Negotiating with terror

I searched but didn't find...i didn't search too hard. Found this interesting compilation on matters predating the 9/11, that were taking place and are now disclosed through FOIA.

It's a bit of a read, so will is needed. I find it interesting because it's backed up by sources at the bottom. The article is less than 2 years old, so it's possible it's been discussed. Take the source for what you want, quotations are referenced.

U.S. government documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and recently posted on the website of the George Washington University National Security Archive shed some additional light on talks with the Taliban prior to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, including with regard to the repeated Taliban offers to hand over Osama bin Laden, and the role of Pakistan before and after the attacks

Michael Malinowski, a State Department official involved in the talks, acknowledged, “I would say, ‘Hey, give up bin Laden,’ and they would say, ‘No…. Show us the evidence’”, a request U.S. officials deemed unreasonable

Indeed it is unreasonable to ask for proof in a democratic society. I think they are making it a rule as we speak. /end sarc

Another newly disclosed document shows that two days after the 9/11 attacks Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf was told “bluntly” that “There was no inclination in Washington to engage in a dialog with the Taliban.” The U.S. was already prepared for military action and “believed strongly that the Taliban are harboring the terrorists responsible for the September 11 attacks.” The U.S. was “fairly sure” that bin Laden “and his Al Qida network of terrorists” were guilty

That's what I call evidence....if you don't come to democracy, democracy will come to you.


Anyway...here is the link www.informationclearinghouse.info...


Your much appreciated comments....


bonus "young guns" jpg

reply to post by MarioOnTheFly

Indeed it is unreasonable to ask for proof in a democratic society.

Keep that in mind if you are ever suspected of a criminal offense. I can only assume you were being sarcastic.

Anyways, I recall reading about the UNESCO pipeline deal, the taliban, and their offers to hand over OBL in one of the Michael Moore books.

Ya ya, he's a big fat white millionaire, whatever, read his books and then you can complain about his personal appearance. He pumped that book out at a time when no one would even begin to start making those connections.

reply to post by phishyblankwaters


This is not about Micheal Moor or the pipeline. At least the text doesn't deal with it. I encourage you to read it.

reply to post by MarioOnTheFly


It is "Official" US Gov't policy that it does not negotiate with terrorists.

However, hardly a week goes by that a negotiation with terrorist groups does not make the news.

Methinks its time to either stand by the policy or at least revise it.

Brilliant. No body cares I see...

Yeah...I guess this is among many other non issues about that day...

Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly

Indeed it is unreasonable to ask for proof in a democratic society. I think they are making it a rule as we speak.

Slight problem with your objections...at the time of 9/11 there were only two or three countries that recognized the Taliban as thre legitimate government of Afghanistan...and we weren't one of them. Not even Iran took them seriously. The US gov't isn't going to honor their request any more than Abraham Lincoln honored any request for peace meetings from the Confederacy- the simple act of responding to them is a recognition of their authority.

On the other hand, we DID show our evidence to our NATO allies, and after comparing it with what their own intelligence agencies were reporting, they found the evidence credible enough to invoke article V for the first time in NATO history. We also showed our evidence to Saudi Arabia and they found it credible enough to withdraw their recognition for the Taliban gov't.

Incorporate the fact into your conspiracy theories as you see fit.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


whatever the relationship...the taliban have been accused of hiding the group Al-Qaueda and the OBL. If you are accused, you deserve to be show the evidence that accuses you.

I don't need to incorporate it in to my conspiracy theory...this just goes to show that the US was after other things. They didn't want OBL arrested, as they also proved with the alleged assassination.
They were never going to allow this man to be brought to the court and answer charges which he has repeatedly denied. Since we know even today...that there is no concrete evidence connecting him firmly the the event.

This just exposes the agenda behind that which hunt