Carter meets Hamas chief

[StevenSeagal]

I can't beleive you have the nerve to bring up Reagan as a shining example of greatness in a thread about the exploits of an ex-pres.

The Iranians openly acknowledged that a condition of them getting their payoff for releasing the hostages was that they be released AFTER Reagan was sworn in.

So Reagan's team was in there BEFORE he even served as pres and KEPT the HOSTAGES IN CAPTIVITY longer ON PURPOSE for political gain.

 

 

Please DO share! What is the "payoff" you speak of? "Reagan's team" pre election? When you post something like it's fact, at least have...some facts. I anxiously await your mainstream linked/posted sources. Good luck with this one.

 

Here's some information, just did a search and found plenty describing the alleged misdeeds. Since much of it casts some potential aspersions upon a number of Republicans from the 1980's, and therefore is obviously written by liberals (and that means LIES, duh), it should all be taken with a huge grain of salt. In fact, on second thought, consider not reading it since it might cause brainwash. Next thing you know you'll be doing what liberals love most- having anal sex, and cheating the welfare system! Don't say I didn't warn you:

 

 

Part 1

 

Part 2

 

Part 3

 

Lots More

 

More

 

Note that William Casey, CIA director from 1981-1987, was an integral part of this alleged conspiracy. He's also remembered for being accused of playing a key role in the Iran-Contra affair a few years later. Of course, since he got a brain tumor in 1987, they rightfully absolved him of further investigation. I mean, really, fucking libturds were just trying to beat the man when he was already down. And let's remember that the Iran-Contra affair was just a liberal conspiracy fantasy, because hey, no one ever really was proven guilty (well North was sort of, but he rightfully became an American hero-celebrity instead of going to jail); and neither Reagan nor HW Bush could remember anything(and with Reagan, I do mean anything)...what, is a man's word no good anymore? That's proof enough for me that this was just a libby witchhunt. Although if those things DID happen, not that they did, it would've been justified because selling arms to terrorist nations to fund commie killers in the jungle would have been good for America, but they didn't do it so why am I talking about that...

 

Strangely, I couldn't find any info on Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, or Ann Coulter's websites about these issues. I'll keep looking through more of these mainstream, truth-oriented, non partisan sources to get a more balanced perspective on this important topic!

 

 

 

[STP]

I don't agree with FW on some things but he's right on the October Surprise thing.

 

CREATING A TASK FORCE TO INVESTIGATE CERTAIN ALLEGATIONS CONCERNING THE HOLDING OF AMERICANS AS HOSTAGES BY IRAN IN 1980 (House of Representatives - February 05, 1992

 

House Inquiry Finds No Evidence of Deal On Hostages in 1980 .

 

The OS incident has never been proven.

 

After Watergate, who could not believe in a plot to influence an election?

 

However, Iran-Contra is right on the mark. This is where Ollie uttered his line--"covert actions are necessary to maintain a viable democracy".

[Hugh Conway]

It seems your lack of sight leads you to familiarity with the area beneath animals' tails only.

 

Yes, I am aware of your origin.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

It seems your lack of sight leads you to familiarity with the area beneath animals' tails only.

 

 

[Bug]

"In addition, one of the principal sources for many of the news reports, an Iranian arms dealer named Jamshid Hashemi, has retracted his story. Mr. Hashemi, the report said, told House investigators under oath that he had no knowledge of any efforts to delay the release of the hostages. "

 

Retracted after a visit from MI-6, CIA, or Massad.

Oh, but Ronnie wouldn't do that. Ronnie was great. Ronnie was pure. Ronnie cared about middle class America.

PPFFFFFFFFT.

Ronnie and CLinton were more alike then unlike.

Like I said, balance FW, balance.

[Peter_Puget]

Outside the CC.com universe there is another view of Carter.......

[joblo7]

a closed mind is a useless tool.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

a closed mind is a useless tool.

 

look in the mirror, toolio.

 

[JayB]

Et tu, Obama?

 

"Carter-Hamas talks 'bad idea,' says Obama

 

1 hour ago

 

WASHINGTON (AFP) — White House hopeful Barack Obama Tuesday slammed last week's meeting between former US president Jimmy Carter and the exiled leader of Hamas militants as "a bad idea."

 

"As I said before I think it was a bad idea for president Carter to meet with Hamas without having recognized Israel or denounced terrorism or acknowledged previous agreements given that they are not heads of state," he told a Pittsburgh press conference.

 

"To sit down with them, I think it gave them a legitimacy that was unnecessary."

 

But he told journalists that the stalled peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians must be relaunched.

 

"I think it is very important for the United States to actively engage in helping bringing about negotiations between the Palestinians and the Israelis," he said.

 

Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas "has indicated his willingness to make every effort to sit down with" Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert," Obama said.

 

"I think that's where our energy should go. If we strengthen Abbas, if we are clear in improving the day to day lives of Palestinians then I think that will do more than anything to encourage Hamas to renounce violence rather than simply sitting down with them."

 

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hkeSfu7WNaOscxS6jZ8QSQhH98Pg

[ivan]

a closed mind is a useless tool.

an open mind is a brain-surgeon's delight?

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Et tu, Obama?

 

"Carter-Hamas talks 'bad idea,' says Obama

 

1 hour ago

 

WASHINGTON (AFP) — White House hopeful Barack Obama Tuesday slammed last week's meeting between former US president Jimmy Carter and the exiled leader of Hamas militants as "a bad idea."

 

"As I said before I think it was a bad idea for president Carter to meet with Hamas without having recognized Israel or denounced terrorism or acknowledged previous agreements given that they are not heads of state," he told a Pittsburgh press conference.

 

"To sit down with them, I think it gave them a legitimacy that was unnecessary."

 

But he told journalists that the stalled peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians must be relaunched.

 

"I think it is very important for the United States to actively engage in helping bringing about negotiations between the Palestinians and the Israelis," he said.

 

Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas "has indicated his willingness to make every effort to sit down with" Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert," Obama said.

 

"I think that's where our energy should go. If we strengthen Abbas, if we are clear in improving the day to day lives of Palestinians then I think that will do more than anything to encourage Hamas to renounce violence rather than simply sitting down with them."

 

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hkeSfu7WNaOscxS6jZ8QSQhH98Pg

 

Obama, like all the candidates, is afraid of what kind of shit Carter will throw their way when one of them is in the White House and the seditious fuck is running around undermining US policy.

[ivan]

seditious

it seems strange that a man who dislikes all-powerful/despotic governments would use a word such monstrosities are so prone themselves to use

[KaskadskyjKozak]

a closed mind is a useless tool.

an open mind is a brain-surgeon's delight?

 

Virendra's "mind" couldn't possibly be any more "open" than it is. I'm not sure what genetic mutation has caused that walking brain-stem sans cerebral cortex and functioning synapses...

[KaskadskyjKozak]

seditious

it seems strange that a man who dislikes all-powerful/despotic governments would use a word such monstrosities are so prone themselves to use

 

I choose my words carefully. The man is exactly that: a seditious fuck.

[ivan]

 

I choose my words carefully. The man is exactly that: a seditious fuck.

 

really?

 

Sedition is a term of law which refers to covert conduct, such as speech and organization, that is deemed by the legal authority as tending toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful authority.

so, carter is trying to overthrow the current regime?

[KaskadskyjKozak]

 

I choose my words carefully. The man is exactly that: a seditious fuck.

 

really?

 

Sedition is a term of law which refers to covert conduct, such as speech and organization, that is deemed by the legal authority as tending toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful authority.

so, carter is trying to overthrow the current regime?

 

Read PP's linked article, and tell me a better word, and I'll use that.

 

[olyclimber]

Outside the CC.com universe there is another view of Carter.......

 

convenient source

 

"Commentary is America’s premier monthly magazine of opinion and a pivotal voice in American intellectual life. Since its inception in 1945, and increasingly after it emerged as the flagship of neoconservatism in the 1970’s, the magazine has been consistently engaged with several large, interrelated questions: the fate of democracy and of democratic ideas in a world threatened by totalitarian ideologies; the state of American and Western security; the future of the Jews, Judaism, and Jewish culture in Israel, the United States, and around the world; and the preservation of high culture in an age of political correctness and the collapse of critical standards."

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Outside the CC.com universe there is another view of Carter.......

 

convenient source

 

"Commentary is America’s premier monthly magazine of opinion and a pivotal voice in American intellectual life. Since its inception in 1945, and increasingly after it emerged as the flagship of neoconservatism in the 1970’s, the magazine has been consistently engaged with several large, interrelated questions: the fate of democracy and of democratic ideas in a world threatened by totalitarian ideologies; the state of American and Western security; the future of the Jews, Judaism, and Jewish culture in Israel, the United States, and around the world; and the preservation of high culture in an age of political correctness and the collapse of critical standards."

 

Attack the source rather than dispute the content of the article itself. Convenient.

[olyclimber]

the point (which you apparently missed) is that you can go out on the internets and find an opinion to support anything (which Peter did).

 

for instance, if i wanted to find a website supporting slavery, i could find one.

 

i wasn't attacking the source, merely pointing out that they have their particular bias...as you do.

[Peter_Puget]

seditious

it seems strange that a man who dislikes all-powerful/despotic governments would use a word such monstrosities are so prone themselves to use

 

I hope you teach PE........

 

Speaking to Nicolae Ceausescu carter said:

Our goals are the same, to have a just system of economics and politics, to let the people of the world share in growth, in peace, in personal freedom, and in the benefits to be derived from the proper utilization of natural resources. We believe in enhancing human rights. We believe that we should enhance, as independent nations, the freedom of our own people.

 

 

In Poland carter declared:

 

“our concept of human rights is preserved in Poland . . . much better than other European nations with which I am familiar.”

 

[KaskadskyjKozak]

the point (which you apparently missed) is that you can go out on the internets and find an opinion to support anything (which Peter did).

 

for instance, if i wanted to find a website supporting slavery, i could find one.

 

i wasn't attacking the source, merely pointing out that they have their particular bias...as you do.

 

I think it is obvious to anyone that the article is biased. But it is well-written with copious footnotes and provides a lot of information to think about.

[JayB]

the point (which you apparently missed) is that you can go out on the internets and find an opinion to support anything (which Peter did).

 

for instance, if i wanted to find a website supporting slavery, i could find one.

 

i wasn't attacking the source, merely pointing out that they have their particular bias...as you do.

 

Yes, you can find someone offering up an opinion for or against anything, and we all have our biases that influence our stances on a particular issue.

 

This doesn't mean that all opinions on all sides of an issue are based on facts that are equally sound, logic that is equally compelling, or arguments that are equally valid.

 

If you want to discredit someone's argument on account of the biases that they hold, you have to demonstrate that the said biases have lead them to distort the facts, or embrace unsound logic, put forward flawed arguments on behalf of whatever cause they're attempting to advance, or against whatever cause they're trying to undermine.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[JayB]

The real question is...when is someone going to take note of Obama's obvious biases on this issue and take him to account for espousing ideas that are contrary to those put forth by Jimmy Carter...

[olyclimber]

yes, that is how it works in the ideal world, doesn't it?

[olyclimber]

The real question is...when is someone going to take note of Obama's obvious biases on this issue and take him to account for espousing ideas that are contrary to those put forth by Jimmy Carter...

 

i take it you have finally formulated your opinion?