah, but I could give a rats touchas about celebrities.  While they are paid big money and people think they are heroes and to be admire, I tend to think they are not, my heroes wear the military uniforms of their country, don't get paid much and are asked to do things that many would not do for any price.
> 
> 
> Also OJ was found culpable in civil court.



You don't care about celebrities?  What is Ollie North now if not a celebrity?


----------



## HOLLiS (Feb 13, 2011)

Marauder06 said:


> You don't care about celebrities?  What is Ollie North now if not a celebrity?



You gotta be kidding me?   When the Iran Contra affair broke out, almost nobody new who Lt. Col. North was.  Gee, maybe I am a celebrity too.   I'll ask my kids.



SpitfireV said:


> He knew that coke was being shipped to his fellow citizens in the US.
> 
> That makes him a shitbag. You don't help a third world shithole at the expense of your own people.



and



SpitfireV said:


> Hollis, I did not at any point say  he was complicit in the drug smuggling as you seem to imply. What I said  was that he knew about it and did nothing over it. You can't try to  forward the foreign policy of your country at the expense of your own  citizens.
> 
> I won't be participating in this thread from this point; It seems futile.



I use to know several Mexican Senators who were involved in the illegal drug trade to the US, and yes I did nothing about it.  It was not in my orders from my boss to do so, it was not happening in my jurisdiction and I learned about their involvement in a FBI class on the illegal drug trade.    Also our FBI instructors were not doing anything about them either, except to teach the class.

I was in Central America too, I hope I am not held responsible for all the crap that went on down there.

I am still trying to figure what you expected him to do.  He is not Sylvester Stallone, Arnie Schwarzenegger, Bruce Willis or any of those other one man army types that are also called celebrities.


.... and all I wanted to do was support the troops, just like those who today who have been found guilty by the media and politicos and later all charges were dropped, but the who remembers that?   At what point do we hang our own based on the media and politicians statements, there by casting aspersion on all those who server?   Yes this war is like Viet-Nam, if this is the out come.


----------



## Marauder06 (Feb 13, 2011)

HOLLiS said:


> You gotta be kidding me?   When the Iran Contra affair broke out, almost nobody new who Lt. Col. North was.  Gee, maybe I am a celebrity too.   I'll ask my kids.
> 
> ...



Your sarcasm is neither necessary nor appreciated.

My question was to his status _now_, not what it was before his lies before Congress.

_



			You don't care about celebrities? What is Ollie North now if not a celebrity?
		
Click to expand...

_


----------



## HOLLiS (Feb 13, 2011)

Marauder06 said:


> Your sarcasm is neither necessary nor appreciated.
> 
> My question was to his status _now_, not what it was before his lies before Congress.




I did not mean it as sarcasm, I was completely unprepared.  It caught me as a complete surprise.  I was actually laughing, it was more a comical  response.   I guess I should have posted a smiley or something.  I don't watch TV, except for movies and just could not imagine him as a celebrity.   I don't argue for political reasons or to just argue.

If we talk about what is appreciated, I would add.  I am set back at the ease in which he is a target in the media.  As I have mentioned through out this thread men and women who serve our country are used a political football.  I am appalled at that.  There has been a number of case where their actions has been heavily scrutinized and false comments made in the media and political arena.  Later very little is said when the charges or allegations have been dismissed or dropped.

My sensitivity to this issue is, as I mentioned, for over 20 years men and women who served honorably suffered under this cloud of suspicion of wrong doing.  If a person violates the laws of their land, military code of conduct, or behaved in a way to cause shame to the military, their crimes should be  fairly crimes adjudicated and reasonable punishment administered.    I think that is something we all should insure.  False allegations, casting aspersions or other methods to slander those who serve and the military they serve in should not be supported.

If Lt. Col North violated the laws,  then in a court of law he should have been found guilty and punished.  If that was done I would not have posted anything.


----------



## Marauder06 (Feb 13, 2011)

Fair enough.


----------



## HOLLiS (Feb 13, 2011)

Marauder06 said:


> Fair enough.



I am good at stepping in.   I think my Gunny was aright about me.  :)


----------



## Marauder06 (Feb 14, 2011)

Stepping in, or "stepping in it?"


----------



## peregrino_nica (Jul 16, 2011)

Marauder06 said:


> What's Oliver North's credibility? Other than being busted for lying to Congress? Asking because I don't know.


Well, here's the unvarnished truth from my perspective. Bear in mind I just had 2 Bamberg Rauchbier's and a Partagas cigar sitting on my deck.
Ollie is your best friend when the camera's are around. Disappears whenever the press and cameras disappear. In Nicaragua days he would trot out pictures of civilian children massacred or starved by the Sandinistas in front of congress(all too ture) and then reverse himself by saying he only supported us because Reagan told him to. There's a bunch of Vietnam vets who stayed loyal to their buddies in the Montagnards called "Save the Montagnard People". After the Montagnards fought there way accross Cambodia they had an anonymous beurocratic battle to get their families settled stateside. Needless to say, Ollie didn't do shit for em, because not publicity there. Likewise over the last 25 years Ollie hasn't done shit in the dozends of land wars and legal wars fought by ex-Contras. Showed up one time in 2006 since there were cameras and backed the WRONG candidate for president. Ollie deserves a place in history for doing a great job keeping a lifeline alive to the best anti communist fighters I ever met in time of aboslute crisis with the FSLN cutting off all medicines to the campesinos causing 10s of thousands of children to die with distended bellies. But he's a fair weather friend who disappears with the cameras.


----------



## dknob (Jul 18, 2011)

LOL "DEA FAST Tier 1" for the win!!


----------

