Founded as a day for Americans of all faiths, the National Day of Prayer is now closely tied to Focus on the Family. It is headquartered in Focus offices, James Dobson’s wife is the chairman, Focus is compensated for “services rendered,” and the NDP’s prayer list (political agenda) is a watered-down version of Focus’ joyous secularism. Both Focus and the NDP promote a so-called “Judeo-Christian” order that more closely conforms to a mystical American patriotism than to mainstream, nonpartisan, global Jewish or Christian belief.
What’s the ex-gay connection, you may ask?
Both the Exodus home page and the weblog of Exodus executive director Alan Chambers feature photos from festivities surrounding the National Day of Prayer in May.
Among the snapshots on the Exodus director’s web site is this one of Chambers standing with his wife and NDP honorary chairman Oliver North. (Click the picture for a much larger version.)
I was reminded of this photograph by today’s excellent 16-page article on the New York Times web site, explaining in fantastic detail why Americans over the age of 30 look back upon presidency of Ronald Reagan with mixed feelings.
Page 12 of the article recalls the Iran-contra affair. The affair began when Reagan, already suffering dangerous memory lapses in 1986, allowed loose cannons in his administration — two national security advisers, Robert C. McFarlane and Vice Adm. John M. Poindexter, and a National Security Council staff assistant, Lt. Col. Oliver L. North — to sell advanced U.S. weaponry to the terrorist government of Iran in exchange for hostages being held in Lebanon. Millions of dollars in proceeds from the sold weaponry were transferred to the “contra” guerrilla network in Nicaragua.
The contras, one may recall, spent the 1980s battling the Central American nation’s Soviet-backed government — in part, through terror attacks against civilians and infrastructure. Most people viewed the contras’ cause, anticommunism, as just. But the tactic of attacking civilians was obscenely violent, morally repugnant and globally condemned. Because of this, Congress established strict controls on aid to the Nicaraguan resistance — controls that Reagan’s loose cannons violated.
We may never know how many people, including Americans, were eventually killed with the weapons sold to the Islamic terrorists of Iran. We do know from Catholic and Quaker groups, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International that the contras deliberately killed hundreds, perhaps thousands of Nicaraguan Catholic and indigenous civilians. The tactics of the contras fueled a backlash within Nicaragua, and ripples from the atrocities continue to hinder Nicaragua’s economic and social recovery.
The New York Times’ Reagan retrospective recalls on page 13:
On May 4, 1989, Mr. North, who had left the Marines, was found guilty of three felonies, including destroying and falsifying official documents, and acquitted of nine other charges. On July 15 he was fined $150,000, placed on probation for two years and ordered to perform 1,200 hours of community service. On Sept. 16, 1991, a federal judge dismissed all charges against Mr. North. Prosecutors said they would not be able to show that the trial had not been affected by televised Congressional testimony that Mr. North had given under immunity.
For the same reason a divided federal appeals court on Nov. 15, 1990, threw out five felony convictions of Mr. Poindexter. In June, 1990, Mr. Poindexter had become the first person in the Iran-contra affair to receive a jail term, and the highest White House official since Watergate sentenced to a prison term for illegal acts committed in office.
In other words, North and Poindexter had admitted committing immoral and criminal actions, but could not be convicted for the illegalities because they had been granted immunity on many of their admissions.
Ever since, many veterans have considered North treasonous for aiding terrorists on two continents, and the global human rights community has viewed North as a law-dodging, unrepentant, amoral scoundrel.
Now fast forward to May 2004. His actions either forgotten or transformed into perverse virtues, North poses with Exodus director Chambers and other “new and old friends” at the National Day of Prayer in 2004.
Why do Chambers and others associate eagerly with North? The New York Times hints at some possible reasons in an editorial published yesterday: Denial and forgetfulness. Having denied or forgotten their role in Latin American human rights atrocities of the 1970s and 1980s, senior Pentagon officials now seem to be preparing to make similar mistakes today.
Presumably some among the religious right leadership learned valuable lessons from the suffering of Latin people of faith in the 1980s, and one hopes those particular leaders no longer support terror as a means to achieve U.S. foreign-policy goals. But by posing confidently with Oliver North, and blogging the photo with no trace of measured criticism, Alan Chambers demonstrates admiration for North — and insensitivity, if not contempt, for the victims and survivors of North’s actions.
Unrelated note: The Washington Post looks back on the minuses and pluses of Reaganomics: A policy of deficit spending and what Reagan’s own economic chief, David Stockman, admits was based upon phony White House accounting.
Addendum:Blogger and journalist Natalie Davis discusses Reagan’s ethical and political wrongs.
I am right at 30, and as far as I was concerned, Reagan was some nice-seeming guy on TV who my mom liked, like Mr. Rogers or something. Thank you for giving me another perspective, even if it is depressing.
How nice, I can use the plotter in the blueprint room at work to make my own poster on Monday. That’s very thoughtful of Chambers
You’ve got to be kidding, Mike. The RR lion-izes Ollie, as do all the so-called “moral conservatives.” So, if he shows up at any function, Chambers et al. will be fawning all over him for a photo-op for the faithful. Really, they don’t think he did anything wrong, and if he did, well, Ollie’s said he’s a Christian, and he did it for a good end. He is one of their jingo-heroes.
As to “some among the religious right leadership learned valuable lessons from the suffering of Latin people of faith in the 1980s,” I am not aware of any who have voiced such concerns. It was Catholic liberal liberation theology (aka, to them, Communist) types that were oppressed for the most part in their eyes.
If by “Terror” in your “one hopes those leaders no longer support terror as a means to achieve U.S. foreign-policy goals” quote, you mean fellas like the Contras or reactionaries like Rios Montt, I’m afraid you’re wrong again. They think Rios Montt of Guatemala was great because he called himself an evangelical, and they think the Contras were freedom fighters (one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter, their thinking goes).
My, my, Alan is going from being pretty-pretty to being Ed Wynn, isn’t he? He still has beautiful eyes. Beautiful eyes and a corrupt, tarnished soul. And look at that smile. Does his wife have her high heel in his heel? Or her hand in a death grip in a more personal area? He looks agonized. Come out, come out, Alan!!
Matt Foreman wrote a letter to his deceased friend, about Reagan’s policies and how those policies are still in effect today.
https://www.thetaskforce.org/news/release.cfm?releaseID=690
Here’s one about Reagan laughing at an ugly AIDS joke by Bob Hope:
https://www.thismodernworld.com/weblog/mtarchives/week_2004_06_06.html#001585
I’m noting these for the sake of balance:
Gay writers Deroy Murdock and Steve Miller comment that Reagan wasn’t an antigay or pro-AIDS extremist.
I agree, though, that his administration could have done a lot more about AIDS, and other public-health and social crises, than it did.
>Presumably some among the religious right leadership learned valuable lessons from the suffering of Latin people of faith in the 1980s
I wouldn’t bet on it. Consider the fact that their man in the White House has recently appointed John Negroponte to be “ambassador” to Iraq. In his previous postings, Negroponte has been known to white-wash human rights abuses. Particularly, but not exclusively, in his posting to Honduras in the 1980s. A concise history for Negroponte can be found at, for example, https://www.fpif.org/republicanrule/officials_body.html#negroponte
Given Negroponte’s appointment to this plum position, it strikes me as anomolous to suggest what is quoted above.
As a Former Marine, and I wear that title proudly, and a computer and photograh professional, I have use my photo enhancement ability and examined your ‘blow up’ of the supposed ‘oliver north’ and placed it side by side with a known military photo (at court in uniform) of the know Mr. North and they are so dissimilar in structure they are not the same person.
I was directed to your web site because I was searching for information on Reagan, for a course I am taking in College, who Mr. North worked for and got directed to you based on the key words Iran- Contra- Reagan.
I do not care about sexual orientation, military status or other. I do care when anyone tries to falsify a photo by making it sooo (sic) small that anyone is indistinguishable and then making the only enlargement one of their choosing just to try to fool the public.
There are many things about facial structure and characteristics that can not be faked. For one thing, Mister North has very prominent ears, one thing that you could not fake in your photo. Second, he has a protruding eyebrow ridge, unlike the man in your picture. Furthermore, Oliver North’s nose has been broken to lay to the left of a photo, your man’s lays to the right.
Finally, even if you get cancer and loose enough weight to account for the difference in cheeks, your forehead structure does not change. Mr. North’s is more square and his cheek bones are higher than the man at your function.
I also find it very suspicious that you have the picture of Mr. North posted in such a way that we can not pan to see other objects, such as his name tag, HMMM.
Babin, K. USMC
Kelly- if you look at the links above in this artile, the picture posted here was taken from the Exodus website. The second link still has the pictures. So, if you have a doubt about the authenticity of the picture, the person to blame would not be the author of this site, but the people at Exodus International. I am sure they would be more than happy to answer your questions.