It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
KABUL, Afghanistan (CNN) -- Afghanistan's ruling Taliban condemned the hijacking attacks against the United States for a second time Wednesday and urged the U.S. not to attack them in retaliation. CNN's Nic Robertson said Taliban officials called the attack a "sad humanitarian catastrophe." The Taliban appealed to the U.S. not to attack Afghanistan because the Afghan people are already in a great deal of misery. Wednesday's statement came after a meeting between senior Pakistani diplomats and Taliban officials that was described as inconclusive. Pakistan is one of the only countries that recognizes the Taliban government. Taliban officials also denied that Osama bin Laden, the millionaire Saudi fugitive blamed for past terrorist attacks against American targets, was behind the attacks.
reply to post by Trolloks
As you know, the blame changed from the Taliban to Al-Queida quite smoothly, to the point now where people say without a blink of an eye that it was Al-Queida who did the attacks and not the Taliban, yet we went into Afghanistan because we were told that is was the Taliban who did the attacks.
Originally posted by CasiusIgnoranze
reply to post by Trolloks
And you wonder why 92% of the people in Afghanistan have no idea why the US and UK Government are fighting a war in Afghanistan in the first place.
92% of the Afghan people never heard of the 9/11 attacks
"Even before the [9/11] attacks, our Islamic Emirate had tried - through various proposals - to resolve the Osama issue. One such proposal was to set up a three-nation court, or something under the supervision of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference [OIC]," Muttawakil said.
"But the US showed no interest in it. They kept demanding we hand him over, but we had not relations with the US, no agreement of any sort. They did not recognise our government."
"Afghanistan was one of the first few governments that condemned the attacks,"
"Neither for the US, nor for Afghanistan - and the Afghan people - the attacks were not a good thing. Because subsequent to those attacks, many more people have died here in Afghanistan.
" That attack was a disaster on civilians, and on the pretext of that attack, disasters have been afflicted on the people of Afghanistan and Iraq,”
We condemned the attacks because the people targeted were defenseless civilians, women, children, Muslim and non-Muslim. But al-Qaeda praised it.
" Days after 9/11, with the US military campaign looming, the Taliban government convened an advisory gathering of over 1,500 religious scholars at a Kabul hotel to discuss what to do with bin Laden. The scholars concluded that the Taliban government should ask bin Laden to "leave the country voluntarily."
"The Americans said that even if he leaves, they will search any place in Afghanistan that they wanted with their military forces. They wanted him dead or alive."
"Their requests and demands were based on a logic of war. They were preparing for it - preparing their planes in the Gulf and working with Pakistan to open a route. Their decision to go to war was definite."
DOHA, Qatar (CNN) -- Islamic militant leader Osama bin Laden, the man the United States considers the prime suspect in last week's terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, denied any role Sunday in the actions believed to have killed thousands. In a statement issued to the Arabic satellite channel Al Jazeera, based in Qatar, bin Laden said, "The U.S. government has consistently blamed me for being behind every occasion its enemies attack it. "I would like to assure the world that I did not plan the recent attacks, which seems to have been planned by people for personal reasons," bin Laden's statement said.
2. Right intention. A state must intend to fight the war only for the sake of its just cause. Having the right reason for launching a war is not enough: the actual motivation behind the resort to war must also be morally appropriate. Ulterior motives, such as a power or land grab, or irrational motives, such as revenge or ethnic hatred, are ruled out.
(Exhausted All Alternatives?)
4. Last Resort. A state may resort to war only if it has exhausted all plausible, peaceful alternatives to resolving the conflict in question, in particular diplomatic negotiation.
(Obvious from the get go)
5. Probability of Success. A state may not resort to war if it can foresee that doing so will have no measurable impact on the situation.
(Proportionate?) what a joke
6. Proportionality. A state must, prior to initiating a war, weigh the universal goods expected to result from it, such as securing the just cause, against the universal evils expected to result, notably casualties.
Originally posted by Trolloks
Bin Laden denies 9/11 attacks
Its a shame that only a few articles are still up, but every now and then something interesting comes up that have yet to be taken down and covered up.edit on 11-9-2011 by Trolloks because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Maslo
Whether Taliban had anything to do with the attacks or not, I am not going to feel sorry for them. It was not a legitimate government, just a bunch of religious savages oppressing their own people, and the country was a mess long before invasion.