This came to me through friends. Thought it worth forwarding to as many people as possible. --Sharon Alexander Afghanistan is not the Enemy Barnett R. Rubin Barnett R. Rubin, Director of Studies at the Center on International Cooperation, New York University, is the author of several books and many articles on Afghanistan. He last visited that country in 1998. New York, September 16 -- Today an Afghan humanitarian worker wrote me by e-mail: It is a shame that we the Afghans do not have a voice to join the world in expressing sorrow for what happened in New York and Washington. We are deeply sorry and disturbed for ruthless criminal act of terror against the innocent people there. We deeply understand and feel the pain of the people over there since we have been facing these situations in our everyday lives since more than two decades. These mad unwanted guests and their ruling hosts exercised massacres, burning and destroying the huts and mud houses in villages here around the country for years before they tried their evil action in New York and Washington. Let me tell you a word a widow told my colleagues in a village in western province of Farah while receiving a food package for her children yesterday. She said, "I am very ashamed to receive assistance from the people who are attacked by cruel people staying in our country (Afghanistan), and I am unable to do anything about it. The only thing I am doing is I ask God five times a day during prayers to destroy these cruel people for ever." As the US plans to attack both Usama Bin Ladin and the Taliban regime that shelters him, our leaders must recognize that the people of Afghanistan are not our enemy. A successful operation would help Afghans re-establish legitimate government and reconstruct their devastated country. We don't need to destroy Afghanistan. As my Afghan correspondent wrote, the Soviets, the extremists we armed, and the Taliban with their Pakistani backers have already taken care of that. About a third of the capital, Kabul, is as thoroughly leveled as the World Trade Center. A lot more people died there, too, though not in a single dramatic atrocity. Ordinary people have already suffered for years from the grief, pain, horror, and anger that are now the lot of Americans and especially my fellow New Yorkers. Adding to that suffering will create nothing but more terrorists. The US and its allies can work with two main focal points of Afghan politics: the United Front led by Ahmad Shah Massoud until his recent assassination by Bin Ladin's terrorists, and the group working with the exiled former Afghan King, Zaher Shah, in Rome, to convene a Loya Jirga (Great Council of the Afghan nation). Together these groups combine important leaders of all ethnic groups. They are working on a plan for Afghanistan's political future. Some might be able to raise troops, including from among Taliban ranks, if they receive adequate support and access to Afghanistan from Pakistan. Other groups in Afghanistan are also ready to fight, as long as they are assured that Pakistan will not intervene to defend the Taliban. Such Afghan troops fighting a Taliban regime perhaps weakened by air strikes and border closures, would be far more effective than any long-term foreign occupation, which has always spelled disaster for the occupiers. In the past Pakistan has restricted activities by Taliban opponents. As part of the demands we make upon Pakistan in this crisis, we should also insist on full freedom of action and security for Afghan leaders who are capable of establishing a legitimate Afghan national government. These leaders in turn should acknowledge legitimate Pakistani concerns by, for instance, offering to grant full recognition to the long-disputed border between the two countries. The US should also accede to Pakistani requests for economic aid and debt relief. The US and the entire world community, especially the wealthier nations, can facilitate this process and sustain the outcome by starting now to plan for the reconstruction of devastated Afghanistan, once it is ruled by a legitimate Afghan authority, perhaps with the assistance of the United Nations. Such a plan will enable a new government to secure the country and gain the cooperation of local communities in assuring that terrorists are eliminated. It will help provide alternative livelihoods for those who know nothing but violence as a way of life and give the lie to those who claim this effort is motivated by hostility toward Muslims. This effort will take time, but the President has said that he intends to win this war, not engage in halfway measures. Only Afghan leaders with knowledge of the country and the support of the people will be able to secure that mountainous land in our common interest. Those who have invaded Afghanistan without respect for its inhabitants have met ignominious ends. Usama Bin Ladin and his allies hope they can draw the US into the trap that devoured the USSR. If we lash out without a political plan for the future, they could succeed. But we can frustrate their hopes if we recognize that the people of Afghanistan can be our firmest allies in this fight. ******************************************* Barnett R. Rubin Director of Studies and Senior Fellow Center on International Cooperation New York University 418 Lafayette Street, Suite 543 New York, NY 10003 Work: 212-998-3680 Fax: 212-995-4706 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ******************************************* ******************************************* Barnett R. Rubin Director of Studies and Senior Fellow Center on International Cooperation New York University 418 Lafayette Street, Suite 543 New York, NY 10003 Work: 212-998-3680 Fax: 212-995-4706 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jordan, Egypt condemn Israeli "terrorism" SHARM EL-SHEIKH, Egypt, Sept 18 (AFP) - King Abdullah II of Jordan and President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt on Tuesday accused Israel of exploiting anti-US attacks to use terror against Palestinians, Mubarak's spokesman said. Mubarak and Abdullah discussed the impact of the US attacks on the world and Middle East as well as "Israel's exploitation of these acts to commit illegal and terrorist acts," Information Minister Safwat al-Sherif said. Egypt's state-run MENA news agency said King Abdullah headed back to Jordan after holding face-to-face talks with Mubarak as well as meetings including aides and ministers in the Egyptian Red Sea resort of Sharm el-Sheikh. Talks focused on regional and international developments after the September 11 suicide plane attacks on targets in New York and Washington as well as efforts to restore calm in the Middle East, Jordanian officials said. Abdullah received a telephone call Monday from Mubarak, during which the two leaders exchanged views on the latest developments and the situation in the Palestinian territories, officials said. "They stressed the importance of pursuing their consultations and to coordinate positions as well on the situation in the Palestinian territories," one official said. Also on Monday Abdullah telephoned Palestinian leader Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat for similar discussions. Mubarak has been calling repeatedly for an international conference against terrorism, saying US plans to forge a coalition and launch an attack against countries suspected of harboring terrorists threaten to divide the world. The Jordanian monarch has said the attacks in the United States would not have happened if Washington had resolved the problems in the Middle East, especially the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Jordan and Egypt are Washington's closest Arab allies and the only two Arab countries to have signed peace treaties with Israel, in 1994 and 1979 respectively. King Abdullah was joined in the talks by Prime Minister Ali Abu Ragheb and Jordanian Foreign Minister Abdel Ilah Khatib, and the head of the royal cabinet Fayez al-Tarawneh, officials said. Mubarak was joined by Prime Minister Atef Ebeid, Defense Minister Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi, Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Maher and the head of Mubarak's office, Zakariya Azmi, officials said. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, meanwhile, is due in Sharm el-Sheikh on Wednesday, a source close to Mubarak said. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Here's another one supposed to be from an engineer/demolition expert. Again, I don't know, but I am looking into this. It's too important to ignore. September 11, 2001 Explosives Planted In Towers, N.M. Tech Expert Says By Olivier Uyttebrouck Journal Staff Writer Televised images of the attacks on the World Trade Center suggest that explosives devices caused the collapse of both towers, a New Mexico Tech explosion expert said Tuesday. The collapse of the buildings appears "too methodical" to be a chance result of airplanes colliding with the structures, said Van Romero, vice president for research at New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology. "My opinion is, based on the videotapes, that after the airplanes hit the World Trade Center there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse," Romero said. Romero is a former director of the Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center at Tech, which studies explosive materials and the effects of explosions on buildings, aircraft and other structures. Romero said he based his opinion on video aired on national television broadcasts. Romero said the collapse of the structures resembled those of controlled implosions used to demolish old structures. "It would be difficult for something from the plane to trigger an event like that," Romero said in a phone interview from Washington, D.C. Romero said he and another Tech administrator were on a Washington-area subway when an airplane struck the Pentagon. He said he and Denny Peterson, vice president for administration and finance, were en route to an office building near the Pentagon to discuss defense-funded research programs at Tech. If explosions did cause the towers to collapse, the detonations could have been caused by a small amount of explosive, he said. "It could have been a relatively small amount of explosives placed in strategic points," Romero said. The explosives likely would have been put in more than two points in each of the towers, he said. The detonation of bombs within the towers is consistent with a common terrorist strategy, Romero said. "One of the things terrorist events are noted for is a diversionary attack and secondary device," Romero said. Attackers detonate an initial, diversionary explosion that attracts emergency personnel to the scene, then detonate a second explosion, he said. Romero said that if his scenario is correct, the diversionary attack would have been the collision of the planes into the towers. Tech President Dan Lopez said Tuesday that Tech had not been asked to take part in the investigation into the attacks. Tech often assists in forensic investigations into terrorist attacks, often by setting off similar explosions and studying the effects. ---------- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (<http://www.grisoft.com>www.grisoft.<http://www.grisoft.com>com). Version: 6.0.281 / Virus Database: 149 - Release Date: 9/18/01 ============================================ Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 6:23 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [iac-disc.] More on Israeli conspiracy hoax I am glad to see that some people went to work to try to find out the source of this info. We need more truth, not less, seems to me. Mary Elynne Tappero http://www.endiraqsanctions.org ~~~~~~~~ Subj: Re: Fwd: [BarrysList] I think it's a hoax Date: 01-09-19 03:29:41 EDT From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bert Sacks) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dick Blakney) Thanks for your good detective work. I've just sent on my efforts (bcc) regarding the 4000 Israelis alleged to have been warned about the attack and who therefor never went to work that morning at the WTC. If you know more, let us know. In the meantime, I'm tired and angry at spending time tracking all of this down. I feel no different than when I look at US State Dept stuff and see "organized lying" in Hans' phrase. If you want the US federal definition of terrorism, take a look at the op-ed by Kate Pflaumer, former US federal attorney for 7 years here. Her piece quotes the federal statute in relation to our policy on Iraq! It's near the top of our site, at www.endiraqsanctions.org. Best, Bert ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Subject: [BarrysList] I think it's a hoax From: "basd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 08:10:11 -0700 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I think the article accusing the Mossad is a hoax. From my own "two cents" contribution, you can tell I would be inclined to believe it. I will write Media Monitors Network and see if they claim it. We may not be able to trust the news media, but anyone with a computer and some sense of how to structure a news story can create a reasonable hoax. I did a web search on all the elements that I thought would be "verifiable." There was no reference to the article on Media Monitor's site. If David Stern is an expert on Israeli intelligence operations, he is invisible to a web search. It seems to me an "expert" would have been quoted in the past. I could not find any agency entitled "Stern-Intel (Canada)" -- the way the dateline reads. The most I could find (somewhat coincidentally) was a "David Stern" who is "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" and is a computer person. As I mentioned before, I found two other David Sterns relative to the World Trade Center. One is a lawyer associated with the defense of Bin Laden relative to the 1993 bombing. The other is an MD who owns the "Deep Politics" conspiracy website. Also interesting, I could not find >any< news references that discussed the Mossad in reference to the World Trade Center. This seems a bit surprising, since the CIA and the Mossad are probably working very closely at this time. CIA and the Mossad have a long relationship and the Mossad has "deep cover" agents that can penetrate Islamic organizations, whereas I don't think the CIA does. Changing subjects: Is it "terrorism" for the US to obtain worldwide "assistance" by essentially threatening to bomb nations such as Pakistan that do not help the US go after Bin Laden? Since Pakistan is presently under trade and technology sanctions as a terrorist nation (and also possesses nuclear weapons), does it make sense to remove those sanctions in an effort to "get Bin Laden?" (If you ask me, this only plays directly into the hands of Islamic Extremists, many of who are alleged to be >in< Pakistan.) ------------------------------------------------------------ A laugh a day keeps the doctor away. Come get your prescription filled at . . . http://www.TheJokeDoctor.com ______________________________________________ You can subscribe to Solidarity4Ever by sending a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and unsubscribe by sending an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
