Ransom for captives?

[whell]

Originally Posted by bobabode

What part of 'it was their money in the first place' doesn't penetrate your thick skull, Mike?

Originally Posted by Oerets

What you don't get is the simple fact, it was not ransom!

""If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."" J Goebbels

Barney

Originally Posted by d-ray657

Don't expect him to let the truth get in the way of his talking point. He has his orders.

Hate to break it to you, but the administration has already stated the payment of the funds was contingent on the release of the hostages.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...08-18-15-49-33

The Obama administration on Friday defended its decision to make a $400 million cash delivery to Iran contingent on the release of American prisoners, saying the payment wasn't ransom because the Islamic Republic would have soon recouped the money one way or another.

Just because the Obama flunkies don't want to call that bird with webbed feet and a orange bill floating on the pond a duck doesn't mean that it isn't. But you three Obama brown-nosers can stay in denial if you want.

"They would have recouped the money one way or another...." Well, that's all very nice, and very convenient excuse - making. Recouping the money could have been handled via a series of wire transfers over time. It didn't have to be a pallet full of various currencies arriving in the dead of night on a plane at an airport where another plane full of hostages wasn't going to take off until the plane with the money arrived.....but it was.

The administration called the $400 MM "leverage". Very nice word-smithing there. Now that's something Barney's hero Goebbels would have been proud of.

Sure it was a ransom. If it wasn't a ransom, why was there an argument about it within the administration. Why did the politicos in the state department have "over-rule" the attorneys at the DOJ?

Nice try, guys.

[Boreas]

You have the quid and the quo reversed whell. We held their money hostage.

[sheltiedave]

Held it hostage for 40 years. It changed from 400 million to 1.7 billion.

The burning question is ... How are you going to spin the next three payments?

[whell]

Originally Posted by Boreas

You have the quid and the quo reversed whell. We held their money hostage.

No, I don't. I addressed that point already here:

http://www.politicalchat.org/showpos...2&postcount=28

As far as I'm concerned, we should still be hanging on to it because those funds will likely end up being used in the same manner that prompted us to hang on to those funds in the first place.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by whell

No, I don't. I addressed that point already here:

http://www.politicalchat.org/showpos...2&postcount=28

As far as I'm concerned, we should still be hanging on to it because those funds will likely end up being used in the same manner that prompted us to hang on to those funds in the first place.

That's conjectural. By the same token, we may as well freeze all of China's assets until they quit "building Chinese territory" in international waters. Or Russia's because, now that they're going to begin using Iranian bases to attack Syria, they might begin transferring military equipment to them.

[whell]

Originally Posted by Boreas

That's conjectural. By the same token, we may as well freeze all of China's assets until they quit "building Chinese territory" in international waters. Or Russia's because, now that they're going to begin using Iranian bases to attack Syria, they might begin transferring military equipment to them.

What part is conjecture?

Spare me the exercise in moral relativism until China and Russia start taking hostages.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by whell

What part is conjecture?

Spare me the exercise in moral relativism until China and Russia start taking hostages.

The entire quoted post is conjectural.

And what about poor Edward Snowden.

[whell]

Originally Posted by Boreas

The entire quoted post is conjectural.

BS. Its AP's reporting of statements by the administration that confirm that the release of the hostages were contingent on the payment, and that the administration viewed the payment as "leverage".

You might need to look up the word "conjecture".

Originally Posted by Boreas

And what about poor Edward Snowden.

You may also need to look up the word "asylum" of you're suggesting that Snowden is being held hostage.

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by whell

Just because the Obama flunkies don't want to call that bird with webbed feet and a orange bill floating on the pond a duck doesn't mean that it isn't. But you three Obama brown-nosers can stay in denial if you want.

Are the insults and abuse yours, or do they come with the talking points?

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by whell

BS. Its AP's reporting of statements by the administration that confirm that the release of the hostages were contingent on the payment, and that the administration viewed the payment as "leverage".

You might need to look up the word "conjecture".

"As far as I'm concerned, we should still be hanging on to it because those funds will likely end up being used in the same manner that prompted us to hang on to those funds in the first place".

That's conjecture, unless the Mullahs already briefed you on their plans.

You may also need to look up the word "asylum" of you're suggesting that Snowden is being held hostage.

And you need to look up the word "irony".