>> in 1979, c-span was created by america's cable television companies and is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. month marks cents oliver north testified before the house and senate committees investigating the iran-contra affair. america," he is questioned by republican senators paul trible and orrin hatch. defends his efforts to support and fund armed rebel groups opposing the nicaraguan

government. funding was riveted. -- was prohibited. sen. inouye: the chair recognizes senator mitchell. sen. mitchell: good morning, colonel north. oliver l. north >> there are many of us on this panel that support ronald reagan and believe in the contra costa. -- the contra cause. there is no evidence on the wrong part of the doing of our president. i believe the essence the american experience is the pursuit of freedom and around the world. that is why we must oppose the marcus tierney in nicaragua. that is why we must help young nicaraguans's fight for their freedom as well. the last week, has not been an

easy one for any of us. it has been a time of probing questions and honest answers on your part. you have done well. yes capture the imagination of the american people. you have done that because he told the truth, fully candidly. you are a man who is doing his duty. you are acting with the knowledge and authority of your superiors. you have demonstrated an amazing ability to get results. i know it has been a difficult time for your family. i believe these hearings are necessary. the ruleo values truth of law must be troubled by what we have heard for the last 10 weeks. when public policy is taken private.

and government operates to operate as a its operated channels, there is no checks and balances. people, a consequence good people and policy getting into trouble. that is what we have seen. president kennedy used to tell a story i used to believe captures the spirit of these hearings. 1780, there is a total eclipse of the sun. at noon, it was as dark as midnight. , vision of people attributed this kind of happening to the day of judgment. for the coming of the lord. connecticut legislature was meeting in hartford. the members returning to chaos. house,aker of the colonel davenport silence the motions with his gavel. he spoke these words.

gentlemen, i do not know if the world is coming to an end or not. if it is not, there is no reason to adjourn. if it is, i want the lord to come and see me in my duty. thatl entertain a motion candles be brought into this chamber so we may this all of democracy. our duty is to light a candle. -- of american campaign the american people can judge and see what is going on. it is not an easy job or happy one. it is one that must be done. when an obvious problem private policy goes -- a public policy goes private. private citizens may be motivated by profit.

north, it is clear to me in the american people that you are motivated by ideals. profit.pursuit of you have spoken powerfully about that. say -- what i would like to do, with your help, is to ask questions about the financial aspects of the enterprise directed by mr. hakim. >> last wednesday you testified he would be compensated in a just and fair permission. is that correct? ifi will take your word that is what i said and what i said. establishes he

and support amassed a $.1 million in the bank accounts -- amassed $8.1 million in the bank accounts. you know it was stocked away? >> my recollection is what i testify to is that i did not .now the magnitude of the funds i do not know the names or numbers but one. it was the lake account in which i provided to the state -- and thefor presenters of another country for the money they were providing support the resistance. ied that i asked general secord and with the approval of my superiors.

i asked on a number of occasions that general secord said funds beside for other activities. sessiony an executive to what the other activities were. i have not come back to say if i had added up all of the other activities, it would've come up to be 20 million that i asked. i do not know with the final tally would be. the important thing is that i did not know that there was that some remaining. i do not know the purposes for which that some was set aside. i do not know the accounts or the names or numbers on any of those. i never considered a penny of it was mine. the righttified that of the -- and the liabilities recovered. i would send the money every nickel of it to the nicaraguan

resistance, the original purpose for setting out -- for setting up all of the non-us government entities. >> last week when you testified this, you use the word shocked. is that a fair characterization? >> i was. i would point out, i believe it was under questioning by counsel. i do not know until these hearings began that there was any such some fine. i have not communicated with these people. i do not know the purposes for which they establish the accounts. >> i believe that. let me ask another question. these money -- this money came from several sources. it came from chiron and solicitations and countries and individuals, is that correct? >> that is my understanding, yes. >> neither of them contributed

any capital to this? >> i do not know. >> there is no question in your mind, the money was to be used for governmental purposes? differ going to beg to with that particular description. , we go back to 1984 when this activity was initiated . the purpose was for these outside non-us government entities to assist in prosecuting the foreign-policy goals of the united states. it was never intended that anybody get rich. it was never intended that thene would do anything support the force and -- before policy goals. it seems to be an idea that there was a government within a government or there was a cia , somehowcia or that

these money's been gone to the -- these money belong to the u.s. government. i am not a financial expert or a legal authority on those activities. entities,e foreign the network of companies and the like set up as being there to support the prosecution of foreign policy goals it was never envisioned my mind that this would be hidden from the president. thankfully, unaware of the media coverage. to use ite are going for the things the president would not know about. it was always my understanding it was a short-term project. not something that would go on. bya question that was raised

representative jenkins last week. it was a fix for a short-term problem. some of the activities to be supported by these non-us government moneys. >> i thank you. these moneys were to be used to advance the fourth and policy goals of the niceties. otherlked about initiatives that were contemplated. -- is that true? we actually started on a number of them example, the purchase of aparticular weapon system, which the ship was used for a number of purposes. , as i indicated.

there were also money set aside, at least in my understanding that they were set aside for a particular weapon system, which both moneys were not extended? >> i do not believe they were. i cannot speak uncertainty with that. now, let's move to a of prices, commissions, and accountability. did you or general secord establish the prices for the arms sold to the contras? oliver north: i established no prices, whatsoever. and, as i think i testified and certainly as is well known, it it was a very competitive marketplace, if you will, to which the nicaraguan resistance could turn. the only thing that i did was to

-- i believed i talked to that in executive session,and whether or not a certain european who had provided arms was,indeed involved in reverse-technology he asked me to intervene, to keep arms from being purchased from those two individuals, and i did so. i established no prices; i established no levels; i established no amounts, of any kind. sen. trible: -- i viewed those transactions as being taking place between general secord and those with whom he was dealing. i do know that toward the end of the activity in establishing the southern front, that munitions

-- north: yes. they ever's it you down and give you an accounting of their profits. north: no. >> do they sit down with the leaders and give their accounts? north: i do not know. there is no financial oversight for you or the united states government. . . you have a number of residues which refer, in gross terms to funds remaining in various overseas entities. that is about the level that i had specific knowledge on.

i did not do it in accounting. i did not hire an accounting firm to do it. we did not bring in the jail. thats ugly a matter -- -- kind of counting was not done. sen. trible: you're a busy man. you are relying on them to handle these matters. isn't that correct? north: that is correct. sen. trible: under established channels, went over operations were taken by cia operatives, isn't there a should oversight or account ability. north: generally, yes. i am the intimately familiar with the contours office at langley. but is well enough known that they do a rigorous accounting of the expenditures of funds in the can't root of a covert operation. i would point out, however, senator, and i think it's important that there is still a debate, ongoing, within the

,, congress and the gao, and the statedepartment, over the accounting of $27 million in nicaraguan humanitarian assistance funds. it has been widely reported invarious media accounts, that i was somehow engaged in siphoning money off from those activities. those reports are untrue. it is adifficult thing to do, and even under the best of circumstances, trying to account for monies like the 27 million, is a difficult task, and i am confident that at the end of all -- >sen. trible: what covert operations were overtaken by the government, there is a strict accounting of the accounting. there was not? north: given my knowledge, i think it is a fair statement. sen. trible: let's move on and

talk about the relationship between the relationship. you have no them from a years. and you have great respect for him. north: i'm sorry. sen. trible: i know you know have known him for great years and have respect for him. is it true you do not know much about our hacking any soldier not know much at all about his relationship between secord and hakim? inth: i first met mr. hakeem the february of 1984. i came to recognize that this was a man who certainly wanted to assist the u.s. government and the restoration of the relationship of his native land. i first met him in in every 1986, not 1984. i do not know the nature of the financial relationship with

general secord or a business relationship he had. i did not consider it to be a pure requisite of using them as an interpreter for one of our meetings or a series of meetings which occurred in europe. i do not see it inconsistent that he would be engaged after i found out about it in establishing the european entities -- and for entities, not in europe that supported this initiative. testimony,: in his said the money, the residuals in the accounts, belong to the enterprise. the enterprise was over mr. hakeem. if you know that? north: no. series, aw was a network if you will, of overseas entities have been established to care activities. to the extent practicable, different overseas companies would carry out discreet activities, to avoid the crossover of knowledge between

various operations.and thus, one of the companies would carry out the purchase ofland in a central american country for the purpose of building an airstrip. they would fund for that airstrip, they would conduct the construction and the like; whereas another company would be engaged in, for example, the delivery of munitions. and that network, as iunderstood it, was basically laid out for these activities by gen.secord. and now, obviously, with the assistance of mr. hakim. but i do not know the details of the relationship. sen. trible: the point i want to make here is the one he was not controlled by mr. secor, a man you knew and trust, but rather by mr. hakim, a man you had admitted you hardly new. that must come as a surprise. north: it does. that is why i was shocked at the

magnitude of the money remaining in the various accounts. i am not entirely sure that we are all speaking from the same sheet of music. it is somewhat tongue-in-cheek. mr. hakim describes profit, and i'm talking about what director casey referred to as self sustaining entities, i am not sure if they are consistent. i look for to the day where i can sit down and talk about where those remaining scope with the people who are they are the controller. sen. trible: i wish you could spend 10 minutes with mr. hakim. you could be a great help to the committee. let's talk about the future of the enterprises. it you and bill casey or admiral poindexter established plans for the future in the event that bill casey had left the cia or

became disabled or die? north: no. sen. trible: what about your reassignment in the remaining court? twitter contingent -- in the marine corps? were there contingency plans? the things that director casey was looking into was not something that would sustain in the 1990's in the activities. he was talking about the use of outside entities to support limited form policy goals of the government. i described some of the activities to the committees in the executive session. it was not the kind of thing that -- that -- i don't think-- director casey had in mind for outliving even his tenure as director of central intelligence. although, as i indicated in mytestimony, we never got to that point.we were --

i regarded this as an magic of solution to some short-term problems. a number of the initiatives that were overtaken that i briefed them on assume that these were immediate short-term -- you could put the company back on the shelf or do away with it. that is how i saw it been pursued. ofwas not a matter representative jenkins and i discussed, i do not think as a matter what happens after both casey goes and all he north goes some of the successor is that would carry the activities out. that is -- sen. trible: is that an important, is it not? marine colonels are reassigned. doctors of the cia died. mr. court -- mr. secord could've suffered a's disability or loss of fight -- lost loot -- loses life. was there any plan in place? north: we never got to a point where it plan was developed.

whentrible: what happened the reagan administration was coming to an end? north: the operations would shut down. this is not something logo in perpetuity. sen. trible: you're not going to turn it over to the democrats? north: you said that. sen. trible: i did. it does not deserve an answer. let's move to another area. other hakeem volunteered -- our albert hakim onto his testimony that he was trying to pass the money to your family. earlier, a lawyer named david lewis, called the committee and volunteered that william zucker had asked him to find a way to getmoney to your wife, betsy. now at first, we didn't follow that up because it was absolutely inconsistent with our

image of you. nothing came of the efforts. we know you're not in it for profit. you have spoken powerfully and convincingly about that. but, my question is this. doesn't it appear that mr. hakim and zucker were trying to compromise you or set you up to gain influence or leverage? north: senator, i did not hear that testimony. and i guess my concern is that this committee not have any reservations whatsoever. i was unaware of any activities beyond what i described. sen. sen. trible: absolute understand. north: i described there were

other attempts at those things. it does not mean it works. i don't know the motivation of mr. hakim or his lawyer in trying to pursuevarious initiatives. i do know that having reviewed certain testimony before this committee, that an indication of calls being made or arrangements being made to meet with my wife after the one meeting that i described to you, and the one telephone call in june,are patently untrue. and thus, the characterization of motivations by mr. lewis or others, or events by mr. lewis and others, are, tomy knowledge and that of my wife, totally untrue. now, i cannot speak to the motivations of those other people who've described other

events. sen. trible: i can conceivably the reason for the issues. if they were helping to help you, they would have gone to directly. and they surely would not have volunteeredthis information as they did. but i thank you for your answer there. we'll just have to sit back and judge as best we can as the -- for example, albert hakim has testified before us that during august of 1986, mr. secord agreed to a suggestion of tom klein's that they maximize the profits from the last sale of arms to the contras. were you aware of that? oliver north: no. sen. trible: yes testified that a prophet of $861,000 was made

on that $2.1 million transaction. --,. sen. trible: he believes that type of profit is fair and just. north: again, i would have to sit down and go under these issues with c court -- i do not know what their expenses were. i do not know what the activities were for the planned use of the moneys. but i certainly did not know that there was anything ofthat magnitude in that transaction. sen. trible: -- i was unaware of the fact that these accounts even existed. sen. trible: isn't it true that their taking of suchoutlandish profits is absolutely inconsistent with your goal of helping the contras keep

their body and soul together? north: there is no doubt if he was done for personal game, as i indicated in my testimony, i never set up to make anybody rich. i don't know what was envisioned by those transactions. i did not know of them when they occurred, and i did not know the magnitude of any of the use of those in terms of compensation. the only thing that i specified right out at the very beginning is that it was understood that fair,just and reasonable compensation would be derived by those people involved in the activities. that included the pilots who putthemselves at risk and those involved and taken out of their normaldiscourse of day-to-day events, day-to-day business would in someway be compensated. that was the sole level of my understanding on it. sen. sen. trible: it seems like this

profit, $861,000 from the $2.1 million transaction -- cannot becategorized by anyone as fair or just or appropriate. you don'tdisagree with that? north: i do not try to characterize it. sen. trible: i understand. now, was anyone in the government of the united states aware of these kinds of profit margins? north: to my knowledge, no one else was aware of the details of those activities at all. sen. . sen. trible: is moving beyond that. and talk about the investment of the funds per credit purposes. the testimony reveals mr. secord investedveals they each sums. did inform you that they invested $150,000 in

time american arms? north: i do not think i heard about it until the same started. sen. trible: so the answer is no? north: no. sen. trible: feels a testified that another $100,000 of residuals were invested in washington timberland from which theyexpected to make millions -- his words -- in the residuals were used as collateral for the purchase price of $1.5 million. digital about that? -- did you know about that? north: no. sen. trible: is that a use of appropriate funds in this judgment? north: i was unaware of these transactions. sen. trible: i understand and i am not citizen you about it. the record establishes that is how the money was used. anm asking you if it is appropriate use of those funds? north: you're asking me to make

judgments on transactions, the sort of which i have no knowledge. i do not think it be fair to me to characterize anybody's decisions based onlack of that kind of knowledge. what i am saying, and i will repeat it again, i did not engage in this to make anybody -- sen. trible: they were getting rich and investing huge sums of these moneys to advance their self interest. that is the point of this line of questioning. these kind of private investments have no governmental purpose, do they? north: none that i know of. sen. trible: thank you. let's move to another area. it is of importance to both of us. it is the democratic resistance in nicaragua. their fortunes, their hopes, and

a future. is it fair to say that you were doing everything humanly possible to help the contras,the democratic resistance in their fight for freedom? north: without going overboard on the statement, i don't think that there's anyone else in the innocence of america that i did to ensure a democratic form and the survival of the resistance from 1984 to 1986. sen. trible: there's no question about it. this is a peasant army? north: it also includes people of the middle class and the intelligence of nicaragua. it is a campus and army. sen. trible: i visited the cans, as you have. i walked down the long line of these young nicaraguans,looking in their faces and every once in a while stopping andasking, "what is your name? where are you from? why are you here?" you know the

answers were different, and yet the theme was the same. they said, "well i've left because my family farm wastaken away by the sandinistas." or they'll say, "my church was closed," or "my priest sent away." or, "my brother was taken by the sandinistas and had to serve the army." he said, "the sandinistas haven't given us the freedom they promise." these are young men who are living their lives online for freedom. you care about them, i care about them, a lot of people care about them. in onea special interest of your notes. it is exhibit five. you laid out their needs and your concerns about their plight. would you reach for exhibit number five? would you read for me?

i have a copy of it here. except it. would you read it from the start to finish? you wrotes the date and who he went if you can decipher it as well. north: this appears to be a note from myself to don fortier, with copy on to admiral poindexter, i believe. the subject is special meeting on central america. "will" -- that's wilma hall, mother of my

secretary --"please pass to don." -- don fortier was at the time the principal deputy assistant to the president for national security affairs,who has since died." there's great anxiety the congress will not act in time to starve off a major defeat for the resistance. it is evident in the resistance itself. the lack of a viable source of resupply has not affected combat operations, it is beginning to affect the poetical viability of the the unified nicaraguan opposition of the leadership as well. colonel bermudez in front of the southern front commanders elnegro chomorro questioned the need for uno and the drain of scarce resources to support the atlantic and southern fronts. while he committed to send six to eight thousand troops in in the next fewdays, he openly admitted in front of blank, that

they would have to admit to come back out in 15 to 20 days if if there's no supply. their other things are running short as well. the entire force is back to one meal per day and no more boots, uniforms, packs,ponchos, or weapons are available for the new recruits. new trainees will be turned away, effective today. all hospitalization for wounded in action will cease at the end of the week. troops returning to nicaragua this week will carry only 70 to 100 rounds of a mission. it is visible unless a new source of bridging could be identified. while we should not raise specific sources with * * * * at there will be no force to help when the congress from acts. north, on the very

day you wrote that note of despair, there was over $4.8 million dollars in the accounts controlled by mr. hakim and mr. secord. have boots could of been purchased? how many lives could have been saved? if a portion of the money had been sent to the resistance? north: boots run $16 to $30 depending on how their purchase. ammunition, as you know from the charts and information you have, varies in cost. the aviation resupply costs considerably. certainly the more money that wasavailable to the resistance, the better fortunes there be. en. trible:

to help you the car just a alive and fight the bottle. north: it was. sen. trible: i have no more questions. i believe he testified truthfully and you have helped us put the pieces of this puzzle together. i would like to make one person observation. , we have seenies private interest over public photos. a cause compromise as individuals reap enormous profits. in my judgment, the trust of north betrayed. august demonstrate -- all this demonstrates is without checks and balances. i thank you and i would like to reserve the balance of my time. senator hatch?

sen. hatch: in some respects from where i sit, you have shed no light on matters that have come before this committee. yet accepted some blame. you have provided helpful of why it occurred in the first place. from what you have said your motives and your intentions were , seems to me, from your perspective, we are always good for our country. we are always willing to be in the best interest of our country. i think it is important. it takes it away from the media. make upr months, try to something it was not.

i do not say some of it, said some of it. that, they can judge i think the american people know. i do not want to give the impression that i believe there were not mistakes made. there were. i think trading arms for hostages is wrong. to the extent that the grant initiative became strictly an arms for hostages. i think that was wrong. i do not feel misleading or lying to congress can't ever be condoned, you need to know that. as a general proposition, which you agree that we have got to come up with a workable system where the executive branch does not feel like it has to mislead the congress? what about drug smuggling? have been a lot of drug -- a lot of allegations.

a news program over the weekend suggested that rob owen, who testified earlier, was involved in drug smuggling. now is there any truth to that? can you shedany light for us on -- can you shed any light on that? north: when mr. owen found any information pertaining to the possibly of involvement in drugs, he told me, and i would tell the top at -- i would tell the appropriate federal authorities. it is absolutely false. sen. hatch: i believe that. i take exception with something to set in your opening statement. you stressed this committee's final conclusion would put the blame on the executive branch and not be willing to share some of the blames ourselves. in that regard, i think you are pre-judging us. in my view, pink the party her testimony over the past few days that he may stand

a chance of understanding a broader for missing -- a broader for policy objectives. i would like to read something from the infamous diversion memo. it is interesting to me that the force and policy goals and memorandum do not get much attention. it has seems to me they have been dwelled on incessantly. now, in that memorandum you make the following statement, quote, the us side made an effort to refocus iranianattention on the threat posed by the soviet union and the need to establish a longer term relationship between our two countries base don more -- for it could prosper. does that actually reflect the objectives? north: it does. i wrote them. sen. hatch: has it been much

said about that? half-year later, you wrote that your talks that your talks were going well and "they and we want to move quickly beyond the obstacle of the hostages." we can be issue mental in bringing an end and to the war. if you had achieved the objective alone, the around initiative probably would have been considered a great success? north: i'm sure it would have. sen. hatch: it was quite an initiative. north: yes. sen. hatch: hopefully these hearings can educate the american public about the foreign policy goals. in addition to the ones i just referred to was the protection of the northern tier states such as pakistan, afghanistan, india -- was a part of what you are trying to do? north: yes.

sen. hatch: with the protection of the southern tier states such as israel, kuwait, saudi arabia, jordon, egypt -- with that part of your goals? north: it was. sen. hatch: important, wasn't it? north: we thought so. sen. hatch: it could've been disastrous. north: it has great potential. by opening up a second channel to moderates who believed it was not in iran's best long-term interest? north: yes, and for 18 months, it worked. was -- in one of the goals? north: yes, sir. sen. hatch: was listening the iranian alliance one of the goals? north: soviet bloc, that is correct. sen. hatch: was the elimination one of the goals? north: it was, and we told them that. sen. hatch: if we could about the hostages out, which unfortunately up peers --

unfortunate appears to end all of the goals, it would have been an excellent result? north: i would've not been alone. sen. hatch: you're concerned about that because you are afraid they were going to be killed? north: yes. sen. hatch: there's number and that you wrought forth, as a part of the stack of these documents that are taller than you. north: yes, sir. sen. hatch: have indicated that you were afraid they may be murdered or killed? north: yes, sir. sen. hatch: that was one of the reasons you are not -- is that right? north: we did a lot of travel. sen. hatch: you are not the only ones concerned. north: i do not believe so. sometimes, covert operations are necessary if they are to be given a chance to succeed, they have to kept secret? with that be a good result of

these hearings? north: it certainly would, senator. sen. hatch: would you think these earrings make the chief success, i may admit i be be on a moonshot with this one -- do you think these hearings may achieve success that if the president must be given some latitude to carry out his foreign-policy objectives without 535 members of congress, many secretary of states thomas second-guessing everything the president is trying to do? north: yes, sir. sen. hatch: you believe that, don't you? north: yes, sir. sen. hatch: i think congress has been interfering too much in a reasonable forcing. north: there is a role and that is the appropriations of moneys to carry the policy. sen. hatch: we can look at the policy and determine whether it is good or bad. it could -- it shouldn't be a constant micromanaging of the policy. do you think you would be a good lesson if we finally learn the lesson that if the leader of the

free world -- if we say we are going to help the freedom fighters, that we dig in for the long help rather than cutting and running every year? do you think that is a good thing? north: yes, sir. sen. hatch: maybe these hearings will get that across, don't you think? north: i hope so. sen. hatch: isn't that what you had to face? every time you had it on track, congress would come up. north: it seemed and annual affair. sen. hatch: it said different messages to the rest of the world? north: that is right. sen. hatch: were you afraid the united states may be considered an unreliable partner? north: yes, sir. sen. hatch: we are considered as an unreliable. is that correct? north: by many. sen. hatch: that is right. as a result of the hearings, we start to provide consistent support. so they effectively seek to

a resolution and ensure we do not have to set our american boys and girls to fight in a troubled region so close to our borders? you can go to be a good result of these hearings? north: yes, sir. sen. hatch: i think so too. if you do not support the resistance and ignore the do youst threat, what think might happen in the next 20 years in this hemisphere and drop the world? north: it will not take 20 years, it will take a whole is. consolation of becoming his regime in managua will result in the spread of the resolution -- in the revolution. potentially, the projection of eight berlin-type while across the rio grande to keep people out. one country took over

million illegal refugees last year. last week, we authorized 2000 nicaraguans to stay in this country. that is the tip of the iceberg. sen. hatch: you're talking about something in the neighborhood of tenley refugees, the potential of drawing down on new support to defend our own southern border. -- the thing we saw to prevent? north: i do not think we heard too much about that. i am glad you articulate in some of the things. do you feel the hearings may be important if they cause us to stand behind the reagan doctrine and give assistance to the freedom fighters in angola, cambodia, afghanistan, and elsewhere where people are committed to pushing the communist aggressions -- communist aggressors? north: that would be a magnificent outcome, senator. sen. hatch: the thank you would be a good thing if both ends of

pennsylvania avenue understand how counterproductive leaks can be? how they can jeopardize lies in national security? is that right? north: it would be, sir. sen. hatch: you said you live because you were worried about lives. were worried about sources and methods in assets and ambassadors and representatives of other nations. is that part of the problem? north: yes, sir. sen. hatch: it is a tough choice between telling the truth, if it means the death of our most important assets of the world. if it means the disruption of some of our most important policies in the world. it is a tough, i do not know if to haveomonic enough made the right choice. -- it is wronghe to not tell the truth to congress. do you think it would be a good thing if the next time the senate intelligence committee

does a 150 page security report -- it was voted by the members of the committee it not be leaked to the press? the think we have to-- to think we ought to-- to think it would be a good thing? north: it would, indeed. sen. hatch: i think so too. north: d think if we reconsidered the staging of these public meter shows were disclosed in great detail to our international friends and our enemies, our documents, our methods, our secret plans, in the details of our own national security? north: i have testified to that end, senator. sen. hatch: this is what is happening here, to a degree. north: i have to say, i think the hearings are important in spite of it. it is something we have to be concerned about. agreet regard, would you if we had these kind of hearing, they should not be turned into ares were persons

prematurely judged and accused of criminal conduct? north: it would have been nice, sir. sen. hatch: is a lot of. you're judging in the process. -- i saw a lot of premature judging in this process. a scholar once wrote, "how individuals have been pillared by congressional committees the dude -- north:. sen. hatch: would you also agree -- if the power is unlimited, the separation of powers and systems would break down? is that correct? north: that is the position i would've taken throughout. sen. hatch: these were written by lawrence lyman by the thesis entitled women e-government in unlimited investigation.

i thought i had been them, sir. sen. hatch: let me tell you, they are true then and true today. it was in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the .achelor's degree it is shortly after the mccarthy hearings. i am happy to say, regardless of what others have done, arthur himself inonducted accordance with what he wrote 33 years ago. let me just say this to you, i will finish with these remarks. i have been a little tough on our committee, but i respect these people appear and i have terrific respect for every member of this panel. i also have a great of respect for you. it is not easy to sit there five days and go through what you have gone through and admit what you had to admit and express some of the mistakes you have been made -- that have been made. based upon what i have seen and

heard in these hearings, there are mistakes here. to the extent that this was purely an arms transfer of hostages, i'm have to disagree with that if that was all it was. i think your answers have shown us more. i do not think the nsc should ever operate covert operations. i do not think they should. i do not think we should have a diversion of funds. i have to confess, i think it is a neat idea to take moneys from the ayatollah and send them to the freedom fighters to go while the. -- fighters to nicaragua. it points out the difficulties of the private -- is still any idea. i do not care who laughs. -- willyou are right motivated in your desires to help them. we were not helping them like we should have here. upwere not supporting this -- this policy.

i do not say you should do it, but they point out the difficulties of -- let me end with this -- these hearings should not let the congress -- if there is anything that ought to come out of these hearings it ought to be that we beat our breasts and act very sanctimonious and act like we just would never have made any of these mistakes when we've never had really the responsibility of day-to-day carrying them out. now mistakes were made here. i think good people can acknowledge that -- and we can all agree -- whether we supported the policies or did not. but, by gosh, we don't have to country into submission or people like you just because mistakes have been made. i want you to know that it's hard for us to believe it up, but congress makes mistakes too. and it has been making mistakes

for most of the affair -- the contra affair we have had on this hemisphere. whether you believe in supporting them or not, we have .o, with a consistent policy everybody knows america stands in a matter of integrity for certain things. i will be honest with you. based on what i have heard far -- heard thus far, with your admission of mistakes and things you did wrong in retrospect -- it is not easy to do these things in retrospect. i don't want you prosecuted. i do not. i do not think many people in america do. oneink there is going to be -- a lot of hell raised if you are. it does not mean they will not. it does not mean the sticklers in the law will not pursue the last pounds of flesh. that i will tell you -- i do not want you prosecuted.

there may be something in the remaining part of this testimony or these hearings that may change my attitude. as of right now, i do not want it to happen here i do not think many people who have watched this, whether they believe he did or did not, want that to happen. i want to personally tell you i do give conducted yourself very well here. i want to tell you i appreciate having the benefit of your testimony. thank you, mr. chairman. continue at the 30 years of the iran-contra investigation. in march lieutenant colonel oliver north's final day of televised testimony in the historic russell caucus room. 40 -- itortion of a made closing statements regarding his testimony and participation in the iran-contra affair.