Pilger says Bush Administration was MOVING BEFORE 9/11/01 TO ACT AGAINST THE TALIBAN!

John Pilger Archives ^ | November 23, 2001 | John Pilger (Bush hater)

[Roscoe Karns]

[snip]

...The twin towers attacks provided Bush's Washington with both a trigger and a remarkable coincidence. Pakistan's former foreign minister Niaz Naik has revealed that he was told by senior American officials in mid-July [2001]that military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October. The US secretary of state, Colin Powell, was then travelling in central Asia, already gathering support for an anti-Afghanistan war "coalition".

[snip] Paragraph #14

[Roscoe Karns]

Of course Pilger goes on to say Bush wanted an oil pipeline through Afghanistan...

Credit to Tim Blair blog http://timblair.spleenville.com/archives/006373.php

Sorry if this has been already been posted

[Support Free Republic]

Donate Here By Secure Server

[what's up]

Next week will be fun...

[writer33]

How can this be? I thought President Bush's administration was a bunch of complete, utter morons. :) hA!

[Paul Atreides]

I thought President Bush's administration was a bunch of complete, utter morons.

Those charges change as much as Kerry's stance on any given issue.

[Shermy]

Return to the 6+2 coalition, 9/11 as "second strike" after the Taliban offensive and Massoud assassination....where are those threads anyway???

[expatpat]

Take that, Clarke!

Unfortunately, if this gets general acceptance, the Dem'rats will then flip, and say Bush precipitated 9/11 by his over-aggressive plans to attack the Taliban! You can't win with the libs -- they'll take both sides of an issue, without shame.

[Solamente]

" Well, well, well, well, WELL! UMPH! "

[cwb]

This is a point the media keeps ignoring, as this was even mentioned by Colin Powell in his testimony. As Powell noted, before there could've been any military action against the Taliban, the US had to negotiate, normally with hostile countries, for air-flight rights and foward base deployment. This is why Powell was personally involved with negotiations with both Pakistan and Usbekistan. As he further noted, without these concessions, US soldiers would've been placed at greater risk, because things like search and rescue would've took hours from further locales. We certainly didn't want to "rush to war" without having a plan in place...which as Powell said, was on its way.

[writer33]

"Those charges change as much as Kerry's stance on any given issue."


That's true, but there's always that soft underlying hint that President Bush is a hick, idiot.

[Shermy]

September 22, 2001

Threat of US strikes passed to Taliban weeks before NY attack

among other things worthy of consideration...

"...Russia's president Vladimir Putin said in an interview released yesterday that he had warned the Clinton administration about the dangers posed by Bin Laden. "Washington's reaction at the time really amazed me. They shrugged their shoulders and said matter-of-factly: 'We can't do anything because the Taliban does not want to turn him over'..."

[marron]

Grownups have seen for a long time that we were going to wind up at war with Saddam and the Afghan-based gangs sooner or later. You let your diplomats do their work, you never know what they may turn up, but below the surface you prepare for war. Thats the way it is supposed to work.

If the guys in suits manage to pull the rabbit out of the hat, good for all of us. If not, if we are serious people, we should have the pieces in place to move it to the next level.

I can safely state that the US military has been preparing for war in the mideast and Central Asia for several years. Anyone could see the storms brewing, and we pay smart people to be ready when it hits.

[Paul Atreides]

Yeah, I know. Somehow, the "handlers" of the administration have managed to do what Follywood directors have been unable to accomplish: take a moron and make him into a convincing actor. Apparently, W is too stupid to put one foot before the other, yet, can somehow manage to memorize a script of facts and figures and, pull the wool over the eyes of the entire world.

[mrsmith]

And there was this report in Jane's six months before the WTC attack:

janes.com

15 March 2001
"India is believed to have joined Russia, the USA and Iran in a concerted front against Afghanistan's Taliban regime. ...Several recent meetings between the newly instituted Indo-US and Indo-Russian joint working groups on terrorism led to this effort to tactically and logistically counter the Taliban.
Intelligence sources in Delhi said that while India, Russia and Iran were leading the anti-Taliban campaign on the ground, Washington was giving the Northern Alliance information and logistic support. "

[kcvl]

bttt

[Shermy]

Grownups have seen for a long time

Certainly Clarke knows, but has an arrested development. And he didn't think up that "important, not urgent" and "focus" semantics all by himself. He was fed them. Kerry ops parsing past statements, defining a "dissent" to fit against Bush, and mindful of Kerry's statements.

Thing about the internet, people can fact check on their own and not rely on the media.

Can o' worms I tell ya.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

They think they can get away with redefining the facts!

[Shermy]

They think they can get away with redefining the facts!

Bush not doing much of a job reminding people of them.

[Spotsy]

Unfortunately, if this gets general acceptance, the Dem'rats will then flip, and say Bush precipitated 9/11 by his over-aggressive plans to attack the Taliban! You can't win with the libs -- they'll take both sides of an issue, without shame.

So true! The Dems have all of their bases covered.

[writer33]

I know. It's amazing to see him at work.

[WestTexasWend]

Does anybody else recall hearing in the weeks after 9/11 that AQ had attacked after word leaked that the Bush Administration was launching a major crackdown against them before year's end? Was I dreaming? (And it was reported then with a "it's Bush's fault" attitude...)

[marron]

See http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/686045/posts

thanks to Shermy

[WestTexasWend]

ah...THANKS! That's exactly what I was looking for...

[Becki]

Bush not doing much of a job reminding people of them.

That's what Condi will do, with the whole world watching.

I don't like it, but the commission would never live up to it's calling and report it.

Becki

[PISANO]

Oh I see. The directive that could have prevented 911, was, in fact, the catalyst for it. Thus... another excursion into WONDERLAND.

[Roscoe Karns]

Can't win with the Bush haters.

[3catsanadog]

I thought the commission was also going to call Bill Clinton to testify. Well???? Where is he?

[cyncooper]

From your link:

Saturday September 22, 2001

Osama bin Laden and the Taliban received threats of possible American military strikes against them two months before the terrorist assaults on New York and Washington, established.

[Vermont Lt]

And this aint going to end in Iraq either. Do you think that the Saudis are tightening the oil grip to just make more money. They are tightening the grip to send a message to Bush not to F&*k with them.

First Afghanistan. Then Iraq. Then Iran. Then Syria. Then the Saudis. Finally, we will have the oil and forward bases for the real enemy. China.

Watcg. Not this year. Perhaps not next year. But its coming. Think Strategically--not emotionally.

[Becki]

I thought the commission was also going to call Bill Clinton to testify. Well???? Where is he?

I understand that he will testify before the commission, but it will NOT be under oath and I am not sure if it will be public.

Becki

[cyncooper]

Link at post #14, March 2001

Intelligence sources in Delhi said that while India, Russia and Iran were leading the anti-Taliban campaign on the ground, Washington was giving the Northern Alliance information and logistic support. "

But Dick Clarke told us the bush administration was ignoring Afghanistan, instead focusing obsessively and ill-advisedly on Iraq! My gosh, maybe he LIED!

[oceanview]

this might actually be a dangerous line of questioning against Rice. The "word" was that the Cheney wanted to pursue an economic strategy against the Taliban, buying them off with this pipeline deal (old thread below):

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/685841/posts

if there is any whiff of this be affirmed, the Dems on the committee will demand Cheney's energy plan notes as part of the 9/11 evidence. god forbid there is anything in there linking the energy commision, Enron, and a plan to "make nice" with the Taliban before 9/11 because of an oil pipeline deal.

be careful with where this one could go.

[madison10]

Bush not doing much of a job reminding people of them.

He won't have to, Ms. Condi will.

[oceanview]

add this to post #32:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1109529/posts

see where this could go?

[AGreatPer]

"First Afghanistan. Then Iraq. Then Iran. Then Syria. Then the Saudis. Finally, we will have the oil and forward bases for the real enemy. China."

You are so right on the mark, you scare me.

I can say this, I have spent some time up at West Point and at the Army War College in Carlisle, PA. Enough said.

[Shermy]

That pipeline offer, one of many carrots, was dead long before 9/11 - and it was an old plan. Pakistanis lost interest, and the T-ban would never let it be built - because the Saudis wouldn't. It would have been competitive to the Saudis.

[oceanview]

I know, it was an on-again, off-again plan. My only point is, if it experienced a possible "on-again" discussion phase in 2001 before 9/11, related to the Cheney energy task force in any way, it could be trouble.

[Shermy]

Task force was about domestic shenanigans. Meetings with Enron and such.

The so called "Taliban" pipeline was a nothing.

[cyncooper]

The article linked at #11 talks about *military strikes*.

[oceanview]

right, after the negotiations went nowhere. the "carpet of gold" becomes the "carpet of bombs". that's the story at least.

[mrsmith]

bump

[swarthyguy]

Either they ignored the threat or they were planning.

HIndus were made to wear saffron markings May 2001
Bamiyan Buddhas blown up later that year.

IMO, Bush depended on the Saudis to nip any plan in the bud. They failed. Back to his primary blind spot.

The Pentagon has contingency plans for everything, including probably invading and taking over the UK.

[marron]

Oil-driven paranoia tends to muddy the water. If a pipeline was in the works there is nothing dishonest about it. There was nothing about trying to work with the people who controlled 9/10 of Afghanistan and trying to woo them into becoming a real government, we were doing everything we could and more. Every NGO in the world was in there working trying to ameliorate the damage caused by these guys. And a lot of it was US money.

So while I badmouth us for "walking away" after the Soviets were ejected, the reality is a little more complicated. We were in there trying, but we had little to work with. You can't make a silk purse out of murderous flat-earthers, as the saying goes.

The famous Afghan pipeline was originally proposed by Unocal. You will note that Unocal has not only not built that line, it has done little or nothing at all in Central Asia. The risk is very high there, and only the big boys with lots of clout, or the little ones with little to lose can risk operating there.

A friend of mine was involved in doing a study of Central Asian oil assets for Unocal after the region opened up for investment. His recommendation was run, not walk, to the nearest exit. It was at that time still a very scary place to try and work. It is still not the easiest place, they are not above shaking down even Chevron, how is a smaller company going to make it? Because once you have sunk a billion of your dollars in their country, you are hostage to your investment and they own you.

Unocal spent a number of years trying to get the Talibs and Northern Alliance folk to kiss and make up, and spread a lot of money around. Between them and the US government, the Talibs received a fair amount of money. But they were what they were, if you are nice to a Wahab, he just thinks you are pathetic.

So Unocal gave up and went away. Some Argentines tried and they gave up also.

Who really needs the pipeline is Turkmenistan, a truly scary place with no outlet to the sea; and Afghanistan, whose economy consists of heroin and goats. No one in their right minds would sink $3 billion dollars into such a place.

You will notice that after the war, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan convened a meeting to promote the pipeline, and got no takers. They invited Chinese participation but so far even they aren't interested. Would you risk your own money on such a project?

Neither would anyone else. In a year it would look like swiss cheese, so many holes would have been blown in it. Any disgruntled ex-employee with a souvenir handgrenade would be able to shut you down.

For what its worth, Enron went broke on a project in India. India is safe. There is no guarantee when you sink your money in an offshore investment even when they aren't shooting at you. I would gladly work on a pipeline in Afghanistan, because I'm crazy. But even I'm not crazy enough to invest in the thing.

[oceanview]

everything you say is true. but this is politics we are talking about, if the Dems can make a point here and make a connection, this could be a very delicate subject.

[marron]

this is politics we are talking about, if the Dems can make a point here and make a connection, this could be a very delicate subject.

You're right.