Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook
  54
Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon
  6
Tell A Friend
  13
73 Shares     
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Article Stats
13 comments

OpEdNews Op Eds

Obama Lied: Taliban Did Not Refuse to Hand Over Bin Laden

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 2 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

Well Said 3   Funny 2   Must Read 1  
View Ratings | Rate It

Headlined to None 12/4/09

opednews.com

Obama slipped past a real doozy Tuesday night when he said the Taliban refused to hand over bin Laden. It just ain't so. They tried three times to open negotiations for this, but Bush refused each time. He wanted to bomb people so bad it hurt.

UK Guardian:

A senior Taliban minister has offered a last-minute deal to hand over Osama bin Laden during a secret visit to Islamabad, senior sources in Pakistan told the Guardian last night...

For the first time, the Taliban offered to hand over Bin Laden for trial in a country other than the US without asking to see evidence first in return for a halt to the bombing, a source close to Pakistan's military leadership said.

The Taliban have offered to hand over Bin Laden before but only if sufficient evidence was presented. Bin Laden is wanted both for the September 11 attacks and for masterminding the bombings of two US embassies in East Africa in 1998 in which 224 people were killed. He is also suspected of involvement in other terrorist attacks, including the suicide bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen last year.

But until now the Taliban regime has consistently said it has not seen any convincing evidence to implicate the Saudi dissident in any crime.

"Now they have agreed to hand him over to a third country without the evidence being presented in advance," the source close to the military said."

Combined with so unhesitatingly waving the Al Qaeda boogey-man to make his case, in a fashion Bush would have been proud of, (Al Qaeda isn't in Afghanistan) it all makes me mighty suspicious. The Taliban wasn't declared an enemy until after 9/11, even as we had evidence that bin Laden was behind the bombing of the USS Cole. That's because Bush's buddies were still hoping to get the contract for the oil pipeline, which the Taliban government was refusing to give them. These are just facts, I'm not even trying to make an argument here. But someone has to call them on these things.

The history is at the classic essay by Richard Behan which went viral on the internet soon after it was published (re-printed at Afterdowningstreet.org ):

From its first days in office in January of 2001 the Administration of George W. Bush meant to launch military attacks against both Afghanistan and Iraq. The reasons had nothing to do with terrorism.

This is beyond dispute. The mainstream press has either ignored the story or missed it completely, but the Administration's congenital belligerence is fully documented elsewhere.

Attacking a sovereign nation unprovoked, however, directly violates the charter of the United Nations. It is an international crime. The Bush Administration would need credible justification to proceed with its plans.

The terrorist violence of September 11, 2001 provided a spectacular opportunity. In the cacophony of outrage and confusion, the Administration could conceal its intentions, disguise the true nature of its premeditated wars, and launch them. The opportunity was exploited in a heartbeat.

Within hours of the attacks, President Bush declared the U.S. "...would take the fight directly to the terrorists," and "...he announced to the world the United States would make no distinction between the terrorists and the states that harbor them." [1] Thus the "War on Terror" was born.

The "War on Terror" is patently fraudulent, but the essence of successful propaganda is repetition, and the Bush Administration has repeated its mantra endlessly:

The War on Terror was launched in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. It is intended to enhance our national security at home, and to spread democracy in the Middle East.

Next Page  1  |  2

 

Take action -- click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people:
Co-sponsor HR 3699, do not fund escalation

Click here to see the most recent messages sent to congressional reps and local newspapers

Ralph Lopez majored in Economics and Political Science at Yale University. He writes for Truth Out, Alternet, Consortium News, Op-Ed News, and other Internet media. He reported from Afghanistan in 2009 and produced a short documentary film on the (more...)
 
Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Wikileaks Soldier Reveals Orders for "360 Rotational Fire" Against Civilians in Iraq

Why Obama Will Not Veto NDAA Military Detention of Americans: He Requested It.

McChrystal Trying to Tell Us Something? "We're F%^*king Losing This Thing"

BoA Dumps $75 Trillion In Derivatives On Taxpayers, Super Committee Looks Away. Seize BoA Now.

Arrests at White House Over NDAA Military Detention of Americans, Occupy Wall Street Joins Fight.

Obama Lied: Taliban Did Not Refuse to Hand Over Bin Laden

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
7 people are discussing this page, with 13 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

In a recent New York Times' article, Bob Herbert w... by Ben Adams on Friday, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:38:54 AM
that the sources are not named other than to say t... by Steven Leser on Friday, Dec 4, 2009 at 3:59:08 PM
President Obama did not cite any evidence at all t... by Blaine Kinsey on Friday, Dec 4, 2009 at 11:54:07 PM
You will note that usually, when I post an article... by Steven Leser on Saturday, Dec 5, 2009 at 12:25:02 AM
I am just letting you debate yourself into a corne... by Blaine Kinsey on Saturday, Dec 5, 2009 at 4:44:43 PM
What you have actually done is remind me of debati... by Steven Leser on Sunday, Dec 6, 2009 at 5:57:05 PM
I will let you know when you can stop digging your... by Blaine Kinsey on Monday, Dec 7, 2009 at 12:09:15 AM
refute it.... by Steven Leser on Monday, Dec 7, 2009 at 10:35:52 PM
Your reply is: "I stand on my previous comment." I... by Blaine Kinsey on Tuesday, Dec 8, 2009 at 8:16:24 AM
That Hillary told the same lie. Here is an articl... by Jon Gold on Saturday, Dec 5, 2009 at 9:45:20 AM
Lie or not, the Truth is that Ussama Bin Laden had... by abe ramsay on Saturday, Dec 5, 2009 at 6:03:48 PM
Hitler stated that a big lie is more easily believ... by wagelaborer on Monday, Dec 7, 2009 at 1:30:05 AM
but then, he has lied about so many many things I ... by richard on Monday, Dec 7, 2009 at 4:42:06 PM