- Thread starter Inexsis
- Start date
C
Cycleguy007
Guest
png2 said:
OK... fair enough... care to jog my memory then geek? (I was 16 at the time and my focus was not on world affairs or politics... so please forgive me...)
Cycleguy007 said:
Hey, you're forgiven. And, I was a grizzled 18 year old at the time.
From Wikipedia:
On the day the hostages were seized, six American diplomats evaded capture and remained in hiding at the Swiss and Canadian embassies. In 1979, the Canadian Parliament held a secret session for the first time since World War II in order to pass special legislation allowing Canadian passports to be issued to some American citizens so that they could escape. The six American diplomats boarded a flight to Zürich, Switzerland, on January 28, 1980. Their escape and rescue from Iran by Canadian ambassador Ken Taylor has come to be known as the Canadian Caper.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_hostage_crisis#Canadian_Caper
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Caper
C
Cycleguy007
Guest
Picky, picky...
Picky, picky...
I'm fairly sure I read that Reagan started planning the rescue of the hostages as soon as he was elected on November 4th 1980.
Picky, picky...
png2 said:Hey, you're forgiven. And, I was a grizzled 18 year old at the time.
From Wikipedia:
On the day the hostages were seized, six American diplomats evaded capture and remained in hiding at the Swiss and Canadian embassies. In 1979, the Canadian Parliament held a secret session for the first time since World War II in order to pass special legislation allowing Canadian passports to be issued to some American citizens so that they could escape. The six American diplomats boarded a flight to Zürich, Switzerland, on January 28, 1980. Their escape and rescue from Iran by Canadian ambassador Ken Taylor has come to be known as the Canadian Caper.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_hostage_crisis#Canadian_Caper
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Caper
OK... So it was 52 hostages, and 444 days.... and there was a Canadian connection via Ambassador Ken Taylor... So the accuracy as to the number of hostages and number of days were off a bit but the rest is true.
I'm fairly sure I read that Reagan started planning the rescue of the hostages as soon as he was elected on November 4th 1980.
C
Cycleguy007
Guest
SillyGirl said:
SillyGirl said:
You are correct.
The Iranians waited until Reagan had been inaugurated for the offical release, to further shame President Carter.
Reagan had nothing to do with the safe release of the hostages.
Prime Minister Joe Clark, the CIA, Flora MacDonald, the co-operation of the opposition parties in Canadian parliment were significant players.
The six Americans that Canada helped were out of Iran about 1 full year before the 52 hostages were released.
Blackrock13
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2010
- Messages
- 471
Cycleguy007 said:Have to disagree... Although that is most definitely in the top few....
My pick for THAT distinct would have to be the Internet...
Some more in the top 10 (in no particular order...)
And to answer the OP... Of course they did! (As far as conspiracy theories go, this one is kinda weak... The JFK one is way more plausible, and then there's that whole 911 thing...)
- Wireless technology
- Air travel
- Telephone
- Refrigeration
- Laser & Fiber optics
- Nuclear technologies
- Digital Technology
- Lesbian PORN!
This is more like a list of the modern Seven Wonders vs the Ancient Seven Wonders;
The horse collar, the screw, and controlling fire could easily be on that list. Where, who knows, but probably north of Lesbian porn.
As far as the moon landing. I suggest the believer in the hoax should catch any number of the Mythbusters specials on this exact theme. Their expertise and resources exceed anyone's on this BB and don't have any political or corporate agendas that I'm aware of. They cover it really well.
Nikki@SPOC
Active member
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2010
- Messages
- 33
SillyGirl said:
Disclaimer - I wasn't actually born yet, so I can't claim to have any memory of the event...
From what I've read, there was an attempt on Carter's part to rescue the hostages, but it ended in failure as the helicopters were damaged by a sandstorm:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Eagle_Claw
Again, all I know of the situation is what Wikipedia says, and even though it's reasonably good for scientific stuff, their political articles are usually pretty biased. Can anyone give us a better rundown of what actually happened?
Cycleguy007 said:
Well, if Billy C had the good sense to wear a glove before the love, maybe Monica would have washed her blue dress, instead of saving the cumstain as a souvenir. :tongue:
I swear, future historians are going to have a field day with this one - the President of the USA was nearly impeached, quite literally, by his intern's dirty laundry!
I see CG is a big fan of RR but while he did do a lot of what you said, his practise of deregulation ultimately was the start of the downfall of the US as an economic super power.
I don't quite get the gist of what he did, but according to the economists and professionals who examined what exactly happened to wall street, it all can be traced back to reagan. Now he didn't do it all, but he started the ball rolling.
My numbers may be off a bit, but since reagan, the US economy has grown by something like 3 trillion dollars. Of those dollars, the top 1 percent garnered 99.8% of those dollars. The next .1 percent was shared by the next 1%, and the last 1%? that went to everyone else.
Basically what that boils down to is that 99.8% of the US population shared 1% of that huge growth. This is what reagan started. Now you may think he did great things in his term as president, but what he did had long lasting negative effects on the US.....
I don't quite get the gist of what he did, but according to the economists and professionals who examined what exactly happened to wall street, it all can be traced back to reagan. Now he didn't do it all, but he started the ball rolling.
My numbers may be off a bit, but since reagan, the US economy has grown by something like 3 trillion dollars. Of those dollars, the top 1 percent garnered 99.8% of those dollars. The next .1 percent was shared by the next 1%, and the last 1%? that went to everyone else.
Basically what that boils down to is that 99.8% of the US population shared 1% of that huge growth. This is what reagan started. Now you may think he did great things in his term as president, but what he did had long lasting negative effects on the US.....
C
Cycleguy007
Guest
tboy said:
I wouldn't say "fan" so much... I never voted for the guy.
I was merely pointing out he was a "what you see is what you get" kinda guy. He didn't take shit, and made the American people proud to stand tall again.
And I don't know too much about the rest of your wall street stuff, but I suspect that, that sort of thing has been going on LONG before he took office. I have read stories about the Federal reserve "pulling the strings" so to speak predating the 1930's...
I know it seems like splitting hairs there CG but the difference is, Reagan had no part in the release....Just because it happened after he was inaugurated doesn't mean he can take credit for it.
For eg: you're driving down the 401 and there's a car accident ahead of you. Just because you were there doesn't mean you caused it.....capice?
Ever heard the term Reaganomics?
Sure, the government has been controlling the economy since time immortal but it is the decisions that are made that affects that economy. The start was Reagan's deregulationary acts that ultimately caused the crash they're experiencing today. That wasn't the federal reserve, that wasn't the senate, that was Reagan and it all falls on his shoulders......
Now Clinton wasn't any better, and Bush, well, he and his cronies just piled kindling on the fire. You could say that Clinton turned the US back into Camelot, but it was a Camelot built on a foundation of straw.
Sure, he was a great speaker, sure he was a no bs type guy. But I'd rather have someone in power who won't fuck the country than a great speaker. That's just the whole problem with their and our political system. People tend to vote people into power who appear to be able to get the job done. I remember Ross Perot made a run at it and he did wonders in the business world. Unfortunately he wasn't a good politician and didn't make it. I bet the world would be a much better place if he had gotten into power.....
I have said this before and I'll say it again: we dont' need politicians in government, we need businessmen. We need people who have taken a bankrupt company and made it into a prosperous corporation. Politicians are too concerned with getting and keeping the job as opposed to doing what's right for the country.
Anyhow, that's a 'hole 'nother thread.....
For eg: you're driving down the 401 and there's a car accident ahead of you. Just because you were there doesn't mean you caused it.....capice?
Ever heard the term Reaganomics?
Sure, the government has been controlling the economy since time immortal but it is the decisions that are made that affects that economy. The start was Reagan's deregulationary acts that ultimately caused the crash they're experiencing today. That wasn't the federal reserve, that wasn't the senate, that was Reagan and it all falls on his shoulders......
Now Clinton wasn't any better, and Bush, well, he and his cronies just piled kindling on the fire. You could say that Clinton turned the US back into Camelot, but it was a Camelot built on a foundation of straw.
Sure, he was a great speaker, sure he was a no bs type guy. But I'd rather have someone in power who won't fuck the country than a great speaker. That's just the whole problem with their and our political system. People tend to vote people into power who appear to be able to get the job done. I remember Ross Perot made a run at it and he did wonders in the business world. Unfortunately he wasn't a good politician and didn't make it. I bet the world would be a much better place if he had gotten into power.....
I have said this before and I'll say it again: we dont' need politicians in government, we need businessmen. We need people who have taken a bankrupt company and made it into a prosperous corporation. Politicians are too concerned with getting and keeping the job as opposed to doing what's right for the country.
Anyhow, that's a 'hole 'nother thread.....
C
Cycleguy007
Guest
Like I said earlier, I am almost 100% sure I read somewhere that Reagan began planning the hostages release right after he was named "President Elect" on Nov. 4th 1980... if that was NOT the case, then the article I was reading was false, and I in turn was misinformed. No worries- it is of no consequence to me...tboy said:
Nope... never herad it before... :roll: :tongue:tboy said:
And it DID effectively end the cold war...Cycleguy007 said:
I don't know about that, reaganomics (according to wikipedia):
"Reagan delivered on each of his four major policy objectives, although not to the extent that he and his supporters had hoped", and notes that the most substantial change was in the tax code, where the top marginal individual income tax rate fell from 70% to 28%,"
Which equates to: the richest people in america pay the same tax rate as you or I which is a paltry sum to them, a major sum to regular folk.
I am in no way shape or form an economist or a money manager but I do know this much: if given the oppurtunity (and Reagan did) Greed will surpass common sense. (ask an union man and he is proof positive of that theory).
As much as I hate government interference on life, without regulation a crash inevitably results. To use the DOT as an example: without regulations (ie speed limits, lane marking, traffic lights, road taxes etc) it would be utter chaos on the roads. (More so than it is now). Take that same "idea" and apply it to Wall Street and voila, you have a recession.
Take the current housing situation in the US: A lender has the ability to take a lower interest rate, and make less money but GREED says: NO EFFIN WAY I WANT IT ALL. So what do they do? Reposess in record numbers. So much so that they shoot themselves in the feet (both of them this time) and reduce the value of the reposessed properties to the point where they will NEVER make a penny profit and in fact, lose 90% of their initial investment.
"Reagan delivered on each of his four major policy objectives, although not to the extent that he and his supporters had hoped", and notes that the most substantial change was in the tax code, where the top marginal individual income tax rate fell from 70% to 28%,"
Which equates to: the richest people in america pay the same tax rate as you or I which is a paltry sum to them, a major sum to regular folk.
- Reduce government spending,
- Reduce income and capital gains marginal tax rates,
- Reduce government regulation, THIS IS THE BIGGY!!!!!
- Control the money supply to reduce inflation.
I am in no way shape or form an economist or a money manager but I do know this much: if given the oppurtunity (and Reagan did) Greed will surpass common sense. (ask an union man and he is proof positive of that theory).
As much as I hate government interference on life, without regulation a crash inevitably results. To use the DOT as an example: without regulations (ie speed limits, lane marking, traffic lights, road taxes etc) it would be utter chaos on the roads. (More so than it is now). Take that same "idea" and apply it to Wall Street and voila, you have a recession.
Take the current housing situation in the US: A lender has the ability to take a lower interest rate, and make less money but GREED says: NO EFFIN WAY I WANT IT ALL. So what do they do? Reposess in record numbers. So much so that they shoot themselves in the feet (both of them this time) and reduce the value of the reposessed properties to the point where they will NEVER make a penny profit and in fact, lose 90% of their initial investment.
SillyGirl
Senior Member
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2017
- Messages
- 7,246
Cycleguy007 said:
It would make sense if the Iranians did have contact with the President-elect, as practical arrangements would have to be made for a release. I don't think that necessarily makes him responsible for the release itself, only for the implementation of it. I agree with you that he was an inspiring orator and he was a major factor in the end of the Cold War.
I also agree with Tboy about the negative longterm effects of deregulation.
L
lagavulin
Guest
Nikki@SPOC said:
Lord, do I now feel old.
Nikki@SPOC said:
Iran had a revolution, the Ayatollah Khomeini took over, the American embassy was stormed and the staff taken hostage, Carter tried a rescue mention but they forgot that there is sand in the desert, helicopter ran into refueling plane blows up lots of dead American soldiers, Iran split the hostages into many small groups so that a rescue was not possible, some made it to the Canadian Embassy and were given sanctuary and fake passports to get out of Iran, Regan became president and thought that arms for hostages was the way to go, Ollie North had his secretary smuggle secret documents out in her underwear, money from the Iranian arms deal was sent to Nicaragua to fund CIA operations in central america.
I suck at doing a Readers Digest version.
There are lots of books on the subject that go on at length.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–Contra_affair
Nikki@SPOC said:
Took me a moment to get the correct context of the 1990's. LOL
President Carter had a brother named Billy (1970's).
Billy C. was known for being a drunk and even had a beer named after him "Billy Beer"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Beer
Since we need a better picture in keeping with the board.
This is Fawn Hall, the secretary to Ollie North that smuggled documents out of the office in her pantyhose.
