Galt's Gulch

US Ransom payment

Posted by Mitch 7 years, 8 months ago to Politics
40 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

Listening to the live feed before the POTUS press conference and heard a reported state that a previous hostage state that the plane with the hostages was delayed because they need to wait for another plan to land first. This was the plan with the cash.

Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

    -
  • Posted by $ allosaur 7 years, 8 months ago
    That ransom is not a ransom because the president who repeatedly told lies about Obamacare, the IRS and tons of other stuff says it ain't.
    So don't go racist on that racist, y'all. The PC police will get you. Best you shut up and sit down.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by $ Suzanne43 7 years, 8 months ago
      Got that right. The Jerk has a 56% approval rating, so when you have the media covering for you, you can do and say pretty much what you want. The Jerk has been living rent free in my brain for the last eight years. The stress is getting to me. Maybe it is time that I shut up and sit down, y'all. Well, maybe until the weekend is over.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ allosaur 7 years, 8 months ago
        I once saw a cartoon of Obama doing a silly arm wriggly dance while surrounded by a protective ring of media all looking outward with mean expressions and their arms crossed.
        It did not have a caption what I can recall but I would caption it, "Nothing to see here, folks. Move along."
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by johnpe1 7 years, 8 months ago
      the irony is that the progressives want to make up for
      slavery with slavery. . the sons and daughters of the
      slave owners -- many generations later -- are being
      enslaved in return. . the new slave owners -- blacks,
      progressives, liberals -- have ganged together to
      make the rest pay for history with reduced freedom
      and heavy taxes. . the new slave owners can do no
      wrong -- they lie, cheat and steal with impunity -- and
      enforce their domination of the rest with PC police
      actions and destruction of reputations, etc. . isn't
      this grotesque irony? -- j
      .
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 7 years, 8 months ago
        it started with reverse racism and has grown to this but as some supporters found out they are already slaves the neo leftists. The ones who were ordered out so only blacks could be seen as supporting some thing or another. Reverse sexism is that third wave movement of bubba butt lovers and we have reverse bigotry of course alive and well. Bear in mind the main proponent and supporter is the US Government if only because of their love affair with racist, sexist questions on every document they own.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by wmiranda 7 years, 8 months ago
    POTUS lied like Hillary. He said they sent cash because they didn't have banking relations with Iran. What a bunch of crap. And the useful idiots take his word for it. If we knew this since January as he claims, you mean to say the United States of America could not figure it out or open an account? The reason is that would have left a trail and no one was supposed know. A released hostage said that when he inquired as to why the hours delay, he was told because they had to wait for the other plane to land or they wouldn't be release. BOOM! POTUS has learned a lot about lying from Hillary but not enough. Don't you hate it when someone lies and their pants don't catch on fire?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 7 years, 8 months ago
    Obama couldnt negotiate for the price of a turnip at the market, let alone with a foreign country. Obviously neither can Hillary. All she wants is absolute power, not good stuff for us.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 7 years, 8 months ago
    Cash; small bills, please. No dye packs, or tracker chips, either. Hezbollah hates those.

    Ignore the nit pickers in the DOJ. After all, what's a little money-laundering between friends. Nudge, nudge, we're still buddies, right Barack?

    By the way, is Hillary going to stick by her promise to push the Russkies to give us a good deal on that U.S. uranium? I hope that big Saudi deposit in her foundation is a good reminder.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 7 years, 8 months ago
    O just keeping his people fed and better prepared for their jihad. No my president, hardly my country anymore.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by Mitch 7 years, 8 months ago
      I finished watch that press conference and realized that it wasn’t about the ransom allocations of money at all but how we are winning the battel against radical extremists. The planted reporter did her job and asked the exultant one about the allocation of this money being a ransom payment. His eyes rolled, went in to super confident mode and said, just like he practice in the mirror - Look, these were planned payments… and everyone in the room rolled over, legs in the air waiting for a belly rub and went back to asking if he thought Donald Trump was stable enough to have access to the nuclear arsenal.

      This isn’t a normal election cycle at all and we better realize that this time it’s for all of the marbles. If Trump wins, we continue, maybe we improve after disruption. If the b**** wins, I see continued roadmap of failed policies and corruption. Selling out our interest and our children’s interest.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by minorwork 7 years, 8 months ago
    It was Iran's money for which they had been denied access of their deposits by sanctions. I doubt they get much interest on it over the years they were not allowed to touch it, eh?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by $ puzzlelady 7 years, 8 months ago
      That's right. We held their money hostage. There's much more to this story and its history than we are told. We are not the innocent offended. We wronged them first (back in 1953). We are trying to whitewash our own misdeeds.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 7 years, 8 months ago
        Pardon me. The people who did that may have had a toad in their pocket but I wasn't one of them. The use of we is inappropriate and it started long before 1953. My parent weren't involved either. So let's go with a pertinent question that does involve 'we.' How long before they demand then sue for lost interest and once graned will they accept US currency?
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by minorwork 7 years, 8 months ago
          Did the agreement specify a non-recourse payment of returned frozen funds? Should have been in order to keep from having to be concerned with interest. I don't know if there was or not the non-recourse clause in the agreement. Would have made your argument about lost interest moot if it was in the agreement.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by Mitch 7 years, 8 months ago
    So far, it’s all on our “success” fighting ISIS (he is saying ISIL). Nothing about the ransom payments to Iran yet.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by lrshultis 7 years, 8 months ago
    There can be no honor, niceness, honesty, someone might repeat it later, or any kind of rational argument at the point of a gun. A country with any kind of collective (sic) integrity would, in the case of its citizens being kidnapped, immediately pay a ransom and when the kidnapped are released, the kidnappers should immediately by attacked and killed if possible. Never leave things so that they can be repeated, there can never be a rational discussion when under the threat of force. It would not be pretty, but would be more of a deterrent than the political solutions of today.
    Get over the wasted energy of whether it was a ransom or not.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by $ puzzlelady 7 years, 8 months ago
      Aha, the shoe is on the other foot. The reason the embassy was held hostage was to prevent a repeat of the coup that America staged in 1953, overthrowing the legitimately elected government and installing the Shah as America's puppet in Iran. I know this because I lived there and knew some of the students involved. Notice that no harm came to the hostages, and they even released a couple for health reasons. Hostage taking does not come out of the blue; there are grievances for which America tries to hide its culpability. Yet even with 25 years of U.S. meddling in Iran's internal affairs, and the setting up of the Shah's secret police, the Savak, whom we encouraged to practice torture and other atrocities, none of the 52 hostages was harmed. So we're fed typical American obfuscation and outright lies to justify our own atrocities. The forming of the Islamic Republic was our chickens coming home to roost. When will we ever learn?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by lrshultis 7 years, 8 months ago
        And what did the hostages have to do with the events in 1953? Yes the 63 years since 1953 has left revenge in the minds of some 70+ year old people who must right a wrong by harassing those who had nothing to do with it and may not even have been born then. Some kind of collective guilt for contemporary kidnapped hostages? You are so lacking in the valuing of liberty, just as those who think prison for certain non-violent crimes for life or even shorter terms are not so bad because prisons are like country clubs today, that being treated somewhat well (wiki article sure does not indicate that with the 1979 hostages) without noticeable harm is no problem with you? Nothing about the hostage takers most likely being theocrats, socialists, and Marxists or any such? Besides, I see nothing about the hostages being ransomed.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ puzzlelady 7 years, 8 months ago
          The hostages were taken not as some kind of innocent individuals with no part in wrongs done by the US to Iran, but as functionaries representing and carrying out US policies. It was to preempt the US from repeating its previous staging of a coup to bring back the Shah, a very reasonable fear considering that the US was encouraging the Shah to increase his suppression of dissidents with ever more brutal tactics. Your pronouncement that I don't value liberty is erroneous and out of context. The hostage takers, by the way, were mostly students motivated by their love of freedom. They were not Marxists and those that turned to their religious leaders for inspiration did so as their only recourse. The US drove them into Khomeini's arms. Some of them later left the country, deeply disenchanted with the results of a revolution they had idealistically supported.

          About ransom, some people wanted to call it that to deny that it was the US who had held Iran's money hostage.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo