Stardate 20011005.1554 (On Screen via long range sensors): Now
this is fuzzy-headed. "The media say that the Taliban wants to negotiate. Great!" Well, what the Taliban ambassador
says he wants, and what the Taliban
really wants may not be the same. Professor Fisher is an expert in negotiations and he can't recognize a delaying tactic when he sees it? He then goes on in a similar vein: "Our current demand appears big and fuzzy." On the contrary, they're very straightforward and clear: we want bin Laden surrendered, we want all the terrorist bases shut down, we want all members of Al Qaeda turned over to us, and we want Afghanistan to never be used as a base for terrorism again. What's so fuzzy about that?
He proceeds to ask some questions, and I had no trouble at all answering any of them:
How many of Osama bin Laden's people do they have to turn over with him? All of them.
How many training camps must be closed? All of them.
How will we verify that this is done? We will need to put our people on the ground in Afghanistan to verify it.
When and how should the Taliban turn these people over, and to whom? As soon as possible, to us.
Where? At their border with Pakistan, or anywhere in Afghanistan where we can land a jet or a helicopter. Anywhere which will make the process as efficient and rapid as possible.
What will happen to them? Will they be shot? No. But other forms of execution are possible.
Tried in a New York court before a New York jury? Most likely they'd be tried in front of a Federal judge in Washington DC. But if it were decided to try them under state law, a trial in New York is unlikely; a petition for change of venue would almost certainly be granted. (McVeigh was tried in Denver.)
Have defense counsel? Of course!
Might they be tried in an international court that would include at least one Islamic judge? Not a chance. They're going to be tried under US law and if found guilty will be punished here.
(His response to my answers would be But those answers are not acceptable to the Taliban. My response to that would be that I don't give a shit what's acceptable to the Taliban.)
The problem is that he's assuming that the offer to negotiate by the Taliban ambassador is actually being made in good faith, and as a supposed expert in negotiations he assumes all problems can be solved that way. "A man whose only tool is a hammer..." He's apparently also not aware of just how entangled Al Qaeda and the Taliban are, especially militarily. The Taliban appear not to be able to capture bin Laden or to root out Al Qaeda, because a substantial part of their armed force would mutiny if they did. Their most reliable troops are actually loyal to bin Laden, not to the Taliban. (discuss)
