posted on September 23, 2001 07:34:09 PM new
Forget for a moment the contradictory stories about whether or not the Taliban will 'give up' Bin Laden. I distinctly remember that at one point they said they would give him up for trial in an Islamic court *if* the U.S. provided proof that he was involved. The President rejected this proposal.
My question is - Why?? I have to admit - it seems like a reasonable condition to me. After all, if a foreign country demanded that the U.S. hand me over, I'd want the government to demand some proof that I was actually a criminal or whatever instead of just deporting me.
So what am I missing? Why didn't we (the U.S.) agree to this?
posted on September 23, 2001 08:27:56 PM new
Does the U.S. possess evidence that would convict bin Laden in a court "beyond a reasonable" doubt? Maybe yes, maybe no (it seems they are preparing to make that case, however). Truth is it really doesn't matter either way. They don't have to. This isn't a legal case anymore than Pearl Harbour was.
The Taliban don't have to do anything they don't want to. Pakistan doesn't have to do anything they don't want to. However, the U.S. posseses enormous power and any would-be adversary ought to be mindful of that. Pakistan evidently is. We can use carrots and we can use sticks where appropriate. Pakistan, for example, was probably threatened with lots of sticks, such as a mutual defense pact between the U.S. and India (that's my guess). By agreeing to toe our line they were rewarded with a carrot; the lifting of economic sanctions imposed on them in 1998 as a result of their nuclear tests.
posted on September 23, 2001 08:34:42 PM new
He was already named as a defendant for the previous bombing of the WTC based on a body of evidence and they were ordered by the UN to turn him over for trial. Why go through all that again when it made no difference to them?
In a court of Islamic law they can say - you are not believers - he is warrented to do anything to you he wants - case dismissed.
posted on September 23, 2001 08:39:42 PM newHe was already named as a defendant for the previous bombing of the WTC based on a body of evidence and they were ordered by the UN to turn him over for trial.
Actually Bin Laden was never sought in regards to the first WTC attack. He has been on the FBI's 10 Most Wanted list since 1998 because of the two attacks on US embassies in Africa.
