Flashback -- Taliban Dismiss bin Laden Threat Reports

CNN/World news ^ | June 24, 2001 | Unknown, but they knew!

[RoarNLion]

KABUL, Afghanistan -- Afghanistan's Taliban ruling militia has dismissed media reports that exiled Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden is planning attacks on U.S. and Israeli interests.

The response comes a day after Arabic satellite television channel MBC reported that followers of Afghan-based bin Laden were planning a major attack on U.S. and Israeli interests in the next two weeks.

[RoarNLion]

It is despicable how the mainstream media and politicians take advantage of the attention deficit disorder of the American public in exchange for profits and political gain.

I found this as I was searching for an Indian newspaper article published around that same time. It was expressing the Indian government's support of a planned overthrow of the Taliban in Afganistan later in the fall, months before 9-11.

This goodie, now discovered in a homeland rag, speaks volumes about several things:

First, it should raise the question that, if CNN had some word of an al Qaeda attack, how is it that this government didn't? Afterall, Dick Cheney said they had no warning whatsoever on Meet The Press on September 16, 2001.

Secondly, its another confirmation -- at least to me -- that Afganistan was planned well in advance of 9/11.

We now know that Iraq was planned in advance of 9/11 -- shame on you if you if it hasn't come into focus yet. Our soldiers went there believing they were protecting America from an imminent threat of WMD. They must be somewhere; and they are! They were found in a location called NOWHERE!

If all of this was planned in advance of 9/11, why is it so inconceivable that 9/11 couln't have been planned and carried out with full complicity of this government in order to move us to where we are in Afghanistan and Iraq?

We owe our full support to the families of 9/11, who has fought so hard to expose the mystery that yet shrouds 9/11 -- anything less is direliction of responsibility -- like Congress.

[Support Free Republic]

---

Become A Member
	Donate Here By Secure Server Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD- It is in the breaking news sidebar!

[goldstategop]

Good question. How come the Clinton News Network didn't bring this to the attention of the Bush Administration a scant two months before 9/11 happened? Inquiring minds would like to know.

[endthematrix]

Further digging will revel that we were warned. And Tenet doesn't deny it but we were overwhelmed with unspecific reports. The FBI and CIA couldn't put it together and in some cases with instructed not to.

You want the truth? You can't handle it. That Operation Mountain Storm with the Paks searching for AQ #2 is more about Uzbekistan. We were fighting terrorism before 9-11 ya know.

This story illustrates that those in power want you top focus on AQ #2 in those mountains, not Tahir Yuldash leader of IMU. A better question of your post is WHO WARNED US? Why none other than former Taleban foreign minister, Wakil Ahmad Muttawakil"I told Mr Katz they should launch a new Desert Storm ­ like the campaign to drive Iraq out of Kuwait ­ but this time they should call it Mountain Storm and they should drive the foreigners out of Afghanistan.

They also had to stop the Pakistanis supporting the Taliban." The Taliban emissary said Mr Katz replied that neither action was possible. Nor did Mr Katz pass the warning on to the State Department, according to senior US diplomatic sources. When Mr Muttawakil's emissary returned to Kabul, the Foreign Minister told him to see UN officials. He took the warning to the Kabul offices of UNSMA, the political wing of the UN. These officials heard him out, but again did not report the secret Taliban warning to UN headquarters.

A UN official familiar with the warnings said : "He appeared to be speaking in total desperation, asking for a Mountain Storm, he wanted a sort of deus ex machina to solve his country's problems. But before 9/11, there was just not much hope that Washington would become that engaged in Afghanistan."

[finnman69]

If all of this was planned in advance of 9/11, why is it so inconceivable that 9/11 couln't have been planned and carried out with full complicity of this government in order to move us to where we are in Afghanistan and Iraq?

Only a complete nut would ever believe this.

[finnman69]

Auditioning for a slot on AirAmerica?

[at bay]

"why is it so inconceivable that 9/11 couln't have been planned and carried out with full complicity of this government in order to move us to where we are in Afghanistan and Iraq?"

Not hard to believe at all if you're a raving paranoic. Hard to believe you've been here since 97. When did you stop taking your meds?

[tkathy]

The intelligence community is awash in millions of things like this. Second guessers have a field day, but it doesn't solve the today's problem.

Just where do you think the next attack will happen? Go find stuff today that will prove where the next attack will happen. Not as easy as it seems.

[wingman1]

"All of them affirm that the next two weeks will witness a big surprise. A severe blow is expected against U.S. and Israeli interests worldwide," the reporter said."

There have been terror threats before 9/11 and after. Not all materialized. The last word in your highlighted quote is "worldwide"- not very specific. The phrase "wake up call" accurately describes 9/11.

"He also dismissed speculation of a possible U.S. attack against Taliban-held areas similar to 1998 missile strikes on suspected bin Laden bases in eastern Afghanistan."

Your second highlighted sentence mentions "speculation" of an attack that is "similar to 1998 missile strikes". Nothing definitive there to suggest the invasion that ultimately took place. Just speculation of a repeat of what Clinton did in 1998.

Most news accounts I saw or read immediately after 9/11 suggested that the US would invade Afghanistan at its own peril - citing what befell the British during colonial days and the Soviets in the early '80s quagmire. Nothing in our recent history guaranteed that we would win a large scale invasion of such a remote and rugged country. I presume this is what the Taliban spokeman is referring to (in the immediate text that follows) and the reason why Bush and Blair repeatedly insisted that the Taliban turn over the al-Q leadership. They did not want to invade Afghanistan.

[agitator]

If all of this was planned in advance of 9/11, why is it so inconceivable that 9/11 couln't have been planned and carried out with full complicity of this government in order to move us to where we are in Afghanistan and Iraq?

Y'know, I really get tired of silly comments like this. Somebody has been spending too much time at commie-front websites. Arguendo some rogue element of govt was willing to sacrifice a number of Americans to move the masses to large scale military action, the idea that anyone would consider something as unpredictable as an aircraft attack on the WTC is just plain silly. It simply doesn't pass the smell test. Any idiot knows that an attack of the type used on 9/11 was way too unnecessarily unpredictable in its outcome for the allegedly desired result. The same thing could have been accomplished choosing a different target without risking the members of the stock exchange and the NY money machine necessary for such military action. If money and power were supposedly the driving force behind 9/11, the idea that it would shoot itself in the foot like that (and potentially in the head) is retarded when alternatives would have worked out just as well.

If you're going to buy into conspiracy theories, at least pick one that retains a little commonsense and then at least try and come up with a little evidence beyond what some WWP website feeds you.