 |
| |
|
|
OneFootInTheGrave
|
 |
Kuzelj
Nov 2000
time: 05:24
|
|
http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiap...aeda/index.html
but the US doesn't seem to be that interested in it at the moment, Saddam is the man.
quote:
The panel was established to monitor efforts against Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, the Taliban and their associates.
The report also said al Qaeda is setting up new training camps in Afghanistan. And the chairman of the monitoring group said it could find no connection between al Qaeda and Iraq.
The report said recent intelligence reports show al Qaeda is "regrouping and setting up simple training facilities inside Afghanistan, close to the Pakistan border."
Michael Chandler, the group's chairman, told reporters the camps are in a remote region of eastern Afghanistan and indicated the United States is aware of them.
In addition, the report said the monitoring group "remains highly preoccupied by the potential" for al Qaeda to manufacture some kind of "dirty" bomb.
Tanzanian police recently seized 100 kilograms of "suspected raw uranium, a highly radioactive and dangerous material," and the Tanzanian government has seized "five canisters of suspected uranium" in recent months, the report said.
The United Nations is continuing to follow the matter with Tanzanian authorities and in discussions with its International Atomic Energy Agency, the report said.
While "important progress" has been made in identifying and breaking up al Qaeda cells, a "large number" of al Qaeda operatives and others trained by al Qaeda "remain at large and should be designated ... as terrorists," the report said.
While countries have collectively made great strides against al Qaeda, Chandler said, "there's a tremendous amount of sympathy in some countries for the movement" and a large number of new adherents continue to join its ranks.
Chandler said the key to international cooperation against al Qaeda and others is the U.N.'s "consolidated list" of suspected terrorists and terror groups.
One problem, Chandler said, is that the list apparently is not as definitive as it could be.
The list currently has the names of 92 entities and 232 individuals associated with bin Laden, al Qaeda and the Taliban.
The authors of the report attached a list of 104 more individuals and entities identified -- through media reports or public mention -- as possibly linked with al Qaeda.
Chandler said his group wants nations to come forward and weigh in on those names.
"We're saying, should these people appear on the list or shouldn't they?" Chandler said.
Chandler said that without such broad sharing of information, investigative cooperation, and international financial controls, al Qaeda would continue to be able to resist, recruit and re-arm.
"Al Qaeda is an insidious movement and no countries or group of countries can handle this problem alone," Chandler said.
Among nations singled out by the report is the United States.
Four of the "most wanted terrorists" -- Imad Fayez Mugniyah, Ahmad Ibrahim al-Mughassil, Ali Saed bin al-Hoorie and Ibrahim Salih Mohammad al-Yacoub -- are on the FBI's Web page but have not been included in the U.N. list, the report said.
Chandler said that while the United States has been a "leading member of the international community in making sure the list is effective" and in putting names on the list, the United Nations needs to know why it has not put those names on it.
|
All in all not a lot of news on that front these days 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kontiki
|
|
Canada
Aug 2001
time: 00:24
|
|
I don't think the US ever claimed that it had eradicated al Qaeda. Now whether or not Iraq has anything to do with al Qaeda is another matter......
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jack_www
|
|
A lot of this is not new. I have been hearing it in the news for a long time after 9/11. But really the have been setting up bases in Pakistan after they got kick out of Afghanistan. There are also troops still in Afghanistan and have been fighting with al Qaeda and the Taliban for a long time.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
chegitz guevara
|
 |
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000
time: 00:24
|
|
Sprayber, I'm not quite sure how to respond to that. Not being privy to top levels of the US government doesn't mean we can't kno what's going on (or isn't going on as the case may be). Given the number of reporters in Afganistan and Pakistan, it's reasonable to conclude that if our government were engaged in some activity or preparing for someactivity, someone would notice. That doesn't mean it would make the press, especially here in the States, but lots of people watch the wire services, and something would be there. Sadly, the US media is as focused on Iraq as the Administration seems to be, so the re-emergence of al-Qaeda in Afganistan won't get the play it should.
Question: if were are going to follow the terrorists everywhere, why didn't we follow them across the border into Pakistan? I thought you were either with us or with the terrorists. Pakistan (while carrying out operations in the NWT) seems to be both.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jack_www
|
|
I am sure US government knows about it, it is just weather or not the media thinks it is important enough to cover is anther matter.
Ever since 1991 after Gulf War Ended US has been flying over nothern Iraq and blowing up anti air missle sites and other anti air weapons, and not all of it has been in the media. There is a lot that happens in the world that never get into the news.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sprayber
|
 |
Dixie
Oct 2000
time: 23:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Sprayber, I'm not quite sure how to respond to that. Not being privy to top levels of the US government doesn't mean we can't kno what's going on (or isn't going on as the case may be). Given the number of reporters in Afganistan and Pakistan, it's reasonable to conclude that if our government were engaged in some activity or preparing for someactivity, someone would notice. That doesn't mean it would make the press, especially here in the States, but lots of people watch the wire services, and something would be there. Sadly, the US media is as focused on Iraq as the Administration seems to be, so the re-emergence of al-Qaeda in Afganistan won't get the play it should.
Question: if were are going to follow the terrorists everywhere, why didn't we follow them across the border into Pakistan? I thought you were either with us or with the terrorists. Pakistan (while carrying out operations in the NWT) seems to be both. |
Perhaps someone realized attacking them like they were an organized army wasnt exactly doing so well and maybe instead of TRYING obliterating every single member they would like to get some kind of idea about how they work and not simply go for the bodycount game.  That's what most of the Euros were so afraid of wasnt it? That Bush would bomb countries left and right and go here and go there without thinking. Some here seem almost disappointed that wasnt what happened. And
it must be because Bush has orchistrated some evil plan to abandon the hunt for the terrorist and focus on the persecuted iraqis instead.
First people want to say what happened in Afghaniastan was a faliure and then they want Bush to do the same thing in Pakistan  But we have so many experts in running anti-terrorist campaigns here, that I'm sure they are right and those in control are wrong.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24.
Apolyton Time is 00:24. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
19-12-2002 20:26
... and does going after Al Quaeda bases in Afghanistan or Pakistan mean obliterating civilians? Or is it an advantage for US strategy to have functional Al Quaeda training grounds?
|