U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf

NEW YORK (Reuters) - President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan said that after the September 11 attacks the United States threatened to bomb his country if it did not cooperate with America's campaign against the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Musharraf, in an interview with CBS news magazine show "60 Minutes" that will air on Sunday, said the threat came from Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and was given to Musharraf's intelligence director.

"The intelligence director told me that (Armitage) said, 'Be prepared to be bombed. Be prepared to go back to the Stone Age,"' Musharraf said. "I think it was a very rude remark."

Armitage was not immediately available to comment and a Bush administration official said there would be no comment on a "reported conversation between Mr. Armitage and a Pakistani official."

But the official said: "After 9/11, Pakistan made a strategic decision to join the war on terror and has since been

a steadfast partner in that effort. Pakistan's commitment to this important endeavor has not wavered and our partnership has widened as a result."

Musharraf is now in Washington and is due to meet President George W. Bush in the White House on Friday.

The Pakistani leader, whose remarks were distributed to the media by CBS, said he reacted to the threat in a responsible way. "One has to think and take actions in the interest of the nation, and that's what I did," Musharraf said.

Before the Sept 11, 2001 attacks, Pakistan was one of the only countries in the world to maintain relations with the Taliban, which was harboring al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, and many Pakistanis were sympathetic with the neighboring Islamic state.

But within days of the attacks Musharraf cut his government's ties to the Taliban regime and cooperated with U.S. efforts to track and capture Al-Qaeda and Taliban forces that sought refuge in Pakistan.

The official 9/11 Commission report on the attacks and their aftermath, based largely on government documents, said U.S. national security officials focused immediately on securing Pakistani cooperation as they planned a response.

Documents showed Armitage met the Pakistani ambassador and the visiting head of Pakistan's military intelligence service in Washington on September 13 and asked Pakistan to take seven steps.

SUPPORT FOR BIN LADEN

They included ending logistical support for bin Laden and giving the United States blanket overflight and landing rights for military and intelligence flights.

The report did not discuss any threat the United States may have made, but it said Musharraf agreed to all seven U.S. requests the same day.

Musharraf said in the CBS interview he was irked by U.S. demands that Pakistan turn over its border posts and bases for the U.S. military to use.

He said some demands were "ludicrous," including one insisting he suppress domestic expression of support for terrorism against the United States. "If somebody's expressing views, we cannot curb the expression of views," Musharraf said.

With Taliban fighters still fighting in Afghanistan and statements by the Afghan government that Pakistan must do more to crack down on militants in its rugged border area, the issue is again a sensitive one between Islamabad and Washington.

Musharraf reacted with displeasure to comments by Bush on Wednesday that if he had firm intelligence bin Laden was in Pakistan, he would issue the order to go into that country.

"We wouldn't like to allow that. We'd like to do that ourselves," Musharraf told a news conference.

Musharraf's comments came days ahead of the publication by New York-based Free Press of his memoir "In the Line of Fire." Advance copies of the memoir have not been released to the media for review before its September 25 publication.

[Keltoi]

Interesting article. Not really surprising though. After 9-11 the U.S. intended to end Al-Qaeda's safe haven in Afghanistan. That is hard to do if a nearby country is willing to aid the enemy. It was important to make sure Pakistan was on the same page as the U.S. on the issue of fighting the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. Seems things worked out for the best, for both the U.S. and Pakistan.

[MTAFFI]

wow

[Isaac]

Theres a saying i once i heard. A dance with the devil may last you for ever. So when the devil asks you to dance say never!!!

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Keltoi]

Theres a saying i once i heard. A dance with the devil may last you for ever. So when the devil asks you to dance say never!!!

..and I'll go out on a limb here and assume you are calling the U.S. the "devil"?
Can we at least attempt to have a sensible discussion about something without falling back on the old tired cliches?

[DaNgErOuS MiNdS]

Why didn't Musharaaf mention this before? or did he?

[Ghazi]

:sl:

So let me get this straight some dude who lives thousands of miles away says he'll bomb pakistan then the pakistan goverment ally with them in their agenda, and on the other hand allah says people who don't rule by his decree are kafir yet the Pakistani Goverment don't complay and become awliya of allah.

Simple word Cowardice.

[Keltoi]

:sl:

So let me get this straight some dude who lives thousands of miles away says he'll bomb pakistan then the pakistan goverment ally with them in their agenda, and on the other hand allah says people who don't rule by his decree are kafir yet the Pakistani Goverment don't complay and become awliya of allah.

Simple word Cowardice.

...so being an ally against terrorism and the Taliban regime equates turning against Allah and being a coward?

[Ghazi]

...so being an ally against terrorism and the Taliban regime equates turning against Allah and being a coward?

:sl:

Terrorism? whats your definiton, this is such an ambigious statement, I agree Al-Qida ect commit unislamic acts which ammounts to terrorism, but whats the wider definiton of the word the west connect it with? I'll tell you the ideology of Jihad, answer this would you call a mujahid who performs jihad according to authentic islamic teachings to be a terrorist?

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

I won't even attempt to identify them as terrorists. All u see is the media focus on the bad side. I dont trust humans because they aren't exactly flawless. So I can only trust Allah. If they truly are then they will be accountable.

[akulion]

well so much for the "oh we lost 3000 people" bull crap

this is supposed to make me feel happy as a pakistani?

that the us was willing to kill all and any pakistanis to get revenge?

Well to hell with them - i felt sorry before for 9-11 but no more

[Trumble]

that the us was willing to kill all and any pakistanis to get revenge?

I very much doubt the "US" was willing to do any such thing. It was just extreme diplo-speak; Mushareff's comment that is was a "very rude remark" rather confirms that.

[Isaac]

people like him are representatives of his nation. what they say, has an impact on their nation. now different to a muslim saying he wants to bomb all british people in the trafford centre. he merely said it, he didnt really plan to, but where does that leave him and his religion. Ill tell you. it leaves him with charges of intoigitaionand conspiring to kill innocent people and it leaves his religion in the eyes of pathteic and uneduaction racist facists to distort the image of islam. so let me ask, whats s going to happen to this threat of terror that was made? Reminds me a bit of robin hood? If your clever you will understand what i mean.

And for it to be brought out now is pathtic, and for the president of pakistan to meet someone who thratned to kill his mothers and daughters, fathers and sons, to be honest i think he just needs to be little more careful.

And keltoi, now i was not referring to america as thed devil, it was just a saying, but you can feel free to link it to the usa.

[north_malaysian]

"The intelligence director told me that (Armitage) said, 'Be prepared to be bombed. Be prepared to go back to the Stone Age,"' Musharraf said. "I think it was a very rude remark."

Indeed it's a very RUDE REMARKS!!!!:grumbling :grumbling :grumbling

That Armitage must be happy as Afghanistan and Iraq have been went back to Stone Age...

[waji]

:sl:

...so being an ally against terrorism and the Taliban regime equates turning against Allah and being a coward?

Keltoi this proves that America was lacking evidance against Taliban and AlQaida
and Pakistan would give them help so they went wild with Pakistan
and yes it is cowardnace of a General who hold A-bomb and still feels he is unsafe


:w:

[Keltoi]

:sl:


Keltoi this proves that America was lacking evidance against Taliban and AlQaida
and Pakistan would give them help so they went wild with Pakistan
and yes it is cowardnace of a General who hold A-bomb and still feels he is unsafe


:w:

How exactly does this prove anything about lack of evidence? So Mushareff should have said "No, I support Al-Qaeda, so please take out your frustration on Pakistan, since I have an A-bomb I feel safe"? Mushareff can't afford to play games or provoke American action against him. He is a smart leader, and knew it was in the best interests of Pakistan to play ball with the U.S. on this issue. It actually took alot of guts for him to refuse the presence of American forces inside Pakistan.

[- Qatada -]

It is only Shaitan (Satan) that suggests to you the fear of his Auliya' [supporters and friends (polytheists, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah and in His Messenger, Muhammad SAW)], so fear them not, but fear Me, if you are (true) believers. (Qur'an 3:175)

[IceQueen~]

america america america...:rollseyes
why can't anyone see through their rubbish talk about 'terrorism'
I mean america IS terrorism!!!!
why can't they leave alone what is NON OF THEIR BUSINESS!!
what is it to them with afghanistan, iraq, iran syria etc....(incl all the other bills of muslim countries on the list)

[waji]

:sl:

How exactly does this prove anything about lack of evidence? So Mushareff should have said "No, I support Al-Qaeda, so please take out your frustration on Pakistan, since I have an A-bomb I feel safe"? Mushareff can't afford to play games or provoke American action against him. He is a smart leader, and knew it was in the best interests of Pakistan to play ball with the U.S. on this issue. It actually took alot of guts for him to refuse the presence of American forces inside Pakistan.

u didn't got my point that if they had evidance that Al-Qaeda was after the 9/11 and Taliban are supporting them(which they haven't provided yet ), then why showed attitude of barbarian to get Pakistan support

:w:

[Keltoi]

:sl:



u didn't got my point that if they had evidance that Al-Qaeda was after the 9/11 and Taliban are supporting them(which they haven't provided yet ), then why showed attitude of barbarian to get Pakistan support

:w:

What do you mean it hasn't been proven yet? Al-Qaeda was living and setting up training grounds inside Afghanistan under the watchful eye of the Taliban. If you are referring to proof that Al-Qaeda committed 9-11, then I'm not sure what to tell you. How much "proof" do you need? I know it is easier to blame aliens, a U.S. conspiracy, or whatever, but anyone intellectually honest knows who was responsible for 9-11, and that was Al0Qaeda, who found refuge with the Taliban.

[IceQueen~]

yeah intellectually what?! well can't anyone see how could someone living in some ol' cave in faraway afghanistan control a number of dif remote control planes starting from dif. airprtsand succeed without any warning?
ahem---what happened to the 'detecty stuff' all round the twin towers...did it just go bonkers at the most reasonable time...?

[Keltoi]

yeah intellectually what?! well can't anyone see how could someone living in some ol' cave in faraway afghanistan control a number of dif remote control planes starting from dif. airprtsand succeed without any warning?
ahem---what happened to the 'detecty stuff' all round the twin towers...did it just go bonkers at the most reasonable time...?

Let me get this straight...now the line is that the planes were "remote controlled"?

[IceQueen~]

I could ask you the very same question:)

[- Qatada -]

Remember everyone:

Beef will not be tolerated in any forum. Differences in opinion are expected, but please debate respectfully. (Beef are comments made for the purpose of insulting somebody else with negative intent, looking for a negative reaction, or blatantly insulting somebody) 15-25% warning

[Keltoi]

I could ask you the very same question:)

Let me guess, you watched a "documentary" right? "Loose Change" I believe it was called.

[IceQueen~]

No dear that's not what i'm referring to and if I insulted you I'm sorry
but I don't watch T.V at all-there are too many lies and brainwashing purpouses behind it...

[- Qatada -]

Keltoi, edit your posts please. Thanks.


Posts no. 22 and 25. We don't need personal insults.

[Snowflake]

I don't get it.. Why has Musharaf decided to speak out now against America's bomb threat and not at the time it was received? America can get peeved off at this statement and decide to bomb Pakistan just for the hell of it. Or could this be Musharafs way of saying "We are prepared for you now!" :?

I'm totally confused!

[IceQueen~]

he can probably only say what he's allowed to say...

[Snowflake]

It doesn't make sense that he'd be allowed to say that now and not then.

[Keltoi]

The answer is a book deal. Mushareff just signed a deal with an American publishing company to write a book. At the press conference today Mushareff was asked this question and simply said he couldn't talk about it because of a deal with Simon & Schuster. Bush says.."In other words, you'll have to buy the book." It looks like this story about Armitage was released to pump up Mushareff's book sales.

[MTAFFI]

:sl:

Terrorism? whats your definiton, this is such an ambigious statement, I agree Al-Qida ect commit unislamic acts which ammounts to terrorism, but whats the wider definiton of the word the west connect it with? I'll tell you the ideology of Jihad, answer this would you call a mujahid who performs jihad according to authentic islamic teachings to be a terrorist?

If the "authentic islamic teachings" allow for one man to kill another man or multiple other men when those particular men did nothing to him, then this is terrorism. I am sure that the Qu'ran does not look fondly upon those that carry out suicide bombings, in fact, i would bet that each one of them werent to happy with what they found on the other side, after their murders and suicides. My personal opinion is that this is "cowardice"

[sameer]

If the "authentic islamic teachings" allow for one man to kill another man or multiple other men when those particular men did nothing to him, then this is terrorism. I am sure that the Qu'ran does not look fondly upon those that carry out suicide bombings, in fact, i would bet that each one of them werent to happy with what they found on the other side, after their murders and suicides. My personal opinion is that this is "cowardice"

Umm... I dont understand. U say Bin laden sent his folowers to bomb the WTc, but didnt Bush send his followers to bomb and kill more ppl? U can say the US army is not his followers..but they are still following his orders.

How come so many cameras happened to be focussed on the WTC, from the correct angle, at that very moment to capture the planes carshing in? Do the WTC have cameras focused on them all the time?

[snakelegs]

this news doen't really surprise me. i had assumed it was some kind of blackmail.
do any of you pakistanis have any thoughts about why the general has gone public with this now? (i find it hard to believe that it's just a gimmick to sell his book)
also, he has recently called off the hunts for terrorists in waziristan - do any of you have any theories as to what is behind this?
i'm always curious, cuz nothing happens in a vacuum and everything is related to a bunch of other stuff in the world.

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

I don't even CARE anymore. Im jus focusing on myself, my family, and fellow Muslims around me that they stay on the right path, InshAllah.

[MTAFFI]

Umm... I dont understand. U say Bin laden sent his folowers to bomb the WTc, but didnt Bush send his followers to bomb and kill more ppl? U can say the US army is not his followers..but they are still following his orders.

How come so many cameras happened to be focussed on the WTC, from the correct angle, at that very moment to capture the planes carshing in? Do the WTC have cameras focused on them all the time?

Actually they do, as a matter of fact every major city in america has cameras all over them for various different reason, like say weather reports, traffic reports, etc. Also you answered nothing in my post, i never even mentioned bin laden or the WTC. But if you want to go there I can do that to, it is a big difference to kill a bunch of innocent people than it is to go after and kill people that run around killing everyone that doesnt believe what they do. The US is not the only ones in the war in Iraq, Iraq is at war in Iraq (Sunnis and ****es). And I cant say i have heard of us actually going and just killing 3000 people at a time like say with a airplane undiscriminatly. Next time you respond to my post please make it at least somewhat relevant. thank you

[snakelegs]

[B]
"The intelligence director told me that (Armitage) said, 'Be prepared to be bombed. Be prepared to go back to the Stone Age,"' Musharraf said. "I think it was a very rude remark."

understatement of the year!

[aamirsaab]

:sl:

do any of you pakistanis have any thoughts about why the general has gone public with this now? (i find it hard to believe that it's just a gimmick to sell his book)
also, he has recently called off the hunts for terrorists in waziristan - do any of you have any theories as to what is behind this?
i'm always curious, cuz nothing happens in a vacuum and everything is related to a bunch of other stuff in the world.

He probably just wants some airtime on cnn or whatnot. Or it could be the press being "fashionably late" with the news.

[sameer]

Actually they do, as a matter of fact every major city in america has cameras all over them for various different reason, like say weather reports, traffic reports, etc. Also you answered nothing in my post, i never even mentioned bin laden or the WTC. But if you want to go there I can do that to, it is a big difference to kill a bunch of innocent people than it is to go after and kill people that run around killing everyone that doesnt believe what they do. The US is not the only ones in the war in Iraq, Iraq is at war in Iraq (Sunnis and ****es). And I cant say i have heard of us actually going and just killing 3000 people at a time like say with a airplane undiscriminatly. Next time you respond to my post please make it at least somewhat relevant. thank you

oopss..sorry i quoted u by mistake. I was speaking generally about Bin ladin and terrorist etc :hiding:

[sameer]

Actually they do, as a matter of fact every major city in america has cameras all over them for various different reason, like say weather reports, traffic reports, etc.

how does cameras permanently focused at the top of the WTC be for traffic, and weather?

[MTAFFI]

how does cameras permanently focused at the top of the WTC be for traffic, and weather?

if you ever watch the news in america you would see, i watch it everyday and before every commercial break the news will cut to a scene of the city usually from 1 of maybe 10 or 15 different places.

[Snowflake]

this news doen't really surprise me. i had assumed it was some kind of blackmail.
do any of you pakistanis have any thoughts about why the general has gone public with this now? (i find it hard to believe that it's just a gimmick to sell his book)
also, he has recently called off the hunts for terrorists in waziristan - do any of you have any theories as to what is behind this?
i'm always curious, cuz nothing happens in a vacuum and everything is related to a bunch of other stuff in the world.

I can't say for sure but maybe Musharaf's pro-American policies have made him unpopular among pakistani masses and that his recent claim is a way of justifying his earlier actions. His political enemies Sharif and Bhutto are also back on the scene just before the 2007 elections. Maybe he is afraid that they will use his policies to turn the people against him - hence claiming that he had no choice but to comply with the Americans at the time. God knows.

[Ninth_Scribe]

U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan after 9/11: Musharraf

But the official said: "After 9/11, Pakistan made a strategic decision to join the war on terror and has since been a steadfast partner in that effort. Pakistan's commitment to this important endeavor has not wavered and our partnership has widened as a result."

SUPPORT FOR BIN LADEN

They included ending logistical support for bin Laden and giving the United States blanket overflight and landing rights for military and intelligence flights.

Basically, you have to assist our troops and join our cause, or become a target yourself. Bush didn't even settle on a denouncement speech from each country. You either had to be in the War on Terror or you were a country that supports terrorism, and thus a target.

In that way, he put everyone's head on the chopping block and the real issue (whether or not every country agreed with his policy) was avoided. He deliberately connected 911 to all his other agendas to get his way. Notice no one went this potty when we had the Oklahoma bombing? Of course, that couldn't be used as a political sword in the manipulation of foreign policy.

Ninth Scribe

[MTAFFI]

That is a great point, I had no idea that elections were up for him in 2007

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

wow loool. nicely said =D
your talking about Bush right?

[snakelegs]

I can't say for sure but maybe Musharaf's pro-American policies have made him unpopular among pakistani masses and that his recent claim is a way of justifying his earlier actions. His political enemies Sharif and Bhutto are also back on the scene just before the 2007 elections. Maybe he is afraid that they will use his policies to turn the people against him - hence claiming that he had no choice but to comply with the Americans at the time. God knows.

thanks for your comments. i know that there is a growing resentment in pakistan as pakistan's sovereignty is being compromised because of u.s. demands. so, maybe this is more as you say - for internal consumption.
he also seems to be backing off from offending the MMA lately. seems like he is really getting worried about his losing his grip. there have been a couple of assassination attempts, after all.