From FOXNews:
Already saddled with resolving a looming nuclear showdown with Iran, the Bush administration now faces the possibility that that country’s new leader helped take 52 Americans hostage in 1979.
“Many questions” have been raised by five former U.S. hostages who have identified Iran’s President-elect Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as one of their captors more than 25 years ago, President Bush said Thursday
“I have no information,” Bush said in an interview with foreign reporters ahead of a trip to Scotland next week. “But obviously his involvement raises many questions
Earlier, the White House indicated that some kind of investigation was in the works.
“I think the news reports and statements from several former American hostages raise many questions about his past,” White House press secretary Scott McClellan said. “We take them very seriously and we are looking into them to better understand the facts.”
Five Americans who were held for more than a year in the hostage crisis believe that Ahmadinejad was one of their captors.
“You don’t forget, even years later,” Chuck Scott told FOX News on Thursday. “Even if he dyed his hair blond and shaved his beard, I’d still recognize him.”
Scott and fellow former hostages David Roeder, William J. Daugherty, Don A. Sharer and Kevin Hermening agreed that Ahmadinejad, 49, was one of the hostage-takers, The Associated Press first reported Wednesday.
Scott, who described Ahmadinejad as being a “terrorist,” said the new Iranian president sat in on parts of his monthlong interrogation and whispered guidance to the men who were questioning him […]
Not everyone agrees. Former hostage and retired Air Force Col. Thomas E. Schaefer (search), of Peoria, Ariz., said he doesn’t recognize Ahmadinejad, by face or name, as one of his captors.
[…] Several former students among the hostage-takers also said Ahmadinejad did not participate. And a close aide to Ahmadinejad denied the president-elect took part in the seizure of the embassy or in holding Americans hostage.
Appendix: FOX is now also reporting that a Farsi website tied to the “student” organization responsible for the kidnappings is confirming Ahmadinejad as a member at the time of the hostage crisis.
What kind of report is that: “Not everyone agrees” that Ahmadinejad was one of the captors? There were 52 hostages–is it expected that all 52 will be able to identify one of their captors 25 years later. It suggests that there may be some doubt, yet one person saying, “I don’t remember Ahmadinejad” does not contradict 5 who positvely identify him as one of the terrorist captors. Sad reporting, to say the least.
The enduring legacy of James Earl Carter stikes again….
Thanks Jimmah!
….and strikes, too.
Seems like reasonable justification for doing whatever is required – what did you say on that earlier chicken post Jeff:
Yeah, I think so. Doesn’t matter if he’s pres of a country – if this allegation is indeed true, he’s an international criminal and – Dept. of State be damned – should be brought to justice …
Now if only we had ‘evildoer’ in that speech yesterday …
Cool, no more spam buster! I be logged in! (<sniff> I’m maybe gonna miss that little turing word…)
I’m sure his Form 180 will clear alllll of this up. He’s promised to sign it immediately.
Jimmy Carter on FOX: “He (Ahmadinejad)denies it entirely, as I understand it. If it proves to be true, it may be deleterious for him.” Putz.
“President-elect” my ass. He’s just another religious nut terrorist dictators, put in power by other religious nut terrorist dictators.
It’s a step up for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, though. He’s gone from holding 52 people hostage to holding 25 million hostage. Quite a promotion. Let’s hope they’re freed within 444 days.
Nice, Dave.
Jeff, a quick bleg –
When you decide to turn this “blog” into a web-magazine, could you use something like this to let us know?
<a href=”http://franknorrisonline.com/images/action.jpg</a<
maybe photochop the “Tony Montana as a Jewish Midnight Cowboy” picture you have on the left hand column into the Superman pic?
I’d like to print out the page of the first issue so that I can have something to take to the eBay RoadShow in the year 2045.
Thanks in Advance,
your obdt srvnt, &c
turing word: future
whoa – creepy.
See you guys!!! This is why it’s important not to elect war criminals as President!! If we hadn’t we would be able to say something about this, but we did so now we can’t!!!!
(Should I use more exclamation points? I can never decide how many is enough}
Hey B Moe,
Sorry I’m not real articulate like the rest of the folks round here, so,,,,,, why don’t you just kiss my ass.
Did I use Enough commas? I can never tell.
Lloyd,
Better wear armor plating on your butt, dems moonbats bite and are highky infectous aren’t they??????????
Did I use enough question marks???
I think B Moe’s, um, liberal use of exclamation points (and the fact that he called attention to them) is meant to indicate moonbat parody, tho it is hard to separate the parodies from the actual moonbats these days.
Hmmmmm…I wonder why that is?
Rob, they’re more than welcome to a tasty bite of my HimRroyds. Just couldn’t help it, I work with the Japanese.
Spam word, “Girls” as in, fuckin bunch “O” pussies.
Actually, I think the Bushies know who he is. They’re just trying to figure out what to do about it. Can we send the FBI to arrest the creep…er, I mean, head of state?
Lloyd – Japanese.. cool .. squeeze out a good blowfish when he bites so he goes into information overload.
Rodger that Rob, ain’t nuthin like a good shot of high protein dysentery when you’re really thirsty.
I can’t wait to see how the Dem’s spin this into their usual, “Move along, nothing to see here. The Middle East is perfectly safe. There is no growing Islamic death cult. Except for Bin Laden. Once he is captured this horrible nightmare of our not being in power will all be over.â€Â
Sorry Lloyd, I’m not that kind of guy. Sean was right on both counts: it was meant as a parody, and it is impossible to parody a lunatic.
so far i tend to think it’s true. in a way it’s a yawn except that it is likely to affect profoundly the domestic american political situation. it matters so much because the hostage situation was a signal moment and emblem of american humiliation (cf defeat in vietnam) which the republicans have dedicated their political lives to redressing, and to the symbolic redressing of which they owe their political identities and successes ever since. remember that reagan owed much of his victory in 80 to the “crisis.” now all of this is extremely ironic because, for example, ollie north and co were negotiating with the mullahs and, er, arming them, in exchange for the release, while carter actually tried special forces-type action. also, whatever anyone tells you, the bush admin cannot possibly be thinking of military action against iran: we can’t even handle iraq, and we would get our, um, asses kicked very very badly. still: it changes the whole dynamic to country-under-siege, us-against-the-world, republicans saved our asses. it gets maybe jeb elected etc. it will be huge. huge.
turing: because (wow! you’re good jeff)
Is the world-weary yawn becoming the rhetorical topos of choice on the left? Seeing a lot of it these days.
What I don’t get (and these aren’t rhetorical questions) is:
1. Wouldn’t this guy’s hostage-taker background be public knowledge, and a badge of honor, in Iran?
2. I mean, wouldn’t this be something a politician (even one participating in Iran’s shambolic political system) would have on his public record, not something he’d want to hide?
3. Or *is* it something he’d want to hide? If so, “that’s interesting too!” Why? The implications of that paint a pretty grim future for the theocrats.
Dave C,
I think your point 3 is more likely. The “1979 cred” is more for the ruling elite, not the overwhelming majority of the common folk. They are not particularly happy living in a theocratic despotism.
B Moe, sorry I got it wrong.