Today's New York Times story is credible but less significant than recent evidence from Madrid that Ronald Reagan's campaign manager tried to delay releasing the hostages until after the election.
Many Americans recall the deep concern felt for the Iran hostages during the Carter administration. I was no exception. After their return to the U.S., I sent a congratulatory letter to former Deputy Sec. of State, Warren Christopher. His gracious reply (as private citizen), dated March 16th, 1981, follows:
"Dear Mr. Vincent" (my legal name then and now)
"Now that I am back in private life, I want to express my deep though belated appreciation for your very thoughtful note about the Algiers negotiations."
"Many able people were involved in this endeavor, under President Carter's close direction. I was fortunate to have had an opportunity to play a role, and deeply thankful that the long nightmare is over."
"All through the negotiations, especially when success seemed so remote, I found reassurance in sensing that we had the support of people like you throughout the nation. I shall always be grateful."
"With regards, Sincerely, Warren Chistopher"
Of course, I still keep his kind letter safe with my keepsakes.
I am not surprised that Reagan and his operatives would exploit and subvert the diligent work of Carter and Christopher's team in the Algerian negotiations.
My pleasure! Dep. Sec. Christopher's obvious deep pride in his team's negotiation outcome seems to support the historical verdict that President Carter's endeavors were the ones that mattered, and that Reagan's alleged intrusions (at the expense of the hostages' well-being) purchased nothing more than presidential puffery.
Not sure I know what you mean, Marla. I use no innuendo in my book or in that excerpt. You seem to be saying that anything short of a smoking gun isn't worth printing. I disagree. Informed speculation bolstered by facts (e.g. Casey's Madrid trip) is important information, though I went to pains to knock down outlandish conspiracy theories.
Many Americans recall the deep concern felt for the Iran hostages during the Carter administration. I was no exception. After their return to the U.S., I sent a congratulatory letter to former Deputy Sec. of State, Warren Christopher. His gracious reply (as private citizen), dated March 16th, 1981, follows:
"Dear Mr. Vincent" (my legal name then and now)
"Now that I am back in private life, I want to express my deep though belated appreciation for your very thoughtful note about the Algiers negotiations."
"Many able people were involved in this endeavor, under President Carter's close direction. I was fortunate to have had an opportunity to play a role, and deeply thankful that the long nightmare is over."
"All through the negotiations, especially when success seemed so remote, I found reassurance in sensing that we had the support of people like you throughout the nation. I shall always be grateful."
"With regards, Sincerely, Warren Chistopher"
Of course, I still keep his kind letter safe with my keepsakes.
I am not surprised that Reagan and his operatives would exploit and subvert the diligent work of Carter and Christopher's team in the Algerian negotiations.
Thanks for sharing that, JoAnne.
My pleasure! Dep. Sec. Christopher's obvious deep pride in his team's negotiation outcome seems to support the historical verdict that President Carter's endeavors were the ones that mattered, and that Reagan's alleged intrusions (at the expense of the hostages' well-being) purchased nothing more than presidential puffery.
So thorough and well-written !
No wonder it took you soooo long to complete the book.
Quality takes time.
Thank you for this reminder, given today’s NYT reporting.
Thanks! Good work does take time.
Not sure I know what you mean, Marla. I use no innuendo in my book or in that excerpt. You seem to be saying that anything short of a smoking gun isn't worth printing. I disagree. Informed speculation bolstered by facts (e.g. Casey's Madrid trip) is important information, though I went to pains to knock down outlandish conspiracy theories.
In mathematics, proofs are born from conjectures, a form of speculation.
In physics, theories are born from hypotheses, a form of speculation.
In pharmacology, new treatments are born from conceptualizing, a form of speculation.
Progress and truth are often conceived in speculation.