Jump to content

Obama's Foreign Policy

Tiberius
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 621
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

B-Man Hall of Famer

B-Man

Posted
Posted

 

It was?

 

"What wasn’t disclosed at the time was that the first payment would be $400 million in cash, flown in as the prisoners were released, as The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday."

 

Be gentle

It's tough actually reading an article posted, when you assume you already know what everyone else thinks................... :lol:

 

 

 

 

 

 

More of the same.......................

Currently on CNN's front page: 8 stories on Trump, but zip on Obama secretly sending Iran $400 million for hostages.

Co8VoMeUEAIWoke.jpg Click on to enlarge

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DC Tom Hall of Famer

DC Tom

Posted
Posted

 

Be gentle

It's tough actually reading an article posted, when you assume you already know what everyone else thinks................... :lol:

 

 

 

 

 

 

More of the same.......................

Currently on CNN's front page: 8 stories on Trump, but zip on Obama secretly sending Iran $400 million for hostages.

Co8VoMeUEAIWoke.jpg Click on to enlarge

 

Of course, if you actually go to cnn.com, it's the fifth story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
IDBillzFan Hall of Famer

IDBillzFan

Posted
Posted

Maybe because it was news in January

Well, the beautiful thing about the digital age is those news stories about the US paying a $400M ransom to a terrorist state to free the hostages should be easy for you to find.

 

We'll wait here for all the links you'll provide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nanker Hall of Famer

Nanker

Posted
Posted

I wonder if the State Department violated the nation's Money Laundering Statute.

Title 31 USC Section 5332 –Also as a result of the USA Patriot Act was the passage of Title 31 USC 5332, Bulk Cash Statute. Criminal Investigation has jurisdiction to investigate violations of this statute. This affects anyone who transports or attempts to transport currency or other monetary instruments of more than $10,000, from a place within the United States to a place outside of the United States, or from a place outside the United States to a place within the United States, and knowingly conceals it with the intent to evade the reporting requirements of 31 USC 5316.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ALF All Pro

ALF

Posted
Posted
The $400 million was paid in foreign currency because any transaction with Iran in U.S. dollars is illegal under U.S. law. Sanctions also complicate Tehran’s access to global banks.




The Iranians were demanding the return of $400 million the Shah’s regime deposited into a Pentagon trust fund in 1979 to purchase U.S. fighter jets, U.S. officials said. They also wanted billions of dollars as interest accrued since then. [The Wall Street Journal, 8/3/16]



Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pine Barrens Mafia Hall of Famer

Pine Barrens Mafia

Posted
Posted

 

The $400 million was paid in foreign currency because any transaction with Iran in U.S. dollars is illegal under U.S. law. Sanctions also complicate Tehran’s access to global banks.
The Iranians were demanding the return of $400 million the Shah’s regime deposited into a Pentagon trust fund in 1979 to purchase U.S. fighter jets, U.S. officials said. They also wanted billions of dollars as interest accrued since then. [The Wall Street Journal, 8/3/16]

 

Who gives a ****?

 

I mean really, why should we care what Iran wants? They get nothing and like it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GG Hall of Famer

GG

Posted
Posted

 

The $400 million was paid in foreign currency because any transaction with Iran in U.S. dollars is illegal under U.S. law. Sanctions also complicate Tehran’s access to global banks.
The Iranians were demanding the return of $400 million the Shah’s regime deposited into a Pentagon trust fund in 1979 to purchase U.S. fighter jets, U.S. officials said. They also wanted billions of dollars as interest accrued since then. [The Wall Street Journal, 8/3/16]

 

 

As long as we're quoting

 

Revolutionary Guard commanders boasted at the time that the Americans had succumbed to Iranian pressure. “Taking this much money back was in return for the release of the American spies,” said Gen. Mohammad Reza Naghdi, commander of the Guard’s Basij militia, on state media.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TH3 Veteran

TH3

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

It was?

 

"What wasn’t disclosed at the time was that the first payment would be $400 million in cash, flown in as the prisoners were released, as The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday."

 

 

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/that-400-million-secret-payment-to-iran-isnt-quite-wha-1784775010

 

You need to leaven your reading list

 

http://articles.latimes.com/1986-12-20/news/mn-4453_1_iranian-official

Edited by baskin
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pine Barrens Mafia Hall of Famer

Pine Barrens Mafia

Posted
Posted

 

Yes. We've officially sunk to a craven place under B. Hussein Obama.

 

We cower before tinhorn third rate third world shitholes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GG Hall of Famer

GG

Posted
Posted

 

So in effect, you're saying this is the same as the 1986 ransom payment?

 

And in what kind of world is an illegal US$400 million payment suddenly becomes legal when that exact US$400 million is magically converted into Euros & SFr? Or is this another case where bribes and money laundering do not apply to people who make up the laws that the little people need to live by?

 

I wonder if you would have the same sanguine response if a US company shifted some foreign cash around to grease the skids to land a contract in a country run by sleazy depots?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
IDBillzFan Hall of Famer

IDBillzFan

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

Hey, where are those articles from January you said reported Obama paid a $400M ransom to Iran in exchange for the hostages.

 

You said it was news back then, but you haven't posted those articles.

 

We'll wait here. Thanks in advance.

Edited by LABillzFan
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DC Tom Hall of Famer

DC Tom

Posted
Posted

 

You're quoting Foxtrot Alpha? You're going to blindly accept the mindless musings of a blogger dumber than you?

 

You need to leaven your reading list. Start with some reading about the Eurodif dispute between France and Iran...which was a nearly identical situation (France freezing Iranian assets, Iran kidnapping Frenchmen, France "paying back" the Iranian assets by installment to get the hostages back.) And was considered ransom, then and now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
B-Man Hall of Famer

B-Man

Posted
Posted (edited)
"Of course the Justice Department objected — it was illegal.
It isn’t only the optics; it isn’t only that they are just looking ridiculous in denying that it was quid pro quo. Obviously it wasn’t a coincidence; the reason it was objected to by Justice — there is a statute that prohibits us from engaging in Iran dealing with dollars, so they had to print the money here, ship it over to Switzerland, turn it into Swiss francs and euros, and ship it over to Iran.
If a private company had done this, it is called money laundering. The CEO would be in jail right now."
- Charles Krauthammer

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/
Hostage-Cash-600-LI.jpg
Edited by B-Man
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...