Politicspoliticstonyperkinsreaganiran

Thu Jan 21, 2016, 11:35 PM

Tony Perkins says Reagan would never have ‘negotiated’ with Iran, forgets about Iran-Contra



Yesterday, GOP Rep. Ted Poe sat down with Family Research Council president Tony Perkins on Perkins’s podcast Washington Watch where they both complained about the United States’s deal to swap prisoners with Iran. Both were disgusted with the negotiation, and said that Ronald Reagan would never agree to such a deal.

“Long gone are the days of Ronald Reagan when we said, ‘We don’t negotiate with terrorists.’ Now we make all kinds of deals and it just appears that America comes out on the short end of the deal,” said Perkins.

Perkins apparently forgot about the Iran-Contra affair, the biggest scandal of Reagan’s presidency. The Reagan administration sold weapons to Iran in exchange for Iran’s assistance in the Lebanon Hostage situation. The administration then used the profits to support the “Contras” in Nicaragua, fighting the Sandinista government.

Not only did Reagan “negotiate with terrorists” much more literally than Obama, the administration did it illegally and covered it up. Nearly a year later, information was leaked that confirmed the deal. The administration “lost” possibly damning paperwork before Reagan took responsibility, despite previously claiming to have no knowledge of it.

http://deadstate.org/tony-perkins-says-reagan-would-never-have-negotiated-with-iran-forgets-about-iran-contra/

17 replies, 859 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 17 replies Author Time Post
Reply Tony Perkins says Reagan would never have ‘negotiated’ with Iran, forgets about Iran-Contra (Original post)
R2D42 Jan 2016 OP
maximumbrainusage Jan 2016 #1
nolidad Jan 2016 #2
JeffJenk Jan 2016 #3
nolidad Jan 2016 #4
JeffJenk Jan 2016 #5
nolidad Jan 2016 #7
JeffJenk Jan 2016 #11
nolidad Jan 2016 #14
Junglejim43 Jan 2016 #8
nolidad Jan 2016 #10
nolidad Jan 2016 #15
Strange Luck Jan 2016 #16
nolidad Jan 2016 #17
Ohio Joe Jan 2016 #6
JeffJenk Jan 2016 #12
Docbroke Jan 2016 #9
Basset Hound Jan 2016 #13

Response to R2D42 (Original post)

Fri Jan 22, 2016, 12:12 AM

1. I believe the technical word

is dumbass

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to R2D42 (Original post)

Fri Jan 22, 2016, 01:41 AM

2. It appears that many do not know the different "negotiations" that took place.

For Reagan it was a business deal.

For Obama it was a capitulation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #2)

Fri Jan 22, 2016, 09:51 AM

3. So sabotaging rescue attempts for Americans held hostage overseas is okay IF DONE FOR PROFIT?

 

Illegal deals are okay if done for profit?

Financing terrorists that kill nuns and priests is okay if done for profit?

Thank you for admitting that capitalism is a cancer that must be excised from our society if we are to have any chance of survival.
And that Saint Alzheimer could do no wrong, even deliberately killing innocents with a disease he thanked god had struck that segment of the population with as well as putting Americans in danger to further his political ambitions.

Raygun was pure shit and the start of the downward spiral this nation has been on ever since.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JeffJenk (Reply #3)

Fri Jan 22, 2016, 01:34 PM

4. Wrong again

who sabatoged rescue attempts???

Sorry captialism has many many errors but it has done more good for more people for longer periods of times than the Marxist- Socialisim you propose ever could!

Just remember this- America needs to build a wall to keep people out! The USSR had to build a wall to keep people in!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #4)

Fri Jan 22, 2016, 03:26 PM

5. Raygun sold arms to the Iranian terrorists holding American hostages so they would keep them

 

until after the election. Then turned around and gave that money to the anti-government terrorists we were backing in Nicaragua, killing more innocents.

Illegal AND immoral on several levels.
But nothing was allowed to stand in the way of his coronation.
As a result, the cancer of conservative policies was accelerated with a vengeance that we are still suffering from and trying to dig out from under today.

From tax cuts for the rich to gutting working people's rights to betraying the American Dream of 99% of us, that piece of shit was as bad as his beginning of dishonesty and corruption and treason promised.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JeffJenk (Reply #5)

Fri Jan 22, 2016, 08:01 PM

7. And you have proof of this?

Lets see Reagan was not a senator or congressmen, but he had a secret deal as a private citizen while Carter was in power to seel, ship and give huge weapons cache to Iran to keep the hostages in Iran until after his election??

Wow and I thought the percoset they gave me after my surgery made me loopy! Can I have some of what you are taking???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #7)

Sat Jan 23, 2016, 08:13 PM

11. Iran-Contra is fact, and history, idiot. Try reading, if you can. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JeffJenk (Reply #11)

Sun Jan 24, 2016, 09:24 AM

14. Iran- Contra? Yes it is history. Reagan selliong arms to Iran prior to his becoming president?

You need to show the proof of that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #2)

Fri Jan 22, 2016, 09:18 PM

8. Great except for the facts


There is evidence that Reagan or some of his people negotiated with the Iranians to hold the hostages until Reagan was elected and inaugurated. Lied about it.

Regan secretly and illegally negotiated with Iran. Not a business deal a lillegal business deal in two directions. Selling arms to Iran was illegal and using the money in Nicaragua for the Contra rebels was illegal.

Obama negotiated in the open and made the Middle East at least a little safer. Rather than invading or bombing Iran, he negotiated. The reason the Repubs are angry is they will now have a more difficult time invading or bombing Iran and starting another Bush style war.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junglejim43 (Reply #8)

Sat Jan 23, 2016, 06:33 AM

10. Well then, where is the evidence???

or do you expect us to just take your word for it!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Junglejim43 (Reply #8)

Sun Jan 24, 2016, 09:25 AM

15. Still waiting!

Or did you want to just fling some innuendo out there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolidad (Reply #15)

Sun Jan 24, 2016, 09:33 AM

16. This might be relevant

"Of course there were negotiations with the Carter administration over the hostages," Bani Sadr affirms. The US had frozen some $12 billion in Iranian assets in US banks, as well as whatever arms the Shah had bought and paid for but which had not yet left the US. The bargaining with Carter, however, was primarily over the money, and the deal Carter eventually offered returned only $4 billion immediately and involved no arms. One reason Khomeini was becoming increasingly disaffected with Bani Sadr was the moderate president's insistence that Iran accept the Carter offer and get on with fighting the war with Iraq.

Savak Supplied the Connection
"There were also secret negotiations," Bani Sadr maintains, and it is these negotiations between officials of the Khomeini regime and members of the Reagan presidential campaign staff that would explain the subsequent unpredictable Reagan administration Mideast policies. As a result, a contract was signed with Israel for shipment of arms in March 1981, Bani Sadr says, and by the time he fled Iran in late July, 1981, there had been at least three Israeli arms shipments, including the one that crashed.

How did Israel get involved in direct contacts between Iranians and Reagan campaign officials? Bani Sadr says it was through the Iranian negotiators, who had close ties with Savak, the Iranian secret police organization which had had Israeli advisers in the time of the Shah.

The former Iranian president's information dovetails at this point with facets of the story previously revealed by American journalists. Bob Woodward and Walter Pincus have reported in the Washington Post and Alfonso Chardy in the Miami Herald that three Reagan campaign aides met in a Washington DC hotel in early October, 1980, with a self-described "Iranian exile" who offered, on behalf of the Iranian government, to release the hostages to Reagan, not Carter, in order to ensure Carter's defeat in the November 4, 1980 election.

http://www.wrmea.org/1987-october/did-iran-delay-hostages-release-to-ensure-reagan-s-election.html

But again, when some people only look at issues based on their faith in the issue and what they want to believe, facts/evidence aren't worth a dime. Otherwise a lot of people wouldn't believe certain things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Strange Luck (Reply #16)

Sun Jan 24, 2016, 07:26 PM

17. Well you almost posted something of value!

But again, when some people only look at issues based on their faith in the issue and what they want to believe, facts/evidence aren't worth a dime. Otherwise a lot of people wouldn't believe certain things.

Well at least we can dispense now with the ad hominems. You posted this implying if I don't bend down and kiss you ring on this it is because "I believe in Jeebus Praise da Lord"!

I am sorry but an unsubstantiated report on a "blog" reporting on a federal felony if it was done, is hardly not the proof that a judge would use to even warrant a grand jury. But nice try.

The biggest reason is Carter was being polled as leading REagan- To think that Iran would make a back door deal with a private citizen who looked like he could not deliver according to the polling data is crazy!

But keep trying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to R2D42 (Original post)

Fri Jan 22, 2016, 04:47 PM

6. Reagan would not recognize himself...

The way the right keeps re-writing his Presidency.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohio Joe (Reply #6)

Sat Jan 23, 2016, 08:15 PM

12. The senile piece of shit did not recognize his own face in the mirror. Or even know what was being

 

done in his name. And ours.

To our eternal shame and disgrace.

As well as lighting the con/regresive fuse that finally destroys this country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to R2D42 (Original post)

Fri Jan 22, 2016, 09:31 PM

9. FRC is a hate group

 

No surprise Fox "News" gives him air time .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to R2D42 (Original post)

Sat Jan 23, 2016, 08:17 PM

13. Why Should We Listen to Tony Perkins?

He murdered his mother.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Politicspoliticstonyperkinsreaganiran