The Reagan Conspiracy

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 10:23 PM
link   
I was learning about Iran, and about the Iran hostage Crisis. Basically, The Ayatollah Khoemeni came into power, after overthrowing the Shah, and created a theocracy and revolution. Shortly thereafter, students overrun marines to capture the US embassy in Iran. The Ayatollah completely supported the crisis. For 444 days, negotiations pressed on until the release of the 66 hostages. They say that the crisis ruined Jimmy Carter's Presidency, and his chance for a second term.

This is partially true, that it hurt Carter, but there is more. The Reagan Conspiracy Theory. Some believe that, in order to get into office, Reagan promised the Ayatollah weapons and funds for his cause, in exchange for the Iranians holding the hostages until the end of Carter's presidency. Don't believe me yet? Here's the kicker: The hostages were released within minutes of Reagan's innauguration.

Did one of our nation's "best" presidents give weapons and cash to one of the countries in the Axis of Evil?




posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 10:31 PM
link   
You were watching this on the History Channel I presume. I stopped watching the WVU/ Pitt game to see this. Really peaked my interest. The only reason I dont buy it, is that the scandal was for using the Ayatollahs influence to get our hostages in Lebanon back, unless you think that was orchestrated too. Which I dont, Ollie North was the fall guy for the Iran Contra scandal, I mean, they used a low level Lt. Col. to do the job someone much higher up in rank should have been taking care of. No harm no foul, the low level guy just gets his intergrity smashed, but everything else is fine. Thats how I see it. I typically dont get involved in all the conspiracy hoopla, but this whole situation ties into todays news really, so it peaks my interest a little.



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 10:32 PM
link   
It was just chance that I watched a little of that show. It just reminded me of when I learned all about Iran in school.



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 10:33 PM
link   
If you equate the fact that the Iranians held them until Reagan took office as proof...how about the idea that they were held to humiliate Carter, who was by the way a complete waste of skin.

If you say that this coincidence was because Reagan set it up then you must be giving Reagan credit for the collapse of Communism. Unless you want to say Bush 1 set it up with the Commies to wait until Reagan was out of office.



posted on Mar, 9 2006 @ 10:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by ludaChris
I mean, they used a low level Lt. Col. to do the job someone much higher up in rank should have been taking care of.


*Clapping hands in applause*

I, too, have been saying this for a long time, that he was too low in rank to have been responsible or in charge of that operation. Being the career military man that he was, I am still surprised that he did not see the politics of plausible deniability being erected by those around him.

JDub



posted on Mar, 10 2006 @ 08:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by crmanager
If you equate the fact that the Iranians held them until Reagan took office as proof...how about the idea that they were held to humiliate Carter, who was by the way a complete waste of skin.
If you say that this coincidence was because Reagan set it up then you must be giving Reagan credit for the collapse of Communism. Unless you want to say Bush 1 set it up with the Commies to wait until Reagan was out of office.


Not sure how the 2 are related, can you explain more about the connection between the collapse of Communism and IranContra?

On another note---Under Reagan, my father was the #2 guy after the president, he was Reagan's Deputy Counselor. I was never quite sure if IranContra was real or not, but then I found an article by Robert Parry where he sourced a memo from my dad to someone in the military, trying to coordinate the scheme of holding back the hostages until Reagan's inauguration. I couldn't believe my dad did this, but then I started finding out about other things that he had done...

Robert Parry is a very well-respected journalist who's been around a long time. I am now convinced that the hostage deal was real, it happened, and that my dad was a part of it. Just my 2 cents.

-Forestlady



posted on Mar, 10 2006 @ 08:41 AM
link   
A Lt Colonel too low rank? Have you ever done any special access projects research at all? A Lt Colonel is the iseal rank for an operation like this - As the man on the ground. Of course above him would of been CIA / NSA controllers, but the day to day say would of been his.

I'll dig the link up for you, but when HAVE BLUE was being developed, a Lt Colonel was in charge. A 2 star General wanted to have a peek at it, and was told by the Lt Colonel that he didn't have the required access and level of clearance. The General blew a fuse, but it was upheld at a higher level- The General lost out to a Lt Colonel with better security clearance and access rights. In the white world rank is all, in the black world of special access and coded projects, rank matters diddly squat unless you have the need to know and are involved.

Yes North was a fall guy, but the man above him was either in congress or the white house.



posted on Mar, 10 2006 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by MadGreebo
A Lt Colonel too low rank? Have you ever done any special access projects research at all?


Cryptologic Technician (Operator)
U.S. Navy 1989-1994

TS/SCI with SBI

Attached to National Security Group Activity (NSGA) Admiral's Staff

Ship's Signal Exploitation Spaces (SSES) SIGINT, ELINT, PHOTINT collection, secure voice control for UHF/HF on:

USS Carl Vinson CVN-70
USS Abraham Lincoln CVN-72
USS Nimitz CVN-68
VQ-1
VQ-5

I didn't research special access projects, I operated in special access projects.


Originally posted by MadGreebo
A 2 star General wanted to have a peek at it, and was told by the Lt Colonel that he didn't have the required access and level of clearance. The General blew a fuse, but it was upheld at a higher level- The General lost out to a Lt Colonel with better security clearance and access rights. In the white world rank is all, in the black world of special access and coded projects, rank matters diddly squat unless you have the need to know and are involved.


Similar situations happened quite often with visiting dignitaries. We had the Undersecretary for the Chief of Staff of the Army pay us a visit and he wanted to see our CommShack in operation. Even with his position we had to sanitize our Comms before he was granted entrance. He went and talked to the embarked Admiral to request special permission and he was told the same thing as above - You don't have the clearance.

Even in the black world rank does matter in that we had O-6's and below scurrying for coffee, acting as messengers or carrying out orders for the Admirals or their guests. If these officers were used as "skirts" (go-fers), then we were ghosts - never seen and never heard from unless there was a problem. Even in my visits to the Pentagon and Ft. Meade (late 1990 and early 1991) I never once encountered a junior officer solely in charge of a project to the level that North was.

JDub



posted on Mar, 10 2006 @ 08:15 PM
link   
BlueTile,
you've been seen and got the T-shirt !


As I said at the end of my post, North may have been running the show on the ground, but his master sat in the White house. North was the fall guy, taking the rap like a good boy for Bush and co (Regan probably didn't remember...)

As for the rank, well I am suprised about the Navy using Officers like gofer boys, as in all of the people I have ever spoken to in the Airforce, researched, collected data from, their accounts of projects with Colonels in sole charge are fairly common... The higher ups just showed up every now and again for budgetary reasons or tech displays with VIPs..

Well, I guess its the Navy way!



posted on Mar, 10 2006 @ 10:00 PM
link   
If it proves anything, Ayatollah Khoemeni was an NWO puppet, trained in Paris in the Tradition of Wahhab

For example:

The Iraqi Shia leadership have been in the bag from the get-go. Because the Iranians are U.S./British/French tools in the region for a long, long time. The British and the French have been in on the whole Iranian revolution from the start. In the 1970's, Ayatollah Khomeini wasn't staying in Paris to see the nice pictures in the Louvre.

Our boys run Iran like they used to run the old Iraq -by means of intelligence-controlled stooges. That's why it was so easy to arrange the Iran-Iraq war.

CIA Myths and Reality

Does anyone seriously think that the Ayatollah Khomeini revolution, remembering his CIA payroll in Paris really controls the oil?

It is highly suggestible that the United States future war on Iran is against a regime it set up as a punching bag years ago to enrich the war industry and others, begging necessity. Really notice how those hostages were released while Reagan and especially de facto President Bush came into office in 1980? And all those stories about an "October surprise," were quite superficial, a red herring telling some truths admixed with some facts. It is all much more complex than your average "conspiracy," and deserving of many other adjectives.



posted on Mar, 10 2006 @ 11:50 PM
link   
Oh Boy, Sometimes I'm amazed at how far out theories can get.
Having read all the paperwork of the Inter-Agency Command Oversight of Covert Clandestine Activities [IACOCCA] , I can assure you that you still haven't even scratched the surface.

In 79 Iran was in bed with Russia for the Russian invasion of Afghanistan. America wouldn't go to war with Russia because the people never would have accepted it since we were only 4 years out of Nam. And especially if we'd have to deal with Iran as well, since they had our hostages. Thats why they took them, to cause turmoil and confusion in america over the hostages and the invasion of Afghanistan. Shortly after Iran took our hostages, Russia invaded afghanistan.

Congress wanted to fight Iran and Russia, but they knew america would never support it because nam was such a disaster. So Tip O'niell and congress started two covert wars. We used Saddam to fight Iran and the Muj to fight Russia, and we started a drug running operation in Arkansas with the blessing of Clinton to covertly finance the wars. Ollie and the Central American thing was just a red herring.

Reagan was opposed to us fighting two secret wars and running drugs to finance it, so he got shot .While he was in the hospital, Alexander Haig orchestrated a coup and signed executive orders to okay the secret wars and the drug running operation.

Congress needed two worthless congressmen to run the drug and weapons smuggling operation, so they tabbed two congressmen who were on their way out. Murtha and Wilson. In the event they got caught, Tip told them he would guarantee they wouldn't go to jail, they would get booted from congress. BUT THEY WERE ON THEIR WAY OUT ANYWAY.

So congress let congressman "coc aine charlie" wilson and congressman John abscam murtha off the hook and they ran the drugs and arms operation along with a CIA guy named Gust Avrakotos. They kept a "database" [AL QAEDA IF YOU SPEAK ARABIC] to keep accurate records so congress could maintain oversight.

Murtha and Wilson made Osama and created Al Qaeda.
Al Qaeda stayed in the drug business after the Arkansas operation shut down. They ran heroin out of Afghanistan ever since 1993. The taliban was killing the Al Qaeda herion smugglers and putting them in prison. So 9/11 happened and America invaded afghanistan and re-took control of the heroin trade. Today Al Qaeda produces more than ten times the herion they were producing pre-9/11. worth 150 billion a year- more valuable than oil.

THE DAY REAGAN GOT SHOT BECAUSE HE WOULDN'T GO ALONG WITH THE COVERT OPERATION AND HAIG TOOK CONTROL OF AMERICA FOR ONE DAY, WAS THE DEFINING EVENT IN THE DEMISE OF AMERICA. PEOPLE IN THE OPERATION WHO GOT A CONSCIENCE OR COMPLAINED OR LEAKED, GOT KILLED. IT'S KNOWN AS THE CLINTON BODY COUNT, BUT IT'S REALLY THE MURTHA BODY COUNT.
Reagan got amnesia or something when he left office and faded away with his memory. He died knowing that America was destroyed on his watch.

After the russian/afghan war some russian nukes went on sale on the black market. murtha and wilson acquired them and still have them,PUTTING THEM ABOVE THE LAW DUE TO BLACKMAIL.
NOW THEY PLAN TO TAKE OVERT CONTROL OF AMERICA IN 2008 WHEN THEY PUT DEAN AND PELOSI IN THE WHITE HOUSE.

THE FIRST GULF WAR HAPPENED WHEN WE HOODWINKED SADDAM INTO THINKING WE WOULD OKAY HIS INVASION OF KUWAIT AS COMPENSATION FOR HIS HELP DURING THE 80'S. WHEN HE INVADED, MURTHA BROUGHT WITNESSES TO THE HOUSE FLOOR TO SAY THAT IRAQI SOLDIERS WERE STOMPING NEWBORN BABIES TO DEATH IN HOSPITALS BECAUSE HE COULDN'T GET CONGRESS TO OKAY A WAR WITH SADDAM, BECAUSE CONGRESS FELT SADDAM WAS AN ALLY BECAUSE HE FOUGHT IRAN FOR US FOR 10 YEARS. MURTHA JUST WANTED TO DESTROY THE ARMY HE SUPPLIED HIM WITH.

P.S. THE DAY REAGAN WAS SHOT BY JOHN HINCKLEY, HIS FAMILY WAS HAVING DINNER WITH THE BUSHES AT NIEL BUSHS HOUSE. THATS WHY HAIG WAS ABLE TO TAKE CONTROL OF THE WHITE HOUSE LONG ENOUGH TO SIGN THE EXECUTIVE ORDERS THAT WERE NEVER MADE PUBLIC. ORDERS TO RUN DRUGS AND SELL THEM ON THE STREETS OF AMERICA TO FINANCE TWO SECRET WARS. WHICH WILL EXPLAIN REAGANS "WAR ON DRUGS" PLAN SOON AFTER HE WAS SHOT.

NOW YOU ACTUALLY KNOW SOMETHING!!!!!!

[edit on 10-3-2006 by shot messenger]



posted on Mar, 11 2006 @ 12:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by BlueTileSpook

Originally posted by ludaChris
I mean, they used a low level Lt. Col. to do the job someone much higher up in rank should have been taking care of.


*Clapping hands in applause*

I, too, have been saying this for a long time, that he was too low in rank to have been responsible or in charge of that operation. Being the career military man that he was, I am still surprised that he did not see the politics of plausible deniability being erected by those around him.

JDub


Well look at it like this as well, he took the fall, really didn't suffer all that much, and now he is still around, makes very good money, and is better off then he would have been if noone had ever heard of him.

He made a pretty good deal for himself to take the fall for the upper ranking people.



posted on Mar, 11 2006 @ 12:19 AM
link   
Yes, I agree. He is living a very good life as compared to what it would be had he not stood up for himself.

Jdub



posted on Mar, 11 2006 @ 03:41 AM
link   
I'm a Ronnie fan.


Without him, actually, we would all be speaking russian, or may be worse chinese , and would have all a communist party card.


When President Reagan replaced Carter, the ICBM's balance was 3 for 1, in favour of the Soviets. The MBT's balance, at least 4 for 1, also in favour of the Soviet and so on. Russians SS-20 IRBM's were targeted right over my head and Reagan MX & missiles and B-1 bombers were there to counter-balance the Soviet threat and to tell them to back off.


So may be he is not 100 % clean, but thank you Mister Reagan.



posted on Mar, 11 2006 @ 07:41 AM
link   
Only in the US could the media and public make a hero out of someone like Oliver North - a traitor and now Fox News analyst and battlefield reporter.



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 12:02 AM
link   
I expounded on the JFK thread in this forum.
I had to be brief but i can expand on any issue you care to look at.

All I'm asking is a chance to prove it. I know the truth is hard to handle and it is a shock to your mind when you realize that everything you believe is a lie, but i feel it's better to shock the hell out of you with the truth so you can at least have a chance to save yourselves, than die in your ignorance.

No need to waste your time insulting me. I really don't care. I have bigger things to deal with now that I exposed the truth.

Any spooks out there- YOU KNOW ME. TREE OF LIBERTY!!!!!!!!!!!



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 12:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by shot messenger
I expounded on the JFK thread in this forum.
I had to be brief but i can expand on any issue you care to look at.

All I'm asking is a chance to prove it. I know the truth is hard to handle and it is a shock to your mind when you realize that everything you believe is a lie, but i feel it's better to shock the hell out of you with the truth so you can at least have a chance to save yourselves, than die in your ignorance.

No need to waste your time insulting me. I really don't care. I have bigger things to deal with now that I exposed the truth.

Any spooks out there- YOU KNOW ME. TREE OF LIBERTY!!!!!!!!!!!

Charlie Wilson never actually met or communicated with Osama Bin Laden, neither did he dabble in the drugs trade. The resistance movement in Afghanstan was funded with CIA funds (approved by the Carter, Reagan and Bush administrations), private funds sourced by Wilson himself (mostly private donations by his wealthy contacts in the oil business) and the Saudis.

Get your facts straight next time mate.



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 03:42 AM
link   
shotmessenger:

It is far too easy to say that 911 happened just so that factions in the US could take back the heroin trade in Afghanistan.

Considering all the aspects of 911 and all the potential players that is an insufficient outcome in my opinion. If you want to add more winners/plans to the outcome of 911 then it would be more believable.

Also there may have been other options for the US to get back into Afghanistan than 911 that were a lot cheaper and less risky too.





new topics
 
0

log in

join