'Bush's Faustian Deal With the Taliban'..L.A.Times May 22, 2001

[spanone]

Just googling around while watching a CNN story on the Taliban and came across this article from Robert Scheer in the L.A.Times from May 22, 2001. FOUR MONTHS BEFORE 9-11.

~SNIP~
Enslave your girls and women, harbor anti-U.S. terrorists, destroy every vestige of civilization in your homeland, and the Bush administration will embrace you. All that matters is that you line up as an ally in the drug war, the only international cause that this nation still takes seriously.

That's the message sent with the recent gift of $43 million to the Taliban rulers of Afghanistan, the most virulent anti-American violators of human rights in the world today. The gift, announced last Thursday by Secretary of State Colin Powell, in addition to other recent aid, makes the U.S. the main sponsor of the Taliban and rewards that "rogue regime" for declaring that opium growing is against the will of God. So, too, by the Taliban's estimation, are most human activities, but it's the ban on drugs that catches this administration's attention. ~SNIP~

Never mind that Osama bin Laden still operates the leading anti-American terror operation from his base in Afghanistan, from which, among other crimes, he launched two bloody attacks on American embassies in Africa in 1998.

http://www.robertscheer.com/1_natcolumn/01_columns/052201.htm

[lisby]

1. Jesus H. Christ

on a Q-tip.

:grr:


Lisby

[spanone]

2. no shit.

[Dr.Phool]

3. Funny how reality keeps coming back to haunt us.

Facts are terrible things. We have always been at war with East Asia.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Webster Green]

4. I remember it well...

I first got pissed about the Taliban when I heard about them blowing up the ancient Buddhas.

I remember reading this article shortly after that, and getting even more pissed that the chimp was sending them money. I got in touch with a SF Bay Area Afghani Association, and discussed staging anti-Taliban protests here, but then 9/11 happened and everything went haywire.

[spanone]

6. Just sent it to Olbermann for what it's worth. Aiding and abetting?

[CheshireCat]

5. People at DU were appalled

when * gave the $43 million to the Taliban rulers. If the archives go back that far, check out the discussions.

[AlienGirl]

7. I was OUTRAGED when that happened--most DUers were

And still are.

Tucker

[spanone]

9. So, did our government help finance 9/11?? If not directly......

geeeez:banghead:

[RDU Socialist]

12. the taliban didn't attack, al qaeda did

the whole plan was set in motion well before this took place.

[spanone]

14. Of course it was. The Taliban gave bin Laden sanctuary in 1996.

[RDU Socialist]

15. the point is the $43 million didn't go towards 9/11

now the aid might have gone to arming the Taliban military even more, so it is possible that the Bush Administration helped buy the weaponry used against soldiers in Afghanistan.

[NNN0LHI]

29. How do you know this? Is it just a guess? Or something else? n/t

[annabanana]

25. Surely that much money given to the taliban... when the B*sh

family's tie to the Bin Laden family were so well known.. . . The taliban kept it a secret from Osama? .... really?

Or did Osama, knowing that these bucks were given to the taliban say "Let's go suck some of that good stuff up?".. or was $43 million chump change to him at that time?

[Roland99]

17. And how much more widespread were these deals. Bet Sibel knows....

[robbedvoter]

32. Yup. never forgot that one.

[sweetheart]

10. The drugs war corrupts all common sense

Rape and all forms of crime are acceptable as long as the war on drugs is
unleashed to murder on all continents. The afgani government should just
legallize drugs and sell them to the highest bidder... That's probably
the backhand deal anyways... why listen to a buch of tyrants and fools
who've locked up their own children in prison and are lookin' fer more.

[ninkasi]

18. I agree

Our so-called "war on drugs" makes no sense whatsoever. The war on drugs, rather than the use of the drugs themselves, is what creates much death and havoc, and causes our prison population to swell to enormous numbers. Of course, some drugs, such as marijuana, are disliked by the big drug companies, and by the liquor industry. The privatized prisons here salivate at the prospect of more and more inmates, for them to use as slave labor.

The neocons view everything with one thing in mind, and that is how they can profit from it. In addition, they need to seize power so that they can continue their rape of the American citizen. No rational person could consider this war on drugs to be sensible policy, so they stoke up the fires of hatred in the right wing religious nut-jobs, who are only too happy to vote for the ones who promise to make sure gay marriage remains illegal, that Roe v. Wade is overturned, and that birth control will be abolished.

I'm afraid that our society has become terminally infected with these people, and that too many Americans are too unable to think for themselves, and act as adults, rather than frightened, terrorized children, clinging in desperation to the Republican Party to save them from themselves.

[Chomp]

11. Wow...kick.........nt

[Disturbed]

13. Guess who personally delivered the $43 Million?

Hmmmmmmmm?

[MountainLaurel]

24. The Shrub?

Or Colin Powell?

[PRETZEL]

28. I remember it being Colin Powell...........n/t

[annabanana]

26. Rummy?. . . .n/t

[xchrom]

16. a trip down memory lane -- kick.

[calimary]

19. And another kick.

It's well worth revisiting.

[texasleo]

30. yup, we discussed it here back then

[kentuck]

20. Also....

Enron had a large gas liquefication plant in India that was going to perhaps use the pipeline. They had to sell it or close it down after they went under. But, this was probably part of the secret energy meeting with Cheney in 2001?

[chat_noir]

21. later in 2001 the US directed the massacre of 3000 Taliban prisoners

“Afghan Massacre: The Convoy of Death”
Film Documents Alleged Massacre of 3,000 Taliban Prisoners in Afghanistan


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1304985&mesg_id=1304985

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3703662

[petgoat]

22. They paid Taliban to outlaw opium production, which

they did.

Afghan Opium Production: Metric Tons
2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996
74 3,656 2,861 2,340 2,184 2,099


http://www.shaps.hawaii.edu/drugs/dea0901/dea0901.html


But of course outlawing the opium pissed the farmers off mightily. It also pissed off
Osama who, according to a report cited in FT, was getting an income of $600 million to
$1 billion a year from the trade. http://specials.ft.com/attackonterrorism/FT3FJ5RJMUC.html

According to Paul Thompson's information at Cooperativeresearch, the CIA induced Pakistan's
Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI)agency to get involved in the heroin trade in the 80's for the
purpose of selling the stuff to the Russian soldiers. After the Russians left Afhanistan, the
trade went on.

Of course opium production in Afghanistan now is at record levels.

[Canuckistanian]

23. $43 million buys a lot of aid and comfort

Can we start the proceedings now?

[PRETZEL]

27. the Unocal Project predates Bush by a few years,

according to Steve Coll's book "Ghost Wars" this project was also very heavily supported by Clinton also. What is interesting is that the claim that the money was for eliminating opium production may be nothing more than a cover story. This project was supposed to be the "be all" for former Soviet countries Turkmenistan and Uzebekistan as well as Afghanistan and Pakistan.

[JackRiddler]

33. Maybe it was a bait and switch...

Supporting the Taliban in their politically suicidal idea of alienating all the warlords by destroying the poppy crop worked out well after 9/11, when the CIA went to the warlords with bags of cash money and everyone could figure out that if the Taliban went down, next year would bring a bumper harvest, which of course it did.

[PRETZEL]

34. I'm not sure what to think of this,

I think you're right but at the time of the proposed deal the Taliban had just taken power. During the Clinton years the thinking was that if this deal went through it would have had major economic benefits for alot of countries. The problem was that the Taliban was not recognized as the legitimate government of Afghnistan. They also controlled the land that the route would have taken and needed security and guarantees the pipelines would be safe for the reasons you mentioned (ie the fueds with the warlords who lived in that area)in order for the deal to go through.

The country that has intrigued me in this whole affair is Pakistan. It's no secret that they supported the Taliban's rise to power (and covertly funded and trained them) but also knew that they were a viscous regime.

[JackRiddler]

35. Taliban in control since 1996...

I am referring specifically to the $125 mil in aid payments during the first months of the Bush regime, and the $43 mil final payment (May) approved by Powell specifically as relief to poppy farmers, in support of the Taliban's suddenly strict policy of destroying the poppy crop (which they were doing on behalf of full "Islamization"). Only the Northern Alliance areas produced opium in that cycle, cutting Afghan production by 95 percent and creating enormous market pressures. Given how it went after the Taliban were taken down by the US-led invasion - total freedom for warlords to plant and produce like crazy a bumper crop - given the long history of Bush mob involvement in narcotics trading, and especially given the well-known plans to invade Afghanistan, which were in place before 9/11, I conclude the idea all along was to encourage the Taliban into alienating the warlords. What followed was the execution of the "carpet of gold or carpet of bombs" threat, delivered via diplomatic back-channels when the Taliban in June 2001 exited the discreet 4 plus 2 talks in Berlin, designed to secure a unity government and a safe pipeline route. Plans for an attack on Afghanistan were on Bush's desk on September 9th, a huge UK fleet was on its way to Oman for a "wargame", and two carrier groups were on a scheduled rendez-vous off the coast of Pakistan - a perfect combination for invading Afghanistan by mid-October before the bad weather, as Indian and Pakistani press claimed was coming before 9/11.

This is one of most powerful elements of the circumstantial case for 9/11 as inside job. They had the war ready but the casus belli provided itself coincidentally two days later?

[PRETZEL]

41. Good points,

I had forgotten about the initial 125m and the "carpet of gold or carpet of bombs" threat you mentioned. One thing that I recall from what I've read is that the Taliban most certainly wanted to Islamized all of Afghanistan and definitely wanted to unite the country by eliminating the various leaders of the different regions. And Pakistan was aiding in that end as they felt the Taliban would eventually become less viscous once they had gotten full control over all the people.

I had not know about the military exercises and build up you mentioned. I vaguely remember about the plans being on Bush's desk on Sept 9 but not much about the details. I'm not so sure that I'm willing to take that step and connect the 2 as you're doing. Like so many here, I have so many unanswered questions about what happened on 9/11 and the response taken by our gov't I just can't take that final step.

[sojourner]

31. K & R

I remember when Boosh hosted Taliban leaders at the ranch. But the USians have short memory when it comes to their HEERO.

[The_Casual_Observer]

36. They didn't expect Osama to attack the US in a big way,

so everything was cool.

[Hoping4Change]

37. That's incorrect. The US did expect terrorist attacks from Osama.

[The_Casual_Observer]

40. "In a big way"

"we didn't expect then to use planes as missiles"

I don't know what they were thinking, but whatever it was, it was irresponsible.

[Hoping4Change]

42. That is the position of Wolfowitz but its not true.

From 60 Minutes Interview with Clarke:

Clarke: Bush ignored terrorism for months, when maybe we could have done something to stop 9/11. Maybe. We'll never know."

Clarke says that prior to Sept. 11, the administration didn't take the threat seriously.
"We had a terrorist organization that was going after us! Al Qaeda. That should have been the first item on the agenda.... On January 24th, 2001, I wrote a memo to Condoleezza Rice asking for, urgently -- underlined urgently -- a Cabinet-level meeting to deal with the impending al Qaeda attack. And that urgent memo-- wasn't acted on. I blame the entire Bush leadership for continuing to work on Cold War issues when they back in power in 2001. It was as though they were preserved in amber from when they left office eight years earlier. They came back. They wanted to work on the same issues right away: Iraq, Star Wars. Not new issues, the new threats that had developed over the preceding eight years." ...


Clarke finally got his meeting about al Qaeda in April, three months after his urgent request. But it wasn't with the president or cabinet. It was with the second-in-command in each relevant department. For the Pentagon, it was Paul Wolfowitz. Clarke relates, "I began saying, 'We have to deal with bin Laden; we have to deal with al Qaeda.' Paul Wolfowitz, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, said, 'No, no, no. We don't have to deal with al Qaeda. Why are we talking about that little guy? We have to talk about Iraqi terrorism against the United States.' ...


By June 2001, there still hadn't been a Cabinet-level meeting on terrorism, even though U.S. intelligence was picking up an unprecedented level of ominous chatter. The CIA director warned the White House, Clarke points out. "George Tenet was saying to the White House, saying to the president - because he briefed him every morning - a major al Qaeda attack is going to happen against the United States somewhere in the world in the weeks and months ahead. He said that in June, July, August." ...


Clarke says the last time the CIA had picked up a similar level of chatter was in December, 1999, when Clarke was the terrorism czar in the Clinton White House. Clarke says Mr. Clinton ordered his Cabinet to go to battle stations-- meaning, they went on high alert, holding meetings nearly every day. That, Clarke says, helped thwart a major attack on Los Angeles International Airport, when an al Qaeda operative was stopped at the border with Canada, driving a car full of explosives. "


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/19/60minutes/printable607356.shtml

[Initech]

38. Why couldnt we have impeached him for this?

He's literally aiding and abetting our enemy and getting away with it! What the fuck?!!!?!

[Jacobin]

39. Hha hah hah

I guess we have to cut off ties with ourselves now, for supporting terrorists.

:rofl:

:rofl:

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

43. big-ass kick!

[derby378]

44. Three words: BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE

Michael Moore lightly touched on this subject in BfC.

[Pastiche423]

46. Don't you mean F/911?

[K8-EEE]

45. I Met Robert Scheer At the UCLA Book Fair!!

The first thing I did is tell him I forward this article to everyone I know whenever that "GOP Is The Nat'l Security" party LIE comes up. I always say, find me one of the RW pundits who ever was concerned about the Taliban or the US FUNDING OF THE TALIBAN before 9/11, this proves once again the liberals are the ones with true national security interests.

This article is in his new book A MUST READ! He talks about his journo experiences with every prez since Nixon and how NONE OF THEM PREPARED HIM FOR GWB....

[bobthedrummer]

47. Former CIA Director Richard McGarrah Helms Niece, Laili Helms,

was the pr spokesperson for the Taliban for awhile.
http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0124,ridgeway,25512,6.html