Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Let's see what proof they have. In a court of law, the defense does not have to spell out what kind of proof they have, it is the prosecutions job to provide it and persuade the jury that it is enough. I do not know how they are going to prove it, and I don't know why they make claims they cannot prove. I guess it is politics as usual.
You are basically admitting they do not have anything but an assumption, and you are also admitting that is enough for you. I am sorry, but I need more than that. I don't need a picture of the cash, since we know the cash was there, it was even announced in January they were sending it there. I want them to prove it was for ransom. I am not asking YOU for anything, so I don't know why you take the "lets see what we can do" stance, as if you were a part of it. Whoever made the claim will now need to prove it.
I am not admitting anything. I am trying to see what meets your criteria that would change your mind toward this being a ransom/blackmail. So far it's nothing.
What would I (or anyone) need for you to say that - yes, it is a ransom? This is not a hard question.
Obama mentioned the timing of the payment in relation to the hostages.
The Iranians said it was a ransom.
The hostages indicated the timing of their released was predicated on the arrival of a plane.
I don't know what else you want.
How about the fact that cash was sent? They couldn't have paid with a check, or by some means that was traceable? Who pays that much with cash - unless they are doing something illegal - or highly questionable at the least?
I am not admitting anything. I am trying to see what meets your criteria that would change your mind toward this being a ransom/blackmail. So far it's nothing.
So far we have not seen any evidence whatsoever, and yet clearly you believe it was ransom. My criteria is same as court of law, which is that things need to be proven beyond any reasonable doubt. Is there a recording between Iran and US where they talk about ransom? Are there emails? Memos? There is nothing but speculation.
Quote:
What would I (or anyone) need for you to say that - yes, it is a ransom? This is not a hard question.
Again, YOU can do, or say nothing unless you were there. Were you there? I am not asking YOU to prove anything. You are simply promoting assumptions made by others.
Quote:
Obama mentioned the timing of the payment in relation to the hostages.
The Iranians said it was a ransom.
The hostages indicated the timing of their released was predicated on the arrival of a plane.
I don't know what else you want.
A plane arrived!!!!! Surely that means it was full of ransom money!!!!! No, it only means a plane arrived.
Quote:
How about the fact that cash was sent? They couldn't have paid with a check, or by some means that was traceable? Who pays that much with cash - unless they are doing something illegal - or highly questionable at the least?
Cash was used!!!!! Surely this means there was a crime!!!!! No, it means nothing. It is illegal to write checks to Iran. It is illegal to send USD. There are no banking relations between US and Iran.
I understand you want to believe it was ransom. You are welcome to your view. I am more critical. Am I welcome to be more critical?
Maybe it makes sense to you that we'd pay ransom with the kidnappers own money, but that's your view, and you are welcome to it.
The right wing has been mentally stimulating themselves for eight years to the idea that Obama hates America and wants to subvert us into a Muslim sharia theocracy. They aren't going to stop now. Anything to distract from Donald Trump is a win for them at this point, in their minds.
So far we have not seen any evidence whatsoever, and yet clearly you believe it was ransom. My criteria is same as court of law, which is that things need to be proven beyond any reasonable doubt. Is there a recording between Iran and US where they talk about ransom? Are there emails? Memos? There is nothing but speculation.
Again, YOU can do, or say nothing unless you were there. Were you there? I am not asking YOU to prove anything. You are simply promoting assumptions made by others.
A plane arrived!!!!! Surely that means it was full of ransom money!!!!! No, it only means a plane arrived.
Cash was used!!!!! Surely this means there was a crime!!!!! No, it means nothing. It is illegal to write checks to Iran. It is illegal to send USD. There are no banking relations between US and Iran.
I understand you want to believe it was ransom. You are welcome to your view. I am more critical. Am I welcome to be more critical?
Maybe it makes sense to you that we'd pay ransom with the kidnappers own money, but that's your view, and you are welcome to it.
OK - that's what I wanted - at least the first two paragraphs.
That pretty much means anything we read is not considered as proof... therefore nothing I post will change your opinion on this - since I was not there. Even an Obama quote saying the money was paid after the prisoners were released won't do it for you.
I don't know - maybe Iran never got the money. Who saw it? I read people complaining about it, but I wasn't there - so I will ignore all of that and assume it never happened... since I wasn't there and I only read about it.
therefore nothing I post will change your opinion on this - since I was not there.
That's my point. I never asked you to provide anything. After all, you didn't make the claim. Those who make the claim need to provide the proof.
Quote:
I don't know - maybe Iran never got the money. Who saw it? I read people complaining about it, but I wasn't there - so I will ignore all of that and assume it never happened... since I wasn't there and I only read about it.
The sending of the money was made public in January, so the issue is not whether or not there was money. They question is whether or not it was paid as ransom. It does not make sense we'd use the kidnappers own money to pay a ransom, but if it makes sense to you, then so be it.
The sending of the money was made public in January, so the issue is not whether or not there was money. They question is whether or not it was paid as ransom. It does not make sense we'd use the kidnappers own money to pay a ransom, but if it makes sense to you, then so be it.
How do you know money was sent in January? You weren't there. Prove it.
No. We both know if this was a Republican president, instead of successfully negotiating a deal, we would be in another decade long war like Iraq.
I know you cons get a hard-on thinking of war, but at this time we can't afford another one.
You know if a Republican was president and this happened, you would be crying wolf.
Last edited by Creekcat; 08-05-2016 at 11:00 AM..
Reason: not going there
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Interesting...
