https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhfHqWU8q-E
watch it and see.
I did my thesis on Urban Legends, this was years before there was a commercial Internet and a site called Snopes. My approach to claims about Urban Legends and the institutions that investigates them is academic.
I don't see anything in the linked CT article that has anything other than the word of one Iranian rando to dispute the what motivated the turn of Iran's assets.
Fyi a Brigaddier General is not some random person. It is close to the highest military rank possible.So snopes deliberately left out some significant sources.
Quote from: Aurata on January 04, 2017, 10:37:56 PMFyi a Brigaddier General is not some random person. It is close to the highest military rank possible.So snopes deliberately left out some significant sources.Sorry, I simply don't agree a single low level general (Brigadier General = 1 star General) is a significant source or represents the official position of the Iranian government as regards the deal. My comment stands: not reporting the pure opinion of every Iranian rando does not indicate systematic bias.Also, what facts did I ignore? I'd be happy to reconsider them.
State Dept. confirms $400 million Iran payment conditioned on prisoner releasehttp://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/iran-payment-hostage-release-227170
A letter from the Iranian government that says, in effect, “you have something of ours and we have something of yours,” isn’t exactly the same as a traditional ransom note, but it’s close enough for horseshoes, hand grenades and government work.The fact that the United States sort of owes Iran money gives Washington a face-saving way to half-plausibly say it did not pay a ransom demand, but let’s keep in mind why American policy forbids paying ransom demands in the first place. If kidnapping American citizens is profitable, more American citizens will be kidnapped. If kidnapping American citizens is a waste of effort, money, and time—if, instead, it is punished—far fewer American citizens will be kidnapped.Paying a ransom that isn’t technically a ransom encourages hostage-taking almost as much as paying a regular ransom. Which is why we shouldn’t do it.“The trouble is,” says NPR reporter Michele Keleman, “since then, Iranian authorities have arrested more Westerners. They're now holding three Iranian-Americans as well as dual nationals from the U.K. and Canada.”Why shouldn’t the Iranian regime continue taking American hostages? It pays.http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/blog/michael-j-totten/iran-payment-wasn%E2%80%99t-ransom-it-was-ransom
This is a very serious topic by Thunderlips.
Quote from: Chester Jim on January 05, 2017, 04:55:52 PMThis is a very serious topic by Thunderlips.There are certainly some issues that need to be addressed in the USA with the election of Trump. If there is viable proof of Russian interference or even assistance that should be a huge red flag to the world.
Quote from: thunderlips on January 06, 2017, 09:21:37 AMQuote from: Chester Jim on January 05, 2017, 04:55:52 PMThis is a very serious topic by Thunderlips.There are certainly some issues that need to be addressed in the USA with the election of Trump. If there is viable proof of Russian interference or even assistance that should be a huge red flag to the world.Not necessarily. Russia could have hacked the emails. If Assange were to reveal his source, and it was proven to be Russian (he's careful in saying that it's not a state party - but that's all he says), then there is no red flag to be had. What's interesting about this whole thing is that it really doesn't matter who hacked whom. The information gathered is by far more important. I for one wish that every politician was hacked - then we'd know the real extent of corruption around the world. We are all being led by corrupt morons - that's the reality of things.
Me personally, I can't help but wonder why Russia is so excited to install Trump. Just for profits? Probably the half of it.
Quote from: thunderlips on January 06, 2017, 03:15:29 PMMe personally, I can't help but wonder why Russia is so excited to install Trump. Just for profits? Probably the half of it.I highly doubt that Russia is 'excited' to install Trump, but they did see him as being less likely to start a war with Russia, as opposed to Clinton. I think most leaders around the globe would have been more excited if neither Trump nor Clinton were on the ballot.
Me personally, I can't help but wonder why Russia is so excited to install Trump.
Have you noticed that there is still a lot of discussion relating to the election regarding the alleged Russian hacking?
Quote from: thunderlips on January 06, 2017, 03:15:29 PMMe personally, I can't help but wonder why Russia is so excited to install Trump. Its not surprising you are wondering.. because it appears you have only ever looked at mainstream media.Russia is happy to see Trump enter the White house because they have had nothing but antagonism and provocation from neo-con administrations ever since Bush senior and bill Clinton.Quote from: hippoHave you noticed that there is still a lot of discussion relating to the election regarding the alleged Russian hacking?mainstream media is still controlled by the globalists, and they are committed to either destroying trump or bringing him into their power.If Trump wants to survive he needs to carry out media reforms, because the popular media has become a propaganda ministry for the 1%.
Have you noticed that there is still a lot of discussion relating to the election regarding the alleged Russian hacking? The New York Times, etc. writes stories about it, but probably less concrete evidence has been given about it than the non-existent WMD in Iraq. Although this could partly (even largely) be related to domestic politics (delegitimizing Trump), aggressive actions against Russia seem unwarranted without concrete proof. These sorts of election rigging claims will only bring about international tensions and possibly threats of wars, whether proxy wars or even a major war. So if there is no concrete proof of Russian hacking (which mysteriously surfaced after Hilary lost), the Democrats and others making these claims should STFU. I am not going believe anonymous officials or officials making vague claims no matter how many agencies can be cited.If the Democrats continue along this path, the best hope of a Democratic victory in future elections seems to be the Republicans screwing things up/making people unhappy. Are the Russians capable and even willing to try to influence the election? Hell yes, and vice versa. But unless there is concrete proof, would it not be better for the Democrats and others opposed to Trump to use a different strategy? Why did Trump pick up white working class voters that Obama won? I would be willing to place a large wager that it was not because people were thinking about Russia or Vladimir Putin on their way to work or when they were searching for jobs. And I guarantee you that a different female candidate could have beaten Trump.
Quote from: Mr.DeMartino on Yesterday at 01:40:32 PM Trump is a liar and a con man.