It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

U.S. Lawmakers Make STUNNING Move To Investigate Obama For Helping ISIS

page: 9
103
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 8 2016 @ 06:23 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth


Glad this thread was bumped... it turned out to be true.


No, it did not. What planet do you get your news from, anyway?




posted on Aug, 8 2016 @ 06:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth


Glad this thread was bumped... it turned out to be true.


No, it did not. What planet do you get your news from, anyway?


Well it really did. Funding a terrorist state with cold hard cash secretly flown in the dead of night on an unmarked plane. Of course Iran will not fund ISIS, just their own terrorist groups who invariably end up joining ISIS.

I tend to get my news from planet Earth, as opposed to planet Obama where all is just peachy. If you ever come back to Earth, maybe you will get up to speed



posted on Aug, 8 2016 @ 06:53 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth


Well it really did. Funding a terrorist state with cold hard cash secretly flown in the dead of night on an unmarked plane. Of course Iran will not fund ISIS, just their own terrorist groups who invariably end up joining ISIS.


This administration is not funding Iran, it is returning Iranian assets that were frozen when they took American diplomats hostage years ago. Those hostages were released after President Reagan promised to provide them with arms, incidentally. There was nothing secret about the return of the assets, it was agreed to months ago as part of the reconciliation involved in the nuclear arms treaty. You may not approve of the treaty, but there was nothing illegal about it. (Sorry if it happens to weaken Russia's hand in the region.)

You are correct about one thing; Iran will not fund ISIS, because Iran is fighting ISIS. They are also fighting the non-Islamist groups who are opposed to Assad's minority government... those are the groups the United States have been secretly funding through other Muslim states... and sadly, yes, they sometimes discover Allah and join up with ISIS. This is why it is a bad policy, not a crime.
edit on 8-8-2016 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-8-2016 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2016 @ 07:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth


Well it really did. Funding a terrorist state with cold hard cash secretly flown in the dead of night on an unmarked plane. Of course Iran will not fund ISIS, just their own terrorist groups who invariably end up joining ISIS.


This administration is not funding Iran, it is returning Iranian assets that were frozen when they took American diplomats hostage years ago. Those hostages were released after President Reagan promised to provide them with arms, incidentally. There was nothing secret about the return of the assets, it was agreed to months ago as part of the reconciliation involved in the nuclear arms treaty. You may not approve of the treaty, but there was nothing illegal about it. (Sorry if it happens to weaken Russia's hand in the region.)

You are correct about one thing; Iran will not fund ISIS, because Iran is fighting ISIS. They are also fighting the non-Islamist groups who are opposed to Assad's minority government... those are the groups the United States have been secretly funding through other Muslim states... and sadly, yes, they sometimes discover Allah and join up with ISIS. This is why it is a bad policy, not a crime.


Refer to the other thread on Obama's funding of terrorists and his secret night time flight foreign cash payment. The way it was paid is very important for a whole host of reasons you can read there and none of it was reported previously.

He is now no different from the leaders of Iran.



posted on Aug, 8 2016 @ 07:11 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth


he way it was paid is very important for a whole host of reasons you can read there and none of it was reported previously.


Does it mention that the US and Iran do not have reciprocal banking arrangements? Or is that too plausible?



posted on Aug, 8 2016 @ 07:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth


he way it was paid is very important for a whole host of reasons you can read there and none of it was reported previously.


Does it mention that the US and Iran do not have reciprocal banking arrangements? Or is that too plausible?


Yep goes into that including the fact that Obama is stonewalling on exact details now and also won't say how the other $1.3bn was paid, if it's been paid and if not how it will be paid. It's already been clarified by for U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey that it is possible to wire the money. Obama lied.



posted on Aug, 8 2016 @ 07:35 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

You were just plain wrong about Iran funding ISIS. In fact, maybe the US has the ultimate plan of forming an alliance with Iran and Israel against the Sunni Islamist states and non-state actors.



posted on Aug, 8 2016 @ 07:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth

You were just plain wrong about Iran funding ISIS. In fact, maybe the US has the ultimate plan of forming an alliance with Iran and Israel against the Sunni Islamist states and non-state actors.


It certainly looks like Obama is in bed with Iran. His actions speak louder than any words.
It's amazing to see a US president openly support terrorism.

You need to expand your knowledge on the relationship between Iran and ISIS. There are indeed reports of Iran using ISIS (through Hamas) to fight in certain areas of the Middle East. Unfortunately terrorism knows no side, only their own extremist goals.
edit on 8/8/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2016 @ 08:01 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth


There are indeed reports of Iran using ISIS (through Hamas) to fight in certain areas of the Middle East.


Link, please.



posted on Aug, 8 2016 @ 08:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth


There are indeed reports of Iran using ISIS (through Hamas) to fight in certain areas of the Middle East.


Link, please.


Start with these two I have on file. Things are not as simplistic as you might read in the watered down MSM.

www.thetower.org...

www.bicom.org.uk...

Reading them tells you why it is insane for Obama to be sending untraceable cash to Iran.



posted on Aug, 8 2016 @ 09:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth


There are indeed reports of Iran using ISIS (through Hamas) to fight in certain areas of the Middle East.


Link, please.


Start with these two I have on file. Things are not as simplistic as you might read in the watered down MSM.

www.thetower.org...

www.bicom.org.uk...

Reading them tells you why it is insane for Obama to be sending untraceable cash to Iran.


Thank you, I am looking forward to reading your sources; they do not look as crazy as I thought they might be. I agree we should not be sending Iran cash, but, technically, it is their money to begin with.



posted on Aug, 8 2016 @ 10:52 AM
link   
So what happened with the original Congressional Investigation described at the top of this thread? Did the spineless Republican majority let it die on the vine, like they did Hillary's Perjury investigation?

What's "stunning" is their lack of action against President Obama and/or Hillary Clinton, after announcing that they're hopping mad and will hold formal investigations and hearings.
edit on 8/8/2016 by carewemust because: see above



posted on Aug, 8 2016 @ 11:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
So what happened with the original Congressional Investigation described at the top of this thread? Did the spineless Republican majority let it die on the vine, like they did Hillary's Perjury investigation?

What's "stunning" is their lack of action against President Obama and/or Hillary Clinton, after announcing that they're hopping mad and will hold formal investigations and hearings.


I rather suspect its just a show. There is no difference between the Ryan's and the Obama's of the world.



posted on Aug, 8 2016 @ 01:32 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust


So what happened with the original Congressional Investigation described at the top of this thread?


Congress approves all arms sales to foreign powers, ergo they would be prosecuting themselves. They seem to have forgotten that while playing to the groundlings.



posted on Aug, 8 2016 @ 01:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: carewemust


So what happened with the original Congressional Investigation described at the top of this thread?


Congress approves all arms sales to foreign powers, ergo they would be prosecuting themselves. They seem to have forgotten that while playing to the groundlings.


Congress did not approve what Obama has done. They only approved the payment, not the method that has led to untraceable cash being handed over at a drop point. They also did not approve a cash for hostages deal. Obama is stonewalling on the specific timings and details of the cash drop and also what is happening/has happened to the other $1.3bn. His lack of transparency must be for a reason. I'd like to see the full flight details and confirmations of when the hostages were released. Exact timings. I'd like to see communications between the apparent separate groups negotiating the hostage release and this payment. As usual Obama, the candidate who promised transparency, is going to hide details and hope time makes people forget.

You are conflating issues again with your point about Congress approval.
edit on 8/8/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2016 @ 05:02 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth


Congress did not approve what Obama has done. They only approved the payment, not the method that has led to untraceable cash being handed over at a drop point. They also did not approve a cash for hostages deal.


Nice try, but it was not a cash for hostages deal: Iranian hardliners are known to create embarrassing situations to discourage easing relations between Iran and the US.



posted on Aug, 8 2016 @ 05:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth


Congress did not approve what Obama has done. They only approved the payment, not the method that has led to untraceable cash being handed over at a drop point. They also did not approve a cash for hostages deal.


Nice try, but it was not a cash for hostages deal: Iranian hardliners are known to create embarrassing situations to discourage easing relations between Iran and the US.


If it was not then Obama should come clean about the facts. As it stands the timing points to a cash for hostages deal.
If Obama has some evidence to refute that then he should provide it.



posted on Aug, 8 2016 @ 05:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth


Congress did not approve what Obama has done. They only approved the payment, not the method that has led to untraceable cash being handed over at a drop point. They also did not approve a cash for hostages deal.


Nice try, but it was not a cash for hostages deal: Iranian hardliners are known to create embarrassing situations to discourage easing relations between Iran and the US.


If it was not then Obama should come clean about the facts. As it stands the timing points to a cash for hostages deal.
If Obama has some evidence to refute that then he should provide it.


I love your circular reasoning. What sort of evidence would you consider acceptable? A note from Khameni?



posted on Aug, 8 2016 @ 07:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: UKTruth


Congress did not approve what Obama has done. They only approved the payment, not the method that has led to untraceable cash being handed over at a drop point. They also did not approve a cash for hostages deal.


Nice try, but it was not a cash for hostages deal: Iranian hardliners are known to create embarrassing situations to discourage easing relations between Iran and the US.


If it was not then Obama should come clean about the facts. As it stands the timing points to a cash for hostages deal.
If Obama has some evidence to refute that then he should provide it.


I love your circular reasoning. What sort of evidence would you consider acceptable? A note from Khameni?


You seem to not like logic, or indeed reading.
I already said that he should provide the specifics that he has refused to so far. The flight details including the logs of the plane flying in secret to the drop point and the plane flying the hostages back. Lets see the exact times. He should also provide the communication meta data between the so called 'different teams' working on the financial settlement and the hostage negotiations. Who was in each team? What communication did they have with each other? Which Iranian representatives were each team talking with? He will never provide any such information because it will incriminate him.

We don't need a mote from Iran. They have already said it was ransom money.




top topics



 
103
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join