The Girl Left Behind

[*bfine32*]

Airs tonight 8/26 at 10 PM

The embedded videos in the link are worth a look.

https://gma.yahoo.com/president-obama-broke-promise-charity-donation-isis-hostage-122205679--abc-news-topstories.html

Quote:As President Barack Obama tried to console the parents of Kayla Mueller after she was killed in ISIS captivity last year, they say he offered to make a contribution to a foundation they had established in her name.

But he has yet to do so, the parents say, 17 months after he made his promise to them on March 13, 2015.

“I’m still waiting for that donation, Mr. President,” Carl Mueller said in an ABC News interview broadcast this morning on Good Morning America, as part of an hour long investigation to be aired tonight on 20/20.

[Mike M (the other one)]

LOL oops.

[GMDino]

Well that's a crappy move.

Do what you say you will do.

[McC]

(08-26-2016, 02:37 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Airs tonight 8/26 at 10 PM

The embedded videos in the link are worth a look.

https://gma.yahoo.com/president-obama-broke-promise-charity-donation-isis-hostage-122205679--abc-news-topstories.html

Barry must have thought he was in a campaign, you know, where you fill heads with crazy promises you know you'll never keep.

[Bengalzona]

It says that he offered to make a donation. Did they accept his offer?

[*bfine32*]

(08-26-2016, 06:11 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: It says that he offered to make a donation. Did they accept his offer?

IDK. How does one go about not accepting an anonymous donation to a foundation. 

[McC]

(08-26-2016, 06:11 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: It says that he offered to make a donation. Did they accept his offer?

“I’m still waiting for that donation, Mr. President,” Carl Mueller said

That sounds like a yes.

[Benton]

Quote:“He says, ‘You won’t know, it’ll be an anonymous donation but I will,’” recalled Kayla’s father.

The Muellers say no such anonymous donation has been received by the foundation, named Kayla’s Hands.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/president-obama-broke-promise-charity-donation-isis-hostage/story?id=41658582

So either he donated anonymously and the anonymous donations are so small the Mueller's think it wasn't enough, or he didn't donate anything and hoped someone would be making an anonymous donation.

[SunsetBengal]

(08-26-2016, 07:48 PM)Benton Wrote: http://abcnews.go.com/International/president-obama-broke-promise-charity-donation-isis-hostage/story?id=41658582

So either he donated anonymously and the anonymous donations are so small the Mueller's think it wasn't enough, or he didn't donate anything and hoped someone would be making an anonymous donation.

Either way, those folks seem a bit let down.  I guess they took the Pres' at his word.

[*bfine32*]

Given the wording in the OP slams POTUS, but that wasn't really the point. I think the story goes much deeper and I am looking forward to watching it. The family alleges they were told that they could/would be tried for criminal activity is they negotiated her release. I have zero idea what I would do if the government told me I could not stop my child from being executed.

And all of this masks the true villain in this scenario.

[Bengalzona]

(08-26-2016, 06:25 PM)bfine32 Wrote: IDK. How does one go about not accepting an anonymous donation to a foundation. 

Kinda hard for the POTUS to donate anonymously and they still know it was or was not him donating.

[Bengalzona]

(08-26-2016, 09:41 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Given the wording in the OP slams POTUS, but that wasn't really the point. I think the story goes much deeper and I am looking forward to watching it. The family alleges they were told that they could/would be tried for criminal activity is they negotiated her release. I have zero idea what I would do if the government told me I could not stop my child from being executed.

And all of this masks the true villain in this scenario.

Yeah. It's been our national stand for about 30 years or more now, I think: no negotiations with terrorists (government or private). The government take is that it weakens us (i.e. if terrorists know Americans will pay for hostages, they will start nabbing U.S. citizens all over the world). But the other side of the coin is that once they do end up grabbing U.S. citizens like mixed in with a group of Europeans, they have no compunctions about killing the Americans to serve as an example to other countries to pay up.

Not sure how I feel about this. But there is another facet to our current policy that I do like. If someone grabs our people and kills them or mistreats them, we let it be known that we WILL get them eventually. Our track record is incomplete on that, but we never forget.

[Vas Deferens]

(08-26-2016, 10:56 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: Yeah. It's been our national stand for about 30 years or more now, I think: no negotiations with terrorists (government or private). The government take is that it weakens us (i.e. if terrorists know Americans will pay for hostages, they will start nabbing U.S. citizens all over the world). But the other side of the coin is that once they do end up grabbing U.S. citizens like mixed in with a group of Europeans, they have no compunctions about killing the Americans to serve as an example to other countries to pay up.

Not sure how I feel about this. But there is another facet to our current policy that I do like. If someone grabs our people and kills them or mistreats them, we let it be known that we WILL get them eventually. Our track record is incomplete on that, but we never forget.

Especially our real national Heros Luke Rudy Guliani.  He certainly never forgot.  Not about 9/11. Not about the first responders. Nothing.  Glad we have some real men running the narrative for our poor uneducated over-medicated masses. 

[JustWinBaby]

If you don't get the check at the Photo Op....you're ******

[Belsnickel]

(08-26-2016, 11:39 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: Especially our real national Heros Luke Rudy Guliani.  He certainly never forgot.  Not about 9/11. Not about the first responders. Nothing.  Glad we have some real men running the narrative for our poor uneducated over-medicated masses. 

[Vas Deferens]

(08-27-2016, 07:58 AM)Belsnickel Wrote:

Well before conveniently forgetting about the actual attack, he was able to turn a blind eye to the first responders and ancillary victims of the attacks.  Thank jesus his attention was squarely focused on bolstering the economic gains of the WTC land owners and military industrial complex. 

Lest we never forget. 

[Rotobeast]

Yet... we negotiate/pay for Berdahl and the recent Iranian prisoners.

That may have furthered some animosity towards Obama, from this family.

Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

[Bengalzona]

(08-27-2016, 10:33 AM)Rotobeast Wrote: Yet... we negotiate/pay for Berdahl and the recent Iranian prisoners.

That may have furthered some animosity towards Obama, from this family.

Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

Bergdahl was a prisoner exchange with the Taliban rather than a ransom. But it was certainly negotiated. It is political double-talk, but the Taliban aren't treated as a terrorist organization so much anymore by our government. They are treated as a political movement (which has occasionally done terrorist acts in the past!). This is a political necessity as stabilizing the Afghani government will eventually require an agreement with and the inclusion of the Taliban. The fact that we have ground forces fighting them also makes this situation a bit different (i.e. POW exchange rather than ransomed civilians).

I'm not necessarily saying that I agree with this, but it is what it is.

BTW- There was another political expediency in the Bergdahl situation. The Taliban prisoners released in the exchange were individuals held for years at Gitmo and the current admin has been committed to getting all of the prisoners from there and closing the facility.

Iran is a country, not a terrorist group. Also, the government didn't pay to get the prisoners released. There were two negotiations: one to return money Iran had paid 40 years ago for weapons they did not receive and another for the release of prisoners. Both were under the overall heading of re-establishing normalized relations with Iran. But the admin held up the first return of Iran's money (it actually is their money) in order to wait and see if they would make good on releasing the prisoners.

[GMDino]

(08-27-2016, 11:28 AM)Bengalzona Wrote: Bergdahl was a prisoner exchange with the Taliban rather than a ransom. But it was certainly negotiated. It is political double-talk, but the Taliban aren't treated as a terrorist organization so much anymore by our government. They are treated as a political movement (which has occasionally done terrorist acts in the past!). This is a political necessity as stabilizing the Afghani government will eventually require an agreement with and the inclusion of the Taliban. The fact that we have ground forces fighting them also makes this situation a bit different (i.e. POW exchange rather than ransomed civilians).

I'm not necessarily saying that I agree with this, but it is what it is.

BTW- There was another political expediency in the Bergdahl situation. The Taliban prisoners released in the exchange were individuals held for years at Gitmo and the current admin has been committed to getting all of the prisoners from there and closing the facility.

Iran is a country, not a terrorist group. Also, the government didn't pay to get the prisoners released. There were two negotiations: one to return money Iran had paid 40 years ago for weapons they did not receive and another for the release of prisoners. Both were under the overall heading of re-establishing normalized relations with Iran. But the admin held up the first return of Iran's money (it actually is their money) in order to wait and see if they would make good on releasing the prisoners.

Which is part of that political double speak but is still correct.

They did not pay to get him released.  That would be a ransom.

They gave what they promised after he was released.  That is a deal.

[fredtoast]

Anyone watch the show?

The failure to make the donation seems like a low class move by Barry, but I think the show as about a lot more than that.  If these people are telling a bunch of lies to make him look bad then I can understand why he would renege on the offer.

I missed it, but I a sure I will be able to find it somewhere else.