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.

 

Documents: U.S., Taliban bargained over bin Laden

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 19 2005 @ 11:50 PM
link   
U.S., Taliban bargained over bin Laden, documents show
Declassified State Department papers detail 1998 meetingsU.S., Taliban

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- During secret meetings with U.S. officials in 1998, top Taliban officials discussed assassinating or expelling Osama bin Laden in response to al Qaeda's deadly bombings of U.S. embassies in Africa, according to State Department documents.

The newly declassified documents, posted Thursday on the National Archives Web site, provide a fascinating glimpse into U.S. diplomacy exerted on Afghanistan's ruling Taliban -- a regime officially unrecognized by Washington -- nearly three years before the September 11, 2001, al Qaeda attacks on the United States.

According to the documents, the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Pakistan, Alan Eastham Jr., met with Wakil Ahmed, a close aide to Taliban leader Mullah Omar, in November and December 1998. That was just months after the August al Qaeda attacks that killed more than 200 people at the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.

"It is unbelievable that this small man did this to you," Ahmed said during their meeting on December 19, 1998, according to the documents.

Ahmed told Eastham that he spoke with Omar about bin Laden and that the Taliban still considered the Saudi exile "innocent."



LINK



Just saw this, another chance sot to hell........

crap makes you really wonder why , does it not?




posted on Aug, 20 2005 @ 01:14 AM
link   
I wonder why we didn't make it happen?


Oh yeah, it was 1998...Our leader was too bothered getting head.



posted on Aug, 20 2005 @ 01:48 AM
link   
'Bin Laden assassination debated'

Bin Laden 'most important'

The documents indicate that bin Laden was clearly Washington's priority with the Taliban in 1998 -- rather than reported human rights violations by their Afghan government.

"The continued presence in Afghanistan of bin Laden and his network is by far the most important," said a State Department cable sent on October 19, 1998.


hmmm, and a certain 'CiC' refused to take the shot, on more than one occasion.



posted on Aug, 20 2005 @ 02:13 AM
link   
The Left and the Right both missed golden chances to get him. Why? Because they are no different to each other behind the curtain. By that I mean the tops of each party, not the voters. Maybe they knew he would cause trouble later down the line, which would in turn suit an agenda?

The Plan is to herd us like cattle, the farmer is using Bin Laden and his crew as shepards.

F.E.A.R

False Evidence Appearing Real

[edit on 20-8-2005 by 7th_Chakra]



posted on Aug, 20 2005 @ 03:11 AM
link   
Wasn't that the same year that UNOCAL was lobbying Congress to bomb Afghanistan?



posted on Aug, 20 2005 @ 04:48 AM
link   
Well This is Certainly Weird for me:

According to the documents, the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Pakistan, Alan Eastham Jr., met with Wakil Ahmed, a close aide to Taliban leader Mullah Omar, in November and December 1998. That was just months after the August al Qaeda attacks that killed more than 200 people at the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.

Now - why did they "meet" with Mullah Omar, just months after the Al-Qaeada Attacked and killed more then 200 people in US Embassies? Why didn't they capture him and arrest him - they would be much closer to OBL now!

I guess that was not the Case at that time....

The State Department has issued a $25 million reward for bin Laden and $10 million for Mullah Omar.



posted on Aug, 20 2005 @ 05:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by 7th_Chakra
The Left and the Right both missed golden chances to get him. Why? Because they are no different to each other behind the curtain. By that I mean the tops of each party, not the voters. Maybe they knew he would cause trouble later down the line, which would in turn suit an agenda?

My strong feeling is that they KNEW they would be using him to cover their own behinds for the trouble THEY caused.

The Plan is to herd us like cattle, the farmer is using Bin Laden and his crew as shepards.

F.E.A.R

False Evidence Appearing Real

CWG
Great series!


[edit on 20-8-2005 by 7th_Chakra]



posted on Aug, 20 2005 @ 05:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
Just saw this, another chance sot to hell........

crap makes you really wonder why , does it not?



Clinton did bomb Afghanistan in August of 1998 and was accused of trying to divert attention away from the Lewinski scandal by those who did not seem to understand the threat of global terror.

Here's a CNN article from August 21 1998:


CNN

"Let our actions today send this message loud and clear -- there are no expendable American targets," U.S. President Clinton said in a televised address to the American people Thursday evening. "There will be no sanctuary for terrorists. We will defend our people, our interests and our values."

U.S. officials say the six sites attacked in Afghanistan were part of a network of terrorist compounds near the Pakistani border that housed supporters of millionaire Osama bin Laden.

An official of the Taliban, Afgahanistan's Islamic rulers, reported 21 were killed and 30 were injured in the missile strikes in eastern Afghanistan.


It's true that Bin Laden was not killed in those strikes but it's not as if Clinton did nothing. The current administration has been going after Bin Laden since 2001 and also been unable to kill him.



posted on Aug, 20 2005 @ 05:28 AM
link   
These are the National Security Archive docements discussed in the CNN article:

Pre-9/11 U.S. Attempts to Drive Bin Laden Out of Afghanistan
Repeatedly Unsuccessful, Documents Show



posted on Aug, 20 2005 @ 05:30 AM
link   
One would have thought if the current administration were serious about capturing bin laden, they'd not have stepped back when they had him trapped in Afghanistan. That bin laden must certainly be a mastermind..first the 9/11 attacks, and now the shell game..he's outwitted the greatest military, and intelligence system in the world. He plays a good game! pffffffffft..... There is not one part of me that has ever been convinced he was ever in danger from our government, nor we in danger from him.



posted on Aug, 20 2005 @ 06:58 AM
link   
Star of Curiosity,

Whats CWG?



[edit on 20-8-2005 by 7th_Chakra]



posted on Aug, 20 2005 @ 07:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by 7th_Chakra
Star of Curiosity,

Whats CWG?



[edit on 20-8-2005 by 7th_Chakra]


Conversations with God by Neale Walsch. The "false expectations appearing real" phrase originated in that series of spiritual work. Though some variations have appeared in the past few years, as yours in this thread



posted on Aug, 20 2005 @ 10:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Star of Curiosity

Originally posted by 7th_Chakra
Star of Curiosity,

Whats CWG?



[edit on 20-8-2005 by 7th_Chakra]


Conversations with God by Neale Walsch. The "false expectations appearing real" phrase originated in that series of spiritual work. Though some variations have appeared in the past few years, as yours in this thread


Oh okay. I might have to check those out. Thanks



posted on Aug, 20 2005 @ 10:46 AM
link   
Ed: I read this article as well and I would say immediately, in agreement with the other poster, that it was not a priority in the Clinton administration to eliminate Bin Laden.

There are many reasons why. The first is that the CIA, in post-vietnam era, was unwilling to sacrifice lives of their agents for sketchy causes such as meddling third world fanatics.

However, we had no idea of the scope of these fanatics plots.

The second is that Clinton, while he authorized the use of force, when it was learned that the attack failed, did not follow up on the action. You cannot attempt something like this, and then not follow up on it. That was a major mistake.

If you consider all of the failures in the CIA during George Tenet's reign (Clinton appointee) you start to wonder why they chose him ... not only did the CIA fail to get BL the first time, but they also failed to prevent 9/11 ... AND they supported the WMD claims that are now thought to have been lies, many people blame Bush but it was Tenet that resigned not Bush ... and it was Clinton that put him in there in the first place!

But, bipartisanship aside, let's get our facts straight. I am reading an excellent book that I strongly recommend that you all read as well called "Afghanistan: Mullah, Marx, and Mujahid" by Ralph Magnus and Eden Naby. It is one of the most thorough and detailed historical accounts of a non-Western nation that I have ever read.

It covers the ancient and modern history of Afghanistan from religion to politics. The history of Afghanistan is one of the middleman. They have been always a country through which one passes for the Silk Road to China, or one that was a buffer zone between Tzarist Russia and the British East India empire, one that was a buffer zone between Communist USSR, and US backed interests in Pakistan and India.

The complexity of their political orientations is great. You cannot possibly begin to imagine the motivations of their people without understanding their own trials and tribulations.

It is the United States that has missed several opportunities to prevent uprisings of organizations such as Bin Laden dating back to the 1950's when we turned down opportunities to support pro-Western movements (which is why they turned to Russia for help, just like Vietnam did).

However, the modern reality is that the Taliban and Bin Laden have captured the Islamic emotions of the extremists frustrated by constant warfare. There have been more coups in Afghanistan in the past 100 years than there ever have been in central and south America dating back to the Incans!

Mullah Omar was willing to take out Bin Laden on their own accords at one point but we did not authorize it. Now he's on our list as well. We appear to have a history of not trusting the local authorities enough to take action in a preventative manner, but then we are unable to carry out successful missions on our own accords after the fact.

Now it's easy to say this (20/20 hindsight) today, but I can only hope we are learning from these failures in preventing worse catastrophes in the future.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join