It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Five of the Most Dangerous Taliban Commanders in U.S. Custody Exchanged for American Captive

page: 2
36
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 1 2014 @ 08:10 AM
link   
a reply to: OpinionatedB

Like the twisted deal made to get a US CIA contractor released from Pakistan?

www.nbcnews.com...




posted on Jun, 1 2014 @ 08:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: OpinionatedB
a reply to: DustbowlDebutante

The story is legit, its in the washington post as well... this really happened. Washington Post Link


Thank you for that. I read the WP article and it states even further that he will not face repercussions for leaving his post AND he will be promoted next month!

Does anyone know if we have ever went to such lengths for an American soldier before?

If this is the first time we have done this ( sacrificed six other soldiers' lives, let five big-name terrorists free, negotiated with terrorists, not charging him with desertion, etc...) either I have to think that this guy is someone "special" or the US Gov thinks he has valuable info on the terrorists due to his time spent with them.

I can't understand why this one guy, whose kidnapping details are somewhat self-incriminatory, would be so special as to warrant all of these exceptional actions by the government. High strangeness for sure.

ETA: what makes us think we can trust Qatar? They let the Taliban open up offices in their country and operate openly like a legitimate business (if not as a political party) in Qatar. And now we have to trust that Qatar will keep the five released Taliban guys within their borders and that they can completely guarantee that these guys will not engage in further terrorist activities?? In a country that let's the Taliban operate openly in the public with offices and everything??? Okaaaay.....


ETA: all of the info about Qatar was in the WP article. They had to # the offices down after a political outcry, but the Qatari government must have been okay with it to have let it happen initially.


edit on 1-6-2014 by DustbowlDebutante because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-6-2014 by DustbowlDebutante because: Add. Correct.

edit on 1-6-2014 by DustbowlDebutante because: More.



posted on Jun, 1 2014 @ 08:21 AM
link   
a reply to: DustbowlDebutante

To my knowledge we have never done such a thing before. These were not lowly nobody men. One who was released is responsible for the death of thousands of people and is wanted by the UN for that crime I believe. These guys were serious business, and they were not recommended for ever being fit to be released... none of them were.

I cannot remember ever hearing of such a thing before.

As to why... I cannot think he is going to have any more information than anyone else that has ever been held captive - most captives are not privy to any special information other than numbers and first names of those holding him. He probably wouldn't have even known where he was held at.
edit on 1-6-2014 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2014 @ 08:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Eryiedes

"We will not negotiate with Terrorists*....




Unless it really benefits them*"



posted on Jun, 1 2014 @ 08:25 AM
link   
a reply to: ausername

Paying cash for someone's release is much different, much much different than what we just did for this guy.... do you realize who was released?

Seriously... I'd rather we have paid cash than this type of release!



KABUL — They were among the Taliban’s most influential commanders — five men whom the United States succeeded in removing from the battlefield.

Khair Ulla Said Wali Khairkhwa - Khairkhwa was an early member of the Taliban in 1994 and was interior minister during the Taliban’s rule. He hails from the same tribe as Afghan President Hamid Karzai and was captured in January 2002. Khairkhwa’s most prominent position was as governor of Herat province from 1999 to 2001, and he was alleged to have been “directly associated” with Osama bin Laden. According to a detainee assessment, Khairkhwa also was probably associated with al Qaeda’s now-deceased leader in Iraq, Abu Musab al Zarqawi. He is described as one of the “major opium drug lords in western Afghanistan” and a “friend” of Karzai. He was arrested in Pakistan and was transferred to Guantanamo in May 2002. During questioning, Khairkhwa denied all knowledge of extremist activities.

Mullah Mohammad Fazl - Fazl commanded the main force fighting the U.S.-backed Northern Alliance in 2001, and served as chief of army staff under the Taliban regime. He has been accused of war crimes during Afghanistan’s civil war in the 1990s. Fazl was detained after surrendering to Abdul Rashid Dostam, the leader of Afghanistan’s Uzbek community, in November 2001. He was wanted by the United Nations in connection with the massacre of thousands of Afghan Shiites during the Taliban’s rule. “When asked about the murders, he did not express any regret,” according to the detainee assessment. He was alleged to have been associated with several militant Islamist groups, including al Qaeda. He was transferred into U.S. custody in December 2001 and was one of the first arrivals at Guantanamo, where he was assessed as having high intelligence value.

Mullah Norullah Noori - Noori served as governor of Balkh province in the Taliban regime and played some role in coordinating the fight against the Northern Alliance. Like Fazl, Noori was detained after surrendering to Dostam, the Uzbek leader, in 2001.Noori claimed during interrogation that “he never received any weapons or military training.” According to 2008 detainee assessment, Noori “continues to deny his role, importance and level of access to Taliban officials.” That same assessment characterized him as high risk and of high intelligence value.

Abdul Haq Wasiq - Wasiq was the deputy chief of the Taliban regime’s intelligence service. His cousin was head of the service. An administrative review in 2007 cited a source as saying that Wasiq was also “an al Qaeda intelligence member” and had links with members of another militant Islamist group, Hezb-e-Islami Gulbuddin. Wasiq claimed, according to the review, that he was arrested while trying to help the United States locate senior Taliban figures. He denied any links to militant groups.

Mohammad Nabi Omari – Omari was a minor Taliban official in Khost Province. According to the first administrative review in 2004, he was a member of the Taliban and associated with both al Qaeda and another militant group Hezb-e-Islami Gulbuddin. He was the Taliban’s chief of communications and helped al Qaeda members escape from Afghanistan to Pakistan. Omari acknowledged during hearings that he had worked for the Taliban but denied connections with militant groups. He also said that he had worked with a U.S. operative named Mark to try to track down Taliban leader Mullah Omar.

Over and over, each detainee received a “recommendation for continued detention” by a military board at Guantanamo. But Bergdahl’s kidnapping — and the prospect of a prisoner swap — meant those recommendations would have to be reassessed.


These are not the kind of people you want running loose after years of torture...
edit on 1-6-2014 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2014 @ 08:32 AM
link   

Lawmakers Say Obama's Prisoner Exchange Violated Law!

Instead of people being distracted and this occurring, its time for the illegal acts to be dealt with.
Impeachment?

I have to add this however. He isn't impeached? Congress must in secret totally approve or he would be impeached. They'd have done it by now Fast and Furious should have ended his reign. He must have all the bildenburgers behind him, and all of the parties, or he'd already be out. He's just the unliked mascot for everything they all want done????

edit on 1-6-2014 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2014 @ 08:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Unity_99

Your addition carries a lot of truth, and is our worst nightmare come true if that is the case...



posted on Jun, 1 2014 @ 08:45 AM
link   
The guys they traded have been locked up for over 10 years. I really don't think they are going to walk back into open arms or have much use at all. The whole leadership has changed and been re arranged since they left. All probably had medical issues that gave us the chance to insert trackers into their bodies. Now if it gets Obummer out then it's a great thing indeed





posted on Jun, 1 2014 @ 08:46 AM
link   
a reply to: mikell

Your dealing with a tribal society... they wont be insignificant even now.



posted on Jun, 1 2014 @ 09:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Unity_99

Impeachment here in the US works this way:




At the federal level, the impeachment process is a two-step procedure. The House of Representatives must first pass, by a simple majority of those present and voting, articles of impeachment, which constitute the formal allegation or allegations. Upon passage, the defendant has been "impeached". Next, the Senate tries the accused. In the case of the impeachment of a president, the Chief Justice of the United States presides over the proceedings. For the impeachment of any other official, the Constitution is silent on who shall preside, suggesting that this role falls to the Senate's usual presiding officer. This may include the impeachment of the vice president, although legal theories suggest that allowing a defendant to be the judge in his own case would be a blatant conflict of interest. If the Vice President did not preside over an impeachment (of anyone besides the President), the duties would fall to the President pro tempore of the Senate.

To convict the accused, a two-thirds majority of the senators present is required. Conviction removes the defendant from office. Following conviction, the Senate may vote to further punish the individual by barring him from holding future federal office, elected or appointed. Conviction by the Senate does not bar criminal prosecution. Even after an accused has left office, it is possible to disqualify the person from future office or from certain emoluments of his prior office (such as a pension). If there is no charge for which a two-thirds majority of the senators present vote "guilty", the defendant is acquitted and no punishment is imposed.


Bold emphasis is mine.

Right now, there is no way that the senate would convict, not while the majority is politically aligned with the president.

Not unless, the president is accused of something that is so obviously criminal that they would have not choice (example: at a press conference, the president pulls out a gun and shoots a reporter between the eyes).

Right now, it would be a waste of time, as it would not really go anywhere.



posted on Jun, 1 2014 @ 09:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Eryiedes
He was probably eminent commander and leader of poppy field production. Bush would've done the same. Big Pharm might have a bigger hand than they are given credit for.



posted on Jun, 1 2014 @ 09:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Unity_99

I think by now that it should be clear to you that impeachment of this particular president is not going to happen. There has been more than enough in the many scandals to act, but they have not gone there, and apparently will not now.

Do you really think that anyone wants to deal with the potential backlash from an impeachment process of the USA's first perceived 'black' president?

They will not go there, Obama knows it, and also knows how to effectively counter any threats of impeachment.

When you have all of the dirt on your opposition, you essentially have control over them.

They will beat their chests, make a lot of noise, have staged hearings, and ultimately do nothing.

IMO

Good luck, nonetheless.


edit on 1-6-2014 by ausername because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2014 @ 09:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Eryiedes

The US policy on terrorism has been irrational and brought under fraud since the very beginning.

The Global War On Terror is a fraud of epic proportions.

Point is, it was not rewritten for the exchange of prisoners. I'm no Obama fan, not by a long shot, but blaming him for bringing this man back sounds rather partisan to me.

It seems probable that the guy walked away from his unit on purpose, being ashamed of what he had seen there.



posted on Jun, 1 2014 @ 09:13 AM
link   
I wonder if they Chipped the 5 before they handed them over.??



posted on Jun, 1 2014 @ 09:21 AM
link   
a reply to: DustbowlDebutante

When ever someone tells the truth it could be taken as "liberal bashing"

Second.



posted on Jun, 1 2014 @ 09:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Eryiedes

As more comes out this will be another one of Obama's notable agenda moves, this guy was meant for something big, if not from the beginning then surly as he became part of his "so captors" agenda.

The military has no idea how this guy became a prisoner or why he left the base... so far.



posted on Jun, 1 2014 @ 09:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Eryiedes



Five of the Most Dangerous Taliban Commanders


But how do we know that without a link or should we just take your word for it ?

if indeed this is true then how come they have not been chaged with any crimes or don't we need that anymore

Do you think that between them they killed more people than killed during the false flag on 9/11 or do you think that the USA traded them because none of them have blood on their hands and they are a danger to no one.

if these gitmo inmates are so bad then how come its costing US tax payers $1m a year each to keep them in jail in a foriegn land and are you happy to be paid your share of the bill or did no one ask you

getting stuffed is one thing but liking it is another so welcome the hero back, he is a hero because he just saved you all $5m p.a that can be used to create jobs in the USA or to put roofs over peoples heads.



posted on Jun, 1 2014 @ 09:36 AM
link   
I hate this!

Hate it!
Hate it!
Hate it!

Now look at what you fine people have made me do!

*gggrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr*

Now I'm defending Obama!

*face-palm*

We've been doing prisoner exchanges forever! Anyone remember the Cold War?

Hello!

North Korea?

Hello!

Now everyone settle down. This is just politics. It's bull-poop!

Lets focus on the real crappy things Obama is doing and step away from this!

*clears throat*

Thank you for your time.




posted on Jun, 1 2014 @ 09:56 AM
link   
a reply to: OpinionatedB

Well after the Syrian fiasco I'm not surprised Obama would do such a thing.



posted on Jun, 1 2014 @ 10:04 AM
link   
Kinda wondering the same thing. They exchange personnel... Have a drone over head. Follow Taliban back to hide out and then light them all up using the drone. Isn't that what Obama loves to do? Use drones. Just a thought.



new topics

top topics



 
36
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join