State Dept. says $400 million cash payment to Iran was contingent on American prisoners' release

a reply to: StallionDuck

Is ransom when you give back siezed assets?

Does the irs give you a ransom if you negotiate a settlement?

Nope. It may be your opinion its bad diplomacy but its their money.

Yeah if we just gave them money it would be ransom. The story so far is they negotiated giving it back and Obama allegedely said not unless we get the hostages first.

Lets wait and see until more comes out before going alex jones on this.

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: dawnstar

Here's where it came from:

But still at issue as Obama began his second term was $400 million that Iran in the late 1970s had paid for U.S. fighter jets, while Tehran was still a U.S. ally. After it turned into an enemy in 1979, Washington was not about to deliver the jets. But, all these years later, Iran wanted its money back—and with interest.

All told, Tehran was asking The Hague arbitrators (comprising equal numbers of U.S., Iranian and neutral judges) for $10 billion. Fearing they might actually be awarded that much, or something like it, the Obama administration negotiated privately with Tehran, which agreed to settle for $1.7 billion. The $400 million stacked on pallets was the first installment.

Link.

So another $1.3b to go.

Well there you go. Sounds like it wasnt such a bad deal after all.

Secondly Iran hasnt actually physically attacked the us unlike arr saudi friends.

Rand Paul is the only guy trying to stop billions of dollars of advanced munitions going to Saudi's. Which in turn kill Yemeni civilians at a rate worse than syrian casualties.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: StallionDuck

Is ransom when you give back siezed assets?

Does the irs give you a ransom if you negotiate a settlement?

Nope. It may be your opinion its bad diplomacy but its their money.

Yeah if we just gave them money it would be ransom. The story so far is they negotiated giving it back and Obama allegedely said not unless we get the hostages first.

Lets wait and see until more comes out before going alex jones on this.

It is when you didn't plan on giving it back in the first place.

Why would you embargo someone if you planned to give them everything they missed out on after the embargo ends?

Will the IRS give back your money once they take it from you?

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: StallionDuck

Is ransom when you give back siezed assets?

Does the irs give you a ransom if you negotiate a settlement?

Nope. It may be your opinion its bad diplomacy but its their money.

Yeah if we just gave them money it would be ransom. The story so far is they negotiated giving it back and Obama allegedely said not unless we get the hostages first.

Lets wait and see until more comes out before going alex jones on this.

All that money was supposed to go to the victims' families of the Beirut bombings and other terrorist activities sanctioned by Iran.

Before the Supreme Court could make its final ruling in April allowing judgement in favor of those families agreeing that the frozen Iranian money would be used for satisfying their 2.65 billion dollar judgment, Obama jumped ahead by about three months, in January, and agreed to give this money to Iran.

One of those men held by Iran didn't even come back to America He stayed in Iran and went back to his old apartment.

After Obama gave cash money to Iran, they promptly detained two more Americans. I guess they will be used as leverage later to get more cash from Obama.

a reply to: loam

lol... straight off the press, onto the pallet, and off to iran it goes!!! and... the press is running hot for the next installment...

knowing our gov't, we can time when the currency is gonna fall by when the last installment has been delivered. a month afterwards, it will be opps, sorry, that money isn't good anymore. makes good fuel for the fireplace though!!

a reply to: StallionDuck

the alternative of letting the world court decide how much Iran should be reimbursed wasn't that pleasant to them?

Another rose garden lie by this admin, what a surprise.

Whilst parts of the US look more like Mogadishu than a first world superpower, $400 million is just pumped away!!!...

Jesus Christ the US government are a bunch of ass hats...

If you are a US citizen in Iran your net worth has just gone through the roof, DO NOT take local taxis anywhere..

RA

To all... I don't care how you flip it, it's still the same thing.


Ransom:
noun
1.the redemption of a prisoner, slave, or kidnapped person, of captured goods, etc., for a price.
2.the sum or price paid or demanded.
3.a means of deliverance or rescue from punishment for sin, especially the payment of a redemptive fine.

verb (used with object)
4.to redeem from captivity, bondage, detention, etc., by paying a demanded price.

It's leverage. One item for another. Give me prisoners and I give you money. Without prisoners, you don't get money. Right? Is this true or false? It's a ransom.

a reply to: queenofswords

Actually we were about to owe them 10 billion and Obama negotiated it down to 1.3billion .

a reply to: StallionDuck

Nope

Unless you consider a court ruling ordering you to pay someone is ransom.

Obama negotiated and settled outside of the international court lowered the debt owed, they paid us billions for fighters we never made.

Not ransom.

We have to start calling a whole lot of negotiations ransom in many different fields by your definition.

This money was documented to be given totally seperate from any iranian diplomacy. Obama actually pulled a smart move for a change.

Its taken 2 weeks for the spin doctors to somehow concoct a story that softens the fact that money was handed over for the release of hostages.
100% Ransom.

It's pretty simple - Obama paid $400m to get hostages released. Still wondering how the other $1.3bn was paid... wired or cash?...

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: queenofswords

Actually we were about to owe them 10 billion and Obama negotiated it down to 1.3billion .

Really? I would like your source for that since this issue has been in the world courts for decades and there was no indication they were anywhere near reaching any sort of "agreement" about that, especially since it is a well known fact that Iran is a world sponsor of terrorist activities all over the world. I seriously doubt Obama did anything of the sort. He was making stuff up and using supposition, or most likely, lying...the thing he does best.

a reply to: luthier

The assets were not seized, they were frozen after Iran took Americans hostage in 1979.

There have beeen sanctions against the islamic dictatorship of iran ever since.

Those assets should have been given to the hostages decades ago,

originally posted by: queenofswords

All that money was supposed to go to the victims' families of the Beirut bombings and other terrorist activities sanctioned by Iran.

Before the Supreme Court could make its final ruling in April allowing judgement in favor of those families agreeing that the frozen Iranian money would be used for satisfying their 2.65 billion dollar judgment, Obama jumped ahead by about three months, in January, and agreed to give this money to Iran.

One of those men held by Iran didn't even come back to America He stayed in Iran and went back to his old apartment.

After Obama gave cash money to Iran, they promptly detained two more Americans. I guess they will be used as leverage later to get more cash from Obama.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Deserves bolding !!!

I guess we now know what Obama is all about don't we.

Just so we don't forget, this is what the State Dept said a couple of weeks back:

“As we’ve made clear, the negotiations over the settlement of an outstanding claim… were completely separate from the discussions about returning our American citizens home,” State Department spokesman John Kirby had told the Wall Street Journal.

Now the story changes (probably after a few damage limitation round tables). You simply can't trust anything that comes from these people.

a reply to: JacKatMtn

Why would we send their money back to them before the prisoners were released? That's $400 million in leverage. The question is was the release of the prisoners quid pro quo for the unfreezing of the assets. If you believe what Kirby is saying, the answer to that question is "no."

The logic for not paying ransom is irrefutable. If the wouldbe hostage taker knows that you won't pay no matter what, there's no financial incentive for taking the hostage. Set aside the political blathering and ask yourself if you think that what has occurred will give Iran reason to believe that they can now go out and imprison more people with the goal of using them to negotiate the release of more frozen assets?

Do you really see that happening? What we're seeing is a very tentative thawing of the relationship between the US and Iran and it could completely stall at any point. Some of these prisoners had been in custody going back to what? 2007? I don't see Iran being stupid enough to believe that there would be anything to gain from imprisoning additional US citizens in hopes of getting us to release $400 million which is frankly small potatoes compared to the $100 billion or so that they're hoping to eventually have unfrozen.

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance
Trump right again.

And of course no apology from the Obama whitehouse or his lapdog media for calling Trump a liar.

Trump right again? If I post 100 lies Donald Trump has told over the last 100 days, will you stop pretending like he's not a liar? Is that what it will take?

Let's start with Trump's lie about seeing a video of the "money plane" that didn't exist. I'll be gracious and not count it as multiple lies even though he lied about it after his own campaign admitted it didn't exist.

Trump lie #1:

"It was interesting because a tape was made," Trump says of a nonexistent video of an unmarked plane dropping $400 million in Iran, reportedly at the same time Iran released four U.S. hostages. "You saw that with the airplane coming in — nice plane — the airplane coming in and the money coming off, I guess. Right?"

Trump first said he saw the "top secret" video, which he claimed Iran released to embarrass the U.S., during a rally in Daytona Beach, Florida, on Wednesday.

"Remember this: Iran — I don't think you heard this anywhere but here — Iran provided all of that footage, the tape of taking that money off the airplane," Trump said at the campaign event. "Right?"

If your biggest problem with presidential administrations is lying and your actively supporting Donald Trump, that's some pretty severe cognitive dissonance.

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance
a reply to: luthier

The assets were not seized, they were frozen after Iran took Americans hostage in 1979.

There have beeen sanctions against the islamic dictatorship of iran ever since.

Those assets should have been given to the hostages decades ago,

That money was settled years ago. Iran has given 2.5 billion to private claims.

originally posted by: queenofswords

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: queenofswords

Actually we were about to owe them 10 billion and Obama negotiated it down to 1.3billion .

Really? I would like your source for that since this issue has been in the world courts for decades and there was no indication they were anywhere near reaching any sort of "agreement" about that, especially since it is a well known fact that Iran is a world sponsor of terrorist activities all over the world. I seriously doubt Obama did anything of the sort. He was making stuff up and using supposition, or most likely, lying...the thing he does best.

All private U.S. claims before the tribunal have been resolved, with Iran paying more than $2.5 billion to American people and businesses. Some claims remain unresolved.

From article on page one.

Yeah these negotiations have been ongoing. Money has been exchanged since the 80's when the international cases started.