I'm just hoping that the new President of Iran is willing to show the
world that Iran's Uranium enrichment program is being done STRICTLY for
the use of Uranium as a fuel in nuclear reactors.
This "catch me if you can" game that the former president was playing is
like playing Russian Roulette with the human race. If we poison this
good Earth that we live on with radiation, there is no where else to
Almost certainly, life is abundant in our galaxy and universe, but the
distances between planets that can support life are so vast that our
moving anywhere else won't be feasible for hundreds of years. This
playing games with nuclear weapons is the last thing we need.
On Saturday, August 24, 2013 3:56:42 PM UTC-4, nestork wrote:
How can he show the world what is obviously not true?
The extent of the program, the type of eqpt they've bought
and continue to try to obtain, the secrecy, the links to
Pakistan's A Q Khan and North Korea clearly show
that the program is not for use in nuclear reactors for power.
Now, if you said you hoped that he would get Iran to stop
their nuclear weapons development program, that would make
Ima Nutjob was indeed a bad guy. But he wasn't running Iran and
neither will the new guy. They real power is in the hands of the
nutty Ayatollah. Maybe the new guy can move them in a better
direction, but given their 30+ year history, I would not bet on it.
Given the path we're on, it seems increasingly likely that we'll
see a nuke used sometime in the coming decades. There are many
ways it could happen and between North Korea and the Islamic nuts
who would be happy to die and take a million with them, we're
headed in that direction. However, don't worry about moving to
another planet. We survived the use of a couple in Japan and
the open air testing of dozens more. As it looks now, any
new nuclear war would be limited, not an all out exchange between
superpowers. More likely an attack of some kind on the USA
or Israel, and then the turning to glass of a country or two
From the same source.
"Alexander Haig who was charged with mediating the dispute between Britain
and Argentina also stated that he did not believe that Reagan authorised the
covert supply of weapons. This, he said, was due to Reagan's administration
being a 'loose ship' with a 'flawed system' of conducting policy. When Snow
asked Haig if he thought Reagan was responsible for the flawed system, he
responded by stating that it was not Reagan's fault but the fault of his
So, more legend.
And there were certanly no AWACs from the USA
The USA has often supported nasty fascist regimes when it suited.
From Argentina back then to Saddam Hussein and a whole range of nasties in
On Tuesday, August 20, 2013 1:41:11 PM UTC-4, nestork wrote:
Did you watch Argo?
So, you're saying it was Canadian officials, not the CIA who came up with
the idea of creating a fake Hollywood movie being filmed in
Iran as the cover to get the Americans out? That CIA operative Antonio
Mendez, who Afleck portrays, is lying when he says he conceived the idea
and put it together?
"Of all the groups heading into Iran, it wasn’t implausible to imagine a
group of self-absorbed Hollywood eccentrics traveling there in the middle o
f a revolution to find the perfect locations for their movie.
Beyond that, it had the one quality that I felt the other potential cover s
tories lacked. It was fun, which I knew would help the six “houseguests.
” We were going to walk them out through Tehran airport and right onto a
commercial plane. They might be stopped; they might be questioned about wha
t they did. And they needed to be comfortable with their new identities. We
figured anyone knows enough about Hollywood to fake a little movie-making
Now I needed to convince everyone else at the CIA—and the Canadians—tha
t this crazy idea was our best shot. And we had to work on the back story.
We needed a Hollywood office, so if the Iranians’ people called our peopl
e, they’d hear something on the phone that confirmed we were legit. We wo
uld need to set up our own production company, which I had decided to call
“Studio Six Productions,” after the six houseguests trapped in Iran. An
d we needed to plant ads and articles in the trade press about our new proj
Our first priority was to get office space [in L.A.]. Film companies often
are created and disbanded overnight, so the film business caters to short-t
erm leases. It only took us about an hour of calling around to find what we
needed. Apparently, Michael Douglas had just finished producing The China
Syndrome and we could have his offices on the Columbia Pictures lot.
I had brought a list of the houseguests in Tehran and their various ages an
d names. Any credible person in the film business would need a long string
of previous credits. The trick was finding those kinds of jobs that give a
person clout— art director, cinematographer, transportation coordinator
—without the kind of marquis billing that a director or producer might ge
t, which would be easier for the Iranians to check.
He goes on, but you get the point. If you have a Canadian who
claims they conceived the idea and put together most of it, got
Holywood involved to create the cover story, etc, I'd be happy to
read their version.
Canada made up fake passports
I believe the idea for the escape was planned by and mostly executed by the
CIA. Did Canada play
a major role, yes? Those Canadians at the embassy put their lives
on the line right from the beginning, allowing the Americans to hide in the
embassy. I think that part is clear from the movie.
I don't doubt that they helped create ID's,
cover stories, helped lie, etc. But I don't think that changes the fact th
it was a CIA plan to get them out and that the movie has a lot of
The whole thing was a secret operation. There were no news
reports at the time.
Ben Afleck is an actor. And like all movies, the writers and directors
take liberty with the facts. Antonio Mendez was the real CIA agent
who is played by Afleck and what Mendez said, is in part above and
his version is consistent with the movie.
Here's what diplomat Ken Taylor himself says about that affair:
"On Monday, Taylor said he was mollified by former U.S. president Jimmy
Carter telling CNN’s Piers Morgan last week that the film greatly
exaggerated the CIA’s role and underplayed the Canadians’
contributions. “When a U.S. citizen makes that case, it really has
an authenticity to it, and a disinterest,” said Taylor.
“He’s just clarifying those first three months.”
"Mollified" means pacified or appeased.
Jimmy Carter was President while that Canadian Caper happened. He says
he was briefed every day on what was happening with the twenty something
Americans that were being held hostage by the Iranian revolutionaries
and the remaining six that were living in property owned by the Canadian
government. If anyone knows what actually happened, it'd be President
Carter, and he's saying the film makers both greatly exagerated the
CIA's role and underplayed the Canadian role in the rescue.
I think this is just the film makers wanting to make this film more
appealing to the larger American audience.
Which country is turing half of it's citizens into police - to lord over
the other half?
The only thing we have stifled here is crime and the role of gov't in
I'll take "dull" if it means we're not killing ourselves by the dozens
at schools, movie theaters and military bases.
Americans all want to be great heros full of marvellous ideas.
The fact they have to lie shows the reverse is true.
In fact they are a clueless bunch of pongos, running about the world
inflicting their stupid ideas on luckless people everywhere who own
something they want to thieve.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.