10 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

You are contradicting yourself. Another poster claimed that the US "was ordered" to pay by the Hague and YOU disputed it. I pointed out that his claim was BS.

 

THE Iranians got paid to release the hostages and that is a quid pro quo. They would not have gotten the money otherwise. It is a ransom pure and simple.

 

Of course I am not contradicting myself.

America negotiated a settlement that said they would pay Iran $400m + interest.

Obama announced in January (and I showed you where) that this was a done deal and they were going to get paid.

They then withheld the agreed payment until Iran released hostages. So they used the 400m they were going to give Iran anyway to fool them into releasing hostages.

Care to tell me where the contradiction is?

All I pointed out was that The Hague did not ORDER the US to pay the money, the US negotiated and DECIDED to pay the money. This was all done in JANUARY.

Sheesh none of this is rocket science.

 

 

Edited August 22, 20169 yr by Chicog

2 hours ago, Chicog said:

 

Cash in foreign denominations was the only way it did not violate existing sanctions.

.

 

 

Kindly tell us the restricting sanctions that preclude 'cash payments'?

50 minutes ago, Boon Mee said:

Kindly tell us the restricting sanctions that preclude 'cash payments'?

 

I did not say that they "preclude cash payments". I said "cash in foreign denominations".

Perhaps you should consult a dictionary when there are big words involved.

 

Quote

 

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.

 

 

http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-sent-cash-to-iran-as-americans-were-freed-1470181874

 

Edited August 22, 20169 yr by Chicog

7 hours ago, Chicog said:

Care to tell me where the contradiction is?

All I pointed out was that The Hague did not ORDER the US to pay the money.

 

 

 

I explained it already, but you are purposely ignoring it, to regurgitate your talking points yet again. Another poster claimed that the Hague ordered the US to pay the money and I called BS on that.

 

You keep trying to claim that paying money to get prisoners back is not a ransom. I called BS on that too.

On 8/21/2016 at 7:03 AM, Ulysses G. said:

 

You got something right for a change. Media bias is a FACT.

 

Media bias is real, finds UCLA political scientist

 

"Of the 20 major media outlets studied, 18 scored left of center, with CBS' "Evening News," The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times ranking second, third and fourth most liberal behind the news pages of The Wall Street Journal.

Media bias is real, finds UCLA political scientist

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664

 

 

Everything from CNN ABC NBC CBS and newspapers are all out for a Hillary coronation at the expense of the free press. Although the New York Post has seen it.  Fox is biased in the other direction, but is almost a lone voice that has not been taken over by the government. The fight is to retain control wealth and power and the free press has joined the government who wants to engage in war and nation building. They are working hard for the oligarchy which will destroy the Republic. When the rule of law continues to collapse and the press becomes the pawn of the establishment, game over.

 

http://nypost.com/2016/08/21/american-journalism-is-collapsing-before-our-eyes/