-=> EARL CROASMUN wrote to BILL MCGARRITY on 05-22-18 11:29 <=-

 
 > Regarding the aircraft, you are correct. That was the money the Obama
 > administration repaid which was plastered all over the news as 'hush' money
 > being transported by a private jet.

 EC> And that came as a heck of a surprise to a number of families who had
 EC> legal claims against Iran, who were paid for their damages in 2000, and
 EC> who were told by the Clinton administration that the same $400 million
 EC> was being used to pay them. It was only 16 years later, when the Obama
 EC> payments to Iran became public, that the families found out they got US
 EC> taxpayers money and not money from the frozen Iranian assets. Not
 EC> Clinton's first lie. Not his last one, either.

Here's a little history on said events.  Please carefully read the last
paragraph as it explains the $400 million in depth.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/markaz/2016/10...
-billion-sorting-out-the-details/


 >  EC> Some people may think that it is not a very good idea to give military
 >  EC> equipment to a country that committed an act of war against us. Some
 >  EC> others, maybe including you, may think it is a fine thing to do.

 > Pre-1979 Iran was a close ally. Do you have issue giving allies military
 > equipment? When the embassy was overrun, sanctions were put on Iran which
 > included the stopping of that very sale. At that time, did you not
 EC> agree with
 > the Carter administration?

 EC> The pre-1979 sale, yes. The 1979 sanctions, yes. The 1981 lifting of
 EC> the sanctions to get the hostages back, no.

Really? Did it not belong to the Iranians? Do you actually think Reagan would
have succeeded without paying? Do you feel his reply should have been to start
a war to get the hostages back? Let's see, first sign of aggression, the
Iranians would have killed the hostages. In the first minute, the $13 billion
would have been spent on the costs of the military along with costs ranging
about a $1m/minute to keep it going. I guess that would have been one way of
putting people to work, send them to war.    

 > Iran is a country, no matter who's running it and under international
 EC> banking
 > regulations the money was rightfully theirs or are you suggesting we
 EC> just pull
 > out of the international financial institutions as well and steal the
 EC> monies?

 EC> Nothing was stolen. And your reading of "international banking
 EC> regulations" as requiring us to turn over all the assets of a
 EC> government to revolutionaries who we had not given diplomatic
 EC> recognition to as a legitimate replacement government . . . well, it is

If the US would have kept it as you suggested then yes, the US would have
stolen the $.  Again, in the link I provided, please read about the Tribunal
and their findings.  I'm sure you'll find it very interesting and totally
contradicts your fantasy.


 EC> a bit suspect. But it is interesting that you consider Carter's 1979
 EC> action so deeply illegitimate.


Why would I find his action so deeply illegitimate? Sanctions are a tool and
were used just as they're used today.  I'm sure you have zero issues with
Trump's usage of them. If that's the case, then why are you upset when Carter
did it and followed protocol in repayment.


--

Bill

Telnet: tequilamockingbirdonline.net
Web: bbs.tequilamockingbirdonline.net
FTP: ftp.tequilamockingbirdonline.net:2121
IRC: irc.tequilamockingbirdonline.net Ports: 6661-6670 SSL: +6697
Radio: radio.tequilamockingbirdonline.net:8010/live


... Look Twice... Save a Life!!! Motorcycles are Everywhere!!!
--- MultiMail/Win32 v0.50
 * Origin: TequilaMockingbird Online - Toms River, NJ (1:266/404)