Black People : Afghanistan war; 9/11 payback or Neocon Con Game?

Discussion in 'Black People Open Forum' started by Ankhur, Dec 2, 2009.

  1. Ankhur

    Ankhur Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,710
    Likes Received:
    3,006
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    owner of various real estate concerns
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Ratings:
    +3,014
    The Afghanistan War was Planned
    Months Before the 9/11 Attacks

    Jane's Defense - India Joined US led plan against Afghanistan in March 2001.
    "India joins anti-Taliban coalition"

    By Rahul Bedi

    India is believed to have joined Russia, the USA and Iran in a concerted front against Afghanistan's Taliban regime. [janes.com]

    From April 2001, yet more indications that a mideast war was planned long before 9/11.


    India Reacts - American government told other governments about Afghan invasion IN JUNE 2001.
    In this article published in India in the summer of 2001 the Indian Government announces that it will support America's PLANNED military incursion into Afghanistan.

    India in anti-Taliban military plan

    India and Iran will "facilitate" the planned US-Russia hostilities against the Taliban.

    By Our Correspondent

    26 June 2001: India and Iran will "facilitate" US and Russian plans for "limited military action"
    against the Taliban if the contemplated tough new economic sanctions don't bend Afghanistan's fundamentalist regime. The Taliban controls 90 per cent of Afghanistan and is advancing northward along the Salang highway and preparing for a rear attack on the opposition Northern Alliance from
    Tajikistan-Afghanistan border positions.

    Indian foreign secretary Chokila Iyer attended a crucial session of the second Indo-Russian joint working group on Afghanistan in Moscow amidst increase of Taliban's military activity near the Tajikistan border. And, Russia's Federal Security Bureau (the former KGB) chief Nicolai Patroshev is visiting Teheran this week in connection with Taliban's military build-up.

    Indian officials say that India and Iran will only play the role of "facilitator" while the US and Russia will combat the Taliban from the front with the help of two Central Asian countries, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, to push Taliban lines back to the 1998 position 50 km away from Mazar-e-Sharief city in northern Afghanistan.

    Military action will be the last option though it now seems scarcely avoidable with the UN banned from Taliban controlled areas. The UN which adopted various means in the last four years to resolve the Afghan problem is now being suspected by the Taliban and refused entry into Taliban areas of the war ravaged nation through a decree issued by Taliban chief Mullah Mohammad Omar last month. [indiareacts.com]


    BBC - American government told other governments about Afghan invasion IN JULY 2001.
    US 'planned attack on Taleban'

    The wider objective was to oust the Taleban

    By the BBC's George Arney

    A former Pakistani diplomat has told the BBC that the US was planning military action against Osama Bin Laden and the Taleban even before last week's attacks. Niaz Naik, a former Pakistani Foreign Secretary, was told by senior American officials in mid-July that military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October.

    Mr Naik said US officials told him of the plan at a UN-sponsored international contact group on Afghanistan which took place in Berlin. Mr Naik told the BBC that at the meeting the US representatives told him that unless Bin Laden was handed over swiftly America would take military action to kill or capture both Bin Laden and the Taleban leader, Mullah Omar.

    The wider objective, according to Mr Naik, would be to topple the Taleban regime and install a transitional government of moderate Afghans in its place - possibly under the leadership of the former Afghan King Zahir Shah. Mr Naik was told that Washington would launch its operation from bases in Tajikistan, where American advisers were already in place.

    He was told that Uzbekistan would also participate in the operation and that 17,000 Russian troops were on standby. Mr Naik was told that if the military action went ahead it would take place before the snows started falling in Afghanistan, by the middle of October at the latest.

    He said that he was in no doubt that after the World Trade Center bombings this pre-existing US plan had been built upon and would be implemented within two or three weeks. And he said it was doubtful that Washington would drop its plan even if Bin Laden were to be surrendered immediately by the Taleban. [BBC]


    MSNBC - Afghanistan war plans were on Bush's desk on 9/9/2001

    President Bush was expected to sign detailed plans for a worldwide war against al-Qaida two days before Sept. 11 but did not have the chance before the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington, U.S. and foreign sources told NBC News. ... The plan dealt with all aspects of a war against al-Qaida, ranging from diplomatic initiatives to military operations in Afghanistan, the sources said on condition of anonymity. [MSNBC]




    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the summer of 2001, while the American media kept the people distracted with "All Condit All The Time", the US Government was informing other governments that we would be at war in Afghanistan no later than October.

    How lucky for our government that just when they are planning to invade another country, for the express purpose of removing that government, a convenient "terrorist" attack occurs to anger Americans into support for an invasion.



    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------



    9/11 radio broadcast: "The Director of the CIA warned that there could be an attack—an imminent attack—on the United States of this nature. So this is not entirely unexpected." [Memory Hole]
    9/11 CBS9 broadcast: "There are contigency plans set to go, and the plans have been set to go for several weeks now on what to do if Osama bin Laden were to plan a very large attack, and they've selected targets in Afghanistan, and you can be sure that if it is Osama bin Laden that the US will probably retaliate, and retaliate massively." WMV video download (172kB)
    "To be truthful about it, there was no way we could have got the public consent to have suddenly launched a campaign on Afghanistan but for what happened on September 11."
    Tony Blair. July 17, 2002 [Guardian]

    full article;
    http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/preplanned.html
     
  2. Ankhur

    Ankhur Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,710
    Likes Received:
    3,006
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    owner of various real estate concerns
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Ratings:
    +3,014
  3. Ankhur

    Ankhur Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,710
    Likes Received:
    3,006
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    owner of various real estate concerns
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Ratings:
    +3,014
    Published on Friday, December 4, 2009 by Salon.com
    Do Obama Officials Know What his Afghanistan Plan Is?
    by Glenn Greenwald

    On the vital question of whether Obama is committed to begin withdrawing troops from Afghanistan in July, 2011 -- or whether that's just an aspirational target subject to being moved -- the statements from key administration officials aren't merely in tension with one another, but are exact opposites:

    Agence France-Press, yesterday [1]:

    President Barack Obama's administration said that a July 2011 target date to begin withdrawing US troops from Afghanistan was not set in stone. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and the top uniformed US military officer, Admiral Michael Mullen, sought to sell the new approach under fire from Obama's hawkish Republican foes.

    During hours of questioning by two key committees, they made clear that his target date of starting a US troop withdrawal in 19 months' time -- a step some anti-escalation lawmakers, especially Democrats, had cheered -- could slip.

    "I do not believe we have locked ourselves into leaving," said Clinton, who added the goal was "to signal very clearly to all audiences that the United States is not interested in occupying Afghanistan."

    Gates said the extra troops Obama had ordered to Afghanistan would be in place in July 2010, that a December 2010 review of the war effort would shape the pace of the withdrawal, and that the target date could change.

    CBS News, Wednesday [2]:



    I asked White House spokesman Robert Gibbs if senators were incorrect calling the date a "target."

    After the briefing, Gibbs went to the president for clarification. Gibbs then called me to his office to relate what the president said. The president told him it IS locked in -- there is no flexibility. Troops WILL start coming home in July 2011. Period. It's etched in stone. Gibbs said he even had the chisel.

    What could possibly explain a contradiction this extreme with regard to a question so central to the policy Obama just announced? How can you have the Defense Secretary and the Secretary of State testifying in front of the Senate that the July, 2011 date is "not set in stone," that they "have not locked oursleves into leaving," and that "the target date could change," while the President is saying exactly the opposite: that "it IS locked in - there is no flexibility" and "it's etched in stone"?

    full article;
    http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/12/04-11
     
  4. Ankhur

    Ankhur Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2009
    Messages:
    14,710
    Likes Received:
    3,006
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    owner of various real estate concerns
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    Ratings:
    +3,014
Loading...