Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
do you want this information released or not.
That is what the thread is about
Truthhater, I DARE you to respond to this post.You've been suckered by liars. You're too stupid to see it, though.
The "October Surprise" Theory :: Daniel Pipes
The October Surprise episode holds much interest as a conspiracy theory case study. In particular, two features stand out: Gary Sick's having single-handedly transformed it from a story only taken seriously on the left-wing fringe into a credible mainstream claim; and the clarity with which it confirmed the conspiracy theorists' tendency to accuse others of what they themselves are doing. On this latter point: again and again, one finds that whereas the conspiracy theorists' accusations of collusion and illegal behavior were unsubstantiated, they themselves engaged in precisely such behavior. Examples include:
- They claimed Casey and Bush pretended to be in the United States when they were in Paris and Madrid. Richard Brenneke, perhaps the single most important informant for the October Surprise thesis, claimed to be in Paris and Madrid when credit card receipts proved he was in Portland, Oregon.
- They accused Reagan campaign officials of plotting to save their necks, when this is what the conspiracy theorists were doing; at least seven of them (Robert Benes, Richard Brenneke, Ahmed Heidari, Nicholas Ignatiew, Oswald LeWinter, Hamid Naqashan and Will Northrop) were implicated in a 1986 sting operation and the October Surprise offered a way to rehabilitate their reputations.
- Sick, a former Carter Administration official, accused the Reagan campaign of secretly working out an arms deal with the Iranians. In fact, as Sick himself already disclosed in 1985, Jimmy Carter initiated such a deal.
- Sick accused others of withholding information, yet this is precisely what he did, keeping quiet about the hundreds of thousands of dollars he received from Oliver Stone for the movie rights to the October Surprise story.
- Sick accused U.S. government officials of lying, yet he was less than honest himself. He wrote in his New York Times article that he had heard rumors of a Reagan-Khomeini deal during the 1988 election campaign but he "refused to believe them." Not so: on 30 October 1988, at the very peak of the 1988 election campaign, he told The Rocky Mountain News, "At first I dismissed this, but not any more. I'm convinced on the basis of what I heard that there were some meetings in Paris."
If all of this is true than this guy should agree that the American people have all the real info right?
Lets release the documents
Objection. Assumes fact not in evidence.do you want this information released or not.
That is what the thread is about
I think...
You have never provided evidence that you do not lick yogurt off of hobo's feet.I think it's clear Reagan/Bush Admin made a deal with Iran to hold the American hostages until Reagan's inauguration. I would like to see it but it wouldn't change my mind.
Amazing how something you have no evidence for is very clear
There is plenty of cirumstatial evidence. I don't need to travel to the sun to know it is hot.
There are witnesses who saw him in Paris that day.
There are NO witnesses to him being in DC.
These documents will reveal the truth of his whereabouts on that day.
Do you agree they should be released?
THey NEED to release these documents if he is innocent they will prove his innocence
Oh great, another Birther.
We must pray she's never given birth. Bite yer damned tongue.
just an fyi, i'm not saying hw bush went to meet them, I don't know that at all....
but what i AM SAYING is that the president elect's team had to negotiate the release BEFORE the actual release, or the Carter admin had to....which means Carter's team negotiated the release.....????
Apparently not.TM i challenge you to respond to any of the questions and facts daveman and JoeB have asked and provided.
Or are you going to pretend they didnt provide anything like you usual do.
One day i seriously hope you stop lying to yourself.
Won't happen. She hasn't got the intellectual honesty required to respond to those points.
do you want this information released or not.
That is what the thread is about
Really, you have proof that Bush didn't meet with the Iranians in Paris?I read when Bush was 4 y/o he pulled a dogs tail once.
Not good at all.
Why do you belittle a potentionally treasonous act?
This myth has been so thoroughly exploded that only the most pathetic brain damaged drones continue to maintain it.
Really, you have proof that Bush didn't meet with the Iranians in Paris?Why do you belittle a potentionally treasonous act?
This myth has been so thoroughly exploded that only the most pathetic brain damaged drones continue to maintain it.
bripat9643 claimed the "myth had been thoroughly exploded". Guess not.Really, you have proof that Bush didn't meet with the Iranians in Paris?This myth has been so thoroughly exploded that only the most pathetic brain damaged drones continue to maintain it.
Do you have proof that you don't lick yogurt off of hobo feet?
I've never seen any.
You wouldn't be sullying one of the greatest war heroes to walk out of the Pacific in WWII alive, would you, if truth truly mattered to you, dear.THey NEED to release these documents if he is innocent they will prove his innocence
bripat9643 claimed the "myth had been thoroughly exploded". Guess not.Really, you have proof that Bush didn't meet with the Iranians in Paris?
Do you have proof that you don't lick yogurt off of hobo feet?
I've never seen any.
You wouldn't be sullying one of the greatest war heroes to walk out of the Pacific in WWII alive, would you, if truth truly mattered to you, dear.THey NEED to release these documents if he is innocent they will prove his innocence
What have you done other than to bite at the ankles of giant living patriots?
Wasn't President Bush's near-brush with death at the hands of Saddam's assassins for reversing Iraq's military attack-for-greedy-gain on oil-rich Kuwait good enough for ya?
She some kind of Iraqi Saddam worshiper?You wouldn't be sullying one of the greatest war heroes to walk out of the Pacific in WWII alive, would you, if truth truly mattered to you, dear.THey NEED to release these documents if he is innocent they will prove his innocence
What have you done other than to bite at the ankles of giant living patriots?
Wasn't President Bush's near-brush with death at the hands of Saddam's assassins for reversing Iraq's military attack-for-greedy-gain on oil-rich Kuwait good enough for ya?
She wishes they'd succeeded.
Amazing how something you have no evidence for is very clear
There is plenty of cirumstatial evidence. I don't need to travel to the sun to know it is hot.
Why do you belittle a potentionally treasonous act?
Treasonous?
Making deals with an avowed enemy of the USA when not officially empowered to do so.
Yes treason.
It appears that this is where Iran Contra started.
She wouldn't be alone on the left.She some kind of Iraqi Saddam worshiper?You wouldn't be sullying one of the greatest war heroes to walk out of the Pacific in WWII alive, would you, if truth truly mattered to you, dear.
What have you done other than to bite at the ankles of giant living patriots?
Wasn't President Bush's near-brush with death at the hands of Saddam's assassins for reversing Iraq's military attack-for-greedy-gain on oil-rich Kuwait good enough for ya?
She wishes they'd succeeded.
tch, tch, tch.
I'll ask the question simplier.
If the Bush did a secret deal with the Iranians, what did the Iranians get out of the deal?
Guy, first, why do yo do these big fonts and links that don't go anywhere useful? They don't add anything to your weak argument.
Second, we didn't sell the Iranians weapons until 1985, and even not directly. What were the Iranians getting for their troubles in 1980 or 1981?
THird, while we did sell some supplies to both sides in the war, we had nothing on the French and the Russians. The rest of the world sees arms sales as commerce. We see it as a way of rewarding people.
....your not going to get anywhere with this dipshit Joe......people from both sides have asked him to post like a normal person......he just picks his ass,sticks his fingers in his mouth,and does it some more....plus we think he is like a 4th Grader.....he says he wants to be a Brain Surgeon when he gets bigger....
Pretty-much the same weapons we were (also).....
Guy, first, why do yo do these big fonts and links that don't go anywhere useful? They don't add anything to your weak argument.
Second, we didn't sell the Iranians weapons until 1985, and even not directly. What were the Iranians getting for their troubles in 1980 or 1981?
THird, while we did sell some supplies to both sides in the war, we had nothing on the French and the Russians. The rest of the world sees arms sales as commerce. We see it as a way of rewarding people.
Stick him on ignore - the rest of the board has.
