The earlier report we posted on "confidence building measures" noted that the U.S. "has asked representatives of the Taliban to match that confidence-building measure with some of their own. Those could include a denunciation of international terrorism and a public willingness to enter formal political talks with the government headed by Afghan President Hamid Karzai."
According to that account, we could be pledging American actions -- big, risky ones -- in exchange for words from the Taliban. What could possibly go wrong? After all, the Taliban don't want Fazl and the other detainees back in Afghan custody just to visit: in Afghan custody, they stand to benefit from any number of "sudden" security lapses and inside help, as has occurred in the massive Kandahar prison break last year.
"U.S. mulls transfer of Taliban prisoner in perilous peace bid," by Mark Hosenball, Missy Ryan and Warren Strobel for Reuters, December 29:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Obama administration is considering transferring to Afghan custody a senior Taliban official suspected of major human rights abuses as part of a long-shot bid to improve the prospects of a peace deal in Afghanistan, Reuters has learned.
The potential hand-over of Mohammed Fazl, a 'high-risk detainee' held at the Guantanamo Bay military prison since early 2002, has set off alarms on Capitol Hill and among some U.S. intelligence officials.
As a senior commander of the Taliban army, Fazl is alleged to be responsible for the killing of thousands of Afghanistan's minority Shi'ite Muslims between 1998 and 2001.
According to U.S. military documents made public by WikiLeaks, he was also on the scene of a November 2001 prison riot that killed CIA operative Johnny Micheal Spann, the first American who died in combat in the Afghan war. There is no evidence, however, that Fazl played any direct role in Spann's death.
Senior U.S. officials have said their 10-month-long effort to set up substantive negotiations between the weak government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai and the Taliban has reached a make-or-break moment. Reuters reported earlier this month that they are proposing an exchange of "confidence-building measures," including the transfer of five detainees from Guantanamo and the establishment of a Taliban office outside of Afghanistan.
Now Reuters has learned from U.S. government sources the identity of one of the five detainees in question.
The detainees, the officials emphasized, would not be set free, but remain in some sort of further custody. It is unclear precisely what conditions they would be held under.
In response to inquiries by Reuters, a senior administration official said that the release of Fazl and four other Taliban members had been requested by the Afghan government and Taliban representatives as far back as 2005.
The debate surrounding the White House's consideration of high-profile prisoners such as Fazl illustrates the delicate course it must tread both at home and abroad as it seeks to move the nascent peace process ahead.
One U.S. intelligence official said there had been intense bipartisan opposition in Congress to the proposed transfer.
"I can tell you that the hair on the back of my neck went up when they walked in with this a month ago, and there's been very, very strong letters fired off to the administration," the official said on condition of anonymity....
"Further custody" means they'll escape from an Afghan prison.
Either the Obama administration is working hand-in-hand with the Taliban, or it is totally incompetent. One way or another, it should go, and take Obama with it!
Clowns!
OT: Last night's Nightline included a fascinating segment on the origin of IED's main ingredient in Afghan. This would be a fertilizer plant in Paki. See "Disarming Explosives in Afghan" here:
http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/
I suppose covertly sabotaging the facility is entirely out of the question.
The latest news!Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff has been condemned in Austria for saying Mohammad was a pedophile.
Even though it is true,technically,she is condemned for "denigrating religious beliefs",in other words,for Blasphemy..
Wow,where is respect for Freedom of Speech.
She said it based on evidence,read:
"Documentary Evidence that Aisha Consummated her Marriage with Muhammad at age 9"
http://www.antisharia.com/2011/04/12/documentary-evidence-that-aisha-consummated-her-marriage-with-muhammad-at-age-9/
"Is it Possible Aisha had her First Menstruation at 7?If one accepts Bukhari, then yes"
http://www.antisharia.com/2011/07/20/is-it-possible-aisha-had-her-first-menstruation-at-7if-one-accepts-bukhari-then-yes/
"Video by Hamza Yusuf where he actually says Aisha was an Adult when she Consummated her Marriage with Muhammad"
http://www.antisharia.com/2011/07/04/video-by-hamza-yusuf-where-he-actually-says-aisha-was-an-adult-when-she-consummated-her-marriage-with-muhammad/
AND ALSO
Among the Leftists who are in that situation we have Noam Chomsky and Norman Finkelstein,who are both Jewish.See this video:
"Shocking Video where Norman Finkelstein,a Jew who is Anti-Israel,makes a University Girl Cry"
http://www.antisharia.com/2011/12/31/shocking-video-where-norman-finkelsteina-jew-who-is-anti-israelmakes-a-university-girl-cry/
AND ALSO
The latest news!Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff has been condemned in Austria for saying Mohammad was a pedophile.
Even though it is true,technically,she is condemned for "denigrating religious beliefs",in other words,for Blasphemy..
Wow,where is respect for Freedom of Speech.
She said it based on evidence,read:
"Documentary Evidence that Aisha Consummated her Marriage with Muhammad at age 9"
http://www.antisharia.com/2011/04/12/documentary-evidence-that-aisha-consummated-her-marriage-with-muhammad-at-age-9/
"Is it Possible Aisha had her First Menstruation at 7?If one accepts Bukhari, then yes"
http://www.antisharia.com/2011/07/20/is-it-possible-aisha-had-her-first-menstruation-at-7if-one-accepts-bukhari-then-yes/
"Video by Hamza Yusuf where he actually says Aisha was an Adult when she Consummated her Marriage with Muhammad"
http://www.antisharia.com/2011/07/04/video-by-hamza-yusuf-where-he-actually-says-aisha-was-an-adult-when-she-consummated-her-marriage-with-muhammad/
Neville Chamberlain to the white courtesy phone, please.
Neville Chamberlain to the white courtesy phone.
An election year stunt by a desperate administration wanting the appearence or peacemaking for next November.
U.S. considers handing over prominent, "high-risk" Taliban member in "confidence building" measure for peace negotiations
.......................................
Yeah—this'll "build confidence" alright—the *confidence of the murderous Taliban*.
I think I'll echo Buraq and say "Clowns!"
Well, are we going to maneuver ourselves a way out, or are going to maintain our occupation of Afghanistan.
There is really no way of pulling out that will look good. Our ally, Karzai, has clearly stated he would side with Pakistan against the US.
We had every right to invade Afghanistan, as they hosted an attack against us. We went terribly wrong when we tried to share the task with the Northern Alliance fighters, allowing them a critical role in the capture or killing of bin Laden. They allowed him to escape, of course, either through incompetence or more likely, sympathy.
Our correct move would have been to invade as we did, kill as many al-Qaeda and Taliban as we could reach, including bin Laden. We had no business trying to integrate the Afghan fighters with our own forces. The Northern Alliance was a mirror image of the Taliban; they simply represented a smaller tribe. They are just as fundamentalist and just as oppressive towards women.
After the battle at Tora Bora, the US should simply have pulled out, leaving the Northern Alliance and the Taliban to duke it out to a finish. Whoever won would know not to sponsor attacks on the US, which is the limit of our interest in the area.
Anyway, the Karzai government is pressing the US to free (transfer custody) of the murderous Taliban leader. Why are we still in the area?
I would hand over any prisoner they wanted--in a body bag. We must stop worrying if these barbarians like us. They should worry if they displease us.
I share the sentiments expressed above. The only "confidence building" exercise the president should participate in is with his American constituency.
His ill-conceived outreach to the Moslems has predictably turned into a disaster. The gesture exudes weakness, one that the enemy is exploiting. His bow to the Saudi king was an insult to all Americans. And why does NASA need to spend US tax dollars in making Mohammedans feel better about their science achievements? And don't get me started on his disposition towards the Taliban and Muslim Brotherhood, as represented in the above report.
I see no game-plan for the next four years other than more of the same. It is now altogether evident that "Yes We Can," his campaign tagline from 2008, means something quite different to him than it does for the Americans who voted for him.
"No You Don't" must be the tagline for those who oppose him and must be applied to all candidates, so-called "left" and "right," who don't have the interests of the US at heart. And there appear to be a LOT of those.
Treason.
Until Islam itself is recognized as the enemy of America and all the West, games like this will continue---silly, futile, piecemeal stuff, sometimes (at best) tactically defensible and other times not even this (like here). Amazing what unnecessary peregrinations from the truth have to occur when people refuse to acknowledge the obvious.
This a bribery. The US is going to pay the taliban with money and weapons so that they don't shoot our departing troops in the back after we drawn down our forces below the level of the taliban's. I wouldn't turn my back on these basterds. Tac nukes on stun.
...and don't forget your umbrella.
When will these ignorant legislators wake-up and see the truth? Even if Obama doesn't understand the meaning of jihad the legislators should and should over-ride Obama.
Appeasing Islam is foolish at best. They don't want agreements or peace, they want to dominate the world.Think about it. How many years have we been trying to get Iran to stop making those WMD? And so far we haven't been able to stop any part of it.
How many years has there been unrest in the Gaza strip, Lebanon, Iraq, and hundreds of other places? There will be peace when the jihad is complete and Islam dominates the world. There is no easy way out of this. And putting your head in the sand only encourages more unrest.
Wake-up America..!
Do we really need any more proof that Obama is a traitorous Trojan horse? He is openly brokering deals for the declared enemy.
Idiots! Do they never learn? To lie in defence of islam is one of their fundamental beliefs and duties - we all know that!
Thomas:
"This is bribery."
"...and don't forget your umbrella."
__________________________________
Yes. It is bribery. Political bribery. But Obama believes that he is above reproach; what's more - since he needs to keep his job, he is willing to stoop to great, new levels of ineptitude and rank stupidity.
I suppose Chamberlain had some similar concerns, as well, but the idea of attempting to placate the enemy by handing over one of theirs while men and women are dying in uniform, is undeniably suspect and repulsive, at best.
I agree.
In view of the danger we are facing(or avoiding) one could,in truth, make the claim that for about the last 1200 years the world has been plagued by the rabid psychopathic,murderous, barbarism committed by the followers of Islam.These are not the polite words of drawing room discussions.So be it.The time has passed for tea and timidity. Thus the act of refusing to state that the leopord has not changed its spots,and to say that it will peacefully sigh AND honor a peace pledge to negociators, is one more indicator of he absolute necessety of plain honest speaking against such folly on the part of our officials.
vnbushman wrote:
There will be peace when the jihad is complete and Islam dominates the world.
............................
And not even then.
Yemen, Somalia, and Taliban-era Afghanistan itself were *entirely* Islamic, and still some of the most violent, chaotic places on the face of the earth.
In fact, the "Peace of Islam" is, curiously, anything but...