Just playing the devil's advocate here for a minute - don't flame me.
Omar (Taliban leader in Afghanistan) wants some info before turning over bin Laden... put the shoe on the other foot.
If this was an American, hiding in the U.S., accused of terrorist activities of a similar scale in Afghanistan, what would the U.S. reaction be to demands that the American be turned over?
Omar wants (quotes from CNN):
"And he adds that the U.S. must produce evidence that proves bin Laden's connection to last week's terror attacks."
"According to Pakistani officials the meeting of the Grand Islamic Council is talking about whether to give up bin Laden, to a third country, other than the United States."
posted on September 19, 2001 08:48:49 AM new
Nope, they are NOT. We have an outstanding warrent issued by a Grand Jury for him from the 93 trade center bombing. That, by it self should be enough for them to turn him over.
Why should he go to a "Neutral Country" for trial, the crime was commited here.
posted on September 19, 2001 08:56:57 AM new
A guess at why they would want him sent to a third country for trial is that they may have fear that he will either not get a fair trial in the United States, or that the United States won't be able to protect him while in custody.
posted on September 19, 2001 09:03:57 AM new
"reasonable" vs "unreasonable" is not something one considers regarding people who fly passenger jets into buildings.
It's not something one considers regarding people who hold religious suicidal martyrs in great respect, or governments which provide a base for carrying out such attacks.
This problem is not going to be solved by people reasoning one with another. It won't be solved after the destruction of the Taliban either, but that will be the first important step.
In a real twist, the act seems to have pushed Arafat and Sharon into being somewhat more reasonable. One wonders how long it will last, but it's the first uptick on that front in some years.
posted on September 19, 2001 09:06:58 AM new
Roofguy,
Don't get me wrong - I want the United States to get their hands on Bin Laden as bad as you do.
But try to see both sides of the issue. Omar says he doesn't believe Bin Laden had anything to do with the attack. Assume he is saying what he truly believes.... (put the shoe on the other foot - if this was Afghanistan asking for a U.S. person).
What would the U.S. ask for before turning over one of their citizens?
posted on September 19, 2001 09:07:09 AM newA guess at why they would want him sent to a third country for trial is that they may have fear that he will either not get a fair trial in the United States, or that the United States won't be able to protect him while in custody.
"fair trial" is not a concept ever supported by the Taliban.
What they fear is that turning bin Laden over to the US is a repudiation of everything they hold sacred. It would be blasphemy.
posted on September 19, 2001 10:26:02 AM new
Roofguy understands it - a guest is to be protected with your own life. It is a matter of religeous law not secular law the way we think of it. Might as well ask them to run around in their skivies and eat pork.
posted on September 19, 2001 11:17:27 AM newIs the Taliban being unreasonable?
YES!!!
"....he adds the US must produce evidence that proves bin Laden's connection to last weeks terror attacks."
We did supply evidence/proof of his previous terrorists attacks against US facilities. We even had the UN backing and demanding that the Teliban turn him over. They didn't.
Press Release SC/6739 SECURITY COUNCIL DEMANDS THAT TALIBAN TURN OVER USAMA BIN LADEN TO APPROPRIATE AUTHORITIES - Resolution 1267 (1999), Adopted Unanimously, Sets Out Measures To be Imposed if Demand Not Met by 14 November - Acting under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, the Security Council this afternoon demanded that the Afghan faction, known as the Taliban, turn over Usama bin Laden to appropriate authorities in a country where he would be brought to justice.
The time for talking/negotiating is over. We need to flush him out.
posted on September 19, 2001 11:27:46 AM newA guess at why they would want him sent to a third country for trial is that they may have fear that he will either not get a fair trial in the United States.
It was my understanding, that the 'third country', could only be another Islamic/Muslim country. Since many of those countries seem to be supporting the terrorists in their countries, I don't see that as a viable alternative.
Read a couple of days ago about the American's and Australian's who were to be put on trial for speaking about the Christian faith. Before the trial was even held, the judge ordered they be found guilty. And the penalty for that is DEATH. Now that's a fair trial for sure.
posted on September 19, 2001 11:35:35 AM new
I saw an interview with some supposed Tilaban "expert" who said they are a group of young men (apparently the name means student fighters/army-something to that effect) who as "children" were indoctrinated into what they were "taught" was a "holy war". Guns were placed in their hand and they actually went to battle as early as 10! As children they looked to bin Laden as their hero. Their "freedom fighter". He "cast off" a life of wealth and priviledge and fought for them! More importantly he has stayed with them. The US recognized his power to focus the people, and sent equipment/weapons/financial aid to the tune of $6 billion to help him, help them fight that "holy war"!
These young men (most are under the age of 40 according to the report) basically uneducated (they were in a war instead of in a school) never stopped "following" the examples/instructions of this "hero". His word is the equivalent of the gospel. This same expert said they have taken their religion back to right after the death of their prophet Mohammed and that's where they want to live it, breath it and die it! They do not live in "real" time and don't understand how things operate financially and politically and that is going to be the biggest problem to overcome. This same person said that killing bin Laden would probably be the wrong thing to do simply because they would just maryyrize him and give them yet one more reason to continue on with the holy war and most probably step up the fevor! They believe it is simply "us against them" and keep in mind, they get to go straight to heaven it they die fighting for Allah! This particular person felt that the Taliben would have to be removed before any real progress could be made, but offered no suggestion on how that might could be done.
posted on September 19, 2001 11:43:09 AM new
Anything the Taliban does or says is self-serving, all in the name of religion, of course.
bin Laden's money is more important to them than the humanitarian aid Afghanistan receives, of which the good old United States is the largest contributor.
They have no concept of the word fair.
If they did, they wouldn't treat their poverty-stricken people and female population as they do.
Sorry, that doesn't answer your hypothetical question, but I couldn't help myself.
posted on September 19, 2001 12:20:21 PM new
Unless I'm reading things wrong, alot of the Taliban Leaders are on the "Wanted - Dead or Alive" list along with Bin Laden. No Surprise they haven't all marched into Pakiastan and turned them selves in.
posted on September 19, 2001 12:27:23 PM new
Femme, from what I've heard on CNN, they claim that Bin Laden is pretty much out of money. He inherited about 25 million from his father, but they think that's long gone.
posted on September 19, 2001 01:38:51 PM new
Ha...I know nothing about the stock market, as you may have guessed. I think you need money to get seriously interested...
I do know poker though...sounds like betting on the come.
posted on September 19, 2001 02:34:17 PM new
Since no one is willing to take me up on this scenerio, I'll answer it myself.
The United States says they have information that tells them Bin Laden was behind the attack, and they are demanding that Afghanistan give him up.
Afghanistan asked for proof - U.S. said it cannot give them the proof, it will uncover their sources.
So either Afghanistan gives up someone they believe is innocent, or the whole world jumps on them.... And they are supposed to do this just because the U.S. said so.
From what I've heard, most American citizens don't trust their own government, so why should another, enemy, country?
All you know is what the news reporters tell you - all they know is what the news reporters tell them... and the press never lies, and is never swayed by government, right????
So, reverse it - Afghanistan demands a U.S. citizen, no proof provided - what would the United States say?
posted on September 19, 2001 02:45:46 PM new
From what I have read, but don't ask me when or where, I had understood that the U.S. is stating its proof in the letter that the Pakastanis are delivering to the Taleban. There's so much uncoordinated information coming from so many sources, it's certainly confusing, but I know that I read that account somewhere. I would be interested in whether or not that information was correct. It may have only been someone's interpretation as with so much "information" lately.
posted on September 19, 2001 08:34:11 PM new
Does Omar believe he did it? Well, duh. Why do you think the Taliban are 'harbouring' this man? Osama is a holy warrior the likes of which really haven't been seen in centuries. He is a revered and honoured figure and he is a guest of the Taliban because he does these kinds of things.
In a sense it is unreasonable of us to ask them to turn him over simply because they can't do that. Imagine if England had demanded that the U.S. turned over George Washington. Would we turn over George Washington? How about Mother Teresa? No, of course not. That means, of course, that they'll find themselves fighting the U.S. I've no doubt we will destroy the Taliban (who are really just a glorified militia and not really a government or army) and lose American soldier's lives in this campaign. After all, they will defend themselves. But they simply can't turn such an important figure over.
This same person said that killing bin Laden would probably be the wrong thing to do simply because they would just maryyrize him and give them yet one more reason to continue on with the holy war and most probably step up the fevor!
The 'you'll make a martyr out of him' line is pure unadulterated hogwash. Ask Hafez Assad. Martyrs are a dime a dozen in the Middle East. You know what they do to potential martrys in the Middle East? They kill 'em. 'You'll make a martyr out of him' never stopped Assad, to mention one example. We will never be safe from Osama while he lives. He doesn't need a date in Federal court. He needs a missile to the head ASAP.
posted on September 19, 2001 08:51:42 PM new
Maybe a missile, but there are several things coming out of Pakistani news that indicate a subtler method is in the works. One of those reports alluded to one or two military airplanes which disembarked an estimated 24 equipment laden men.
Our team(s) is probably hunting right now.
The guy has to go, and I agree with James, the Afgans CAN'T give him up.
