WASHINGTON, Oct. 7, 2008
Iran Gave U.S. Help On Al Qaeda After 9/11
Former U.S. Officials Say Iran Rounded Up Hundreds Of Possible Terrorists Following Sept. 11 Attacks
-
Photo
(AP / CBS)
-
Fast Facts
Iran
Learn about the people, economy and history.
-
Timeline
The U.S. And Iran
Key events in once friendly, now contentious relationship between Washington and Tehran.
The copies were sent to Kofi Annan, then the secretary-general of the United Nations, who passed them to the United States, and U.S. interrogators were given a chance by Iran to question some of the detainees, Leverett said in an Associated Press interview.
Leverett, a Middle East expert who was a career U.S. Foreign Service officer, said she negotiated with Iran for the Bush administration in the 2001-3 period, and Iran sought a broader relationship with the United States. "They thought they had been helpful on al Qaeda, and they were," she said.
For one thing, she said, Iran denied sanctuary to suspected al Qaeda operatives.
Some administration officials took the view, however, that Iran had not acknowledged all likely al Qaeda members nor provided access to them, Leverett said.
Many of the expelled Arabs were deported to Saudi Arabia and other Arab and Muslim countries, even though Iran had poor relations with the Saudi monarchy and some other countries in the region, Leverett said. Iranians are Persian, not Arab, and most belong to the Shiite sect of Islam rather than the Sunni, the majority sect in most Arab countries.
James F. Dobbins, the Bush administration's chief negotiator on Afghanistan in late 2001, said Iran was "comprehensively helpful" in the aftermath of the 9-11 attack in 2001 in working to overthrow the Taliban militias' rule and collaborating with the United States to install the Karzai government in Kabul.
Iranian diplomats made clear at the time they were looking for broader cooperation with the United States, but the Bush administration was not interested, the author of "After the Taliban: Nation-Building in Afghanistan," said in a separate interview.
The Bush administration has acknowledged contacts with Iran over the years even while denouncing Iran as part of an "axis of evil" and declining to consider resumption of diplomatic relations.
"It isn't something that is talked about," Leverett said in describing Iran's role during a forum at the New America Foundation, a nonpartisan policy institute.
Leverett and her husband, Flynt Leverett, a former career CIA analyst and a former National Security Council official, jointly proposed that the U.S. president who replaces George W. Bush in January seek a "grand bargain" with Iran to settle all major outstanding differences.
"The next president needs to reorient U.S. policy toward Iran as fundamentally as President Nixon did with China in the 1970s," Flynt Leverett said. Richard Nixon, a political conservative, opened the U.S.-China relationship by among other things visiting the communist country.
Among provisions of the Leveretts' recommended new Iran policy: The United States would clarify that it is not seeking change in the nature of Iran's Islamic government but rather its policies, while Iran would agree to "certain limits" on its nuclear program.
Iran considers most of its neighbors as its enemies. Among incentives for improving U.S. relations, the Leveretts said, is they feel that Pakistan and Saudi Arabia would be less provocative with a friendlier U.S.-Iranian relationship.
In Other Developments:
The ministry said the airplane, carrying a four-member Hungarian military delegation, had permission to fly over Iran, but that because of an "administrative error," characters in the craft's call signal were changed around and Iranian authorities did not recognize it.
© MMVIII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Video and Galleries from World
-
Video
Eating-In Replaces Eating-Out
-
Video
Music In The Air
-
Video
U.S. Troops In Need
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 58 CommentsPeople who have their head out of the sand, understand the culprits are bred, raised, and taught in Saudi Arabia. Mostly friends of the bush crime family and PNAC which explains why these thugs continue to walk the face of the planet.
Not for much longer though...
Welcome to Kennebunkport Maine you ******.
yeah i said iran.
open your eyes people, we have been engaging in policies that perpetuate the problem, not solve them. iran is the super power in the middle east capable of bringing peace, not US (sic).
Now Iraq is a mess. The Christian Arabs who were living decently before the US invasion, are now the victims of all kinds of Muslim fringe groups that run all over the country side looking for fresh new victims. And the present government of Iraq even has made provision for Shariah Laws.
We owe the Iranians a massive apology and reparations for all the illegal acts done in the name of the US Government.
Xentpro: history didn''t start 7 years ago.
Saudi Arabia, a US ally, does the same thing. Where is your outrage? Amazing though that the few times we got to hear about it, the protests of many made that government stop.
Iranian diplomats made clear at the time they were looking for broader cooperation with the United States, but the Bush administration was not interested, the author of "After the Taliban: Nation-Building in Afghanistan," said in a separate interview.
------------------------------------
This is no surprise. Many countries that symphatized with us immediately after 9/11 are now either our enemies are do not like us because of Bush policies. I hope Obama has the good sense to reach out to them early.
This administration has done nothing but attack Iran, now they''re passing a story like this to the press?
And, you guy are printing it?
Do you think someone is getting ready to attack them, and this administration is ''making nice'' to obscure the fact THEY are behind the attack?!
But the US simply reacts against it without much thought in the same way it does with Iran and it did with Saddam''s Iraq.
The common thread between these three countries is their vocal opposition to Israel. Of course all Arab and Middle Eastern countries dislike Israel and what''s doing with the Palestinians very much but it''s these three countries who don''t mind protesting about it in public.
Saudi Arabia, the gulf states, Egypt and so on they pretty much keep the discussion private although once in a while they might rebuke Israel through the press but nothing like Saddam, Iran and Syria.
In view of how the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is strictly about land and not about an ideological movement trying to impose some kind of "superior" philosophy like the Nazis tried on Europe, I think it''s wrong to judge the character of a country, or a person, by how critical they are of Israel.
In fact, it is Israel who more resembles an ideological movement than the Palestinians. Zionism was created in Europe at a time when European powers were colonizing the world over and it''s been put to practice over the dead bodies of thousands of Palestinian nationals of all faiths and creed.
To wish for the end of Zionism does not mean wishing for the extermination of the Jewish people, in the same way that wishing for the end of the Soviet Union didn''t mean a desire to exterminate Russians.
Posted by demslie2u at 08:22 AM : Oct 08, 2008
Anyone who contends that only conservatives are patriots is deluded.
Dems don''t hate America, they just don''t like pro-corporation, bible-thumping provincials who contradict themselves all the time.
Well, it seems Iran may have learned it''s lesson during the recent saber rattling by Bush and McSame, it is a safe bet they won''t make the mistake of helping US Republican - led, war mongering governments ever again.
Unless of course we''re talking about US neocons, they have only one concept of accomodating different views, kill everyone who disagrees with them.
Neo cons you will be out for a generation get used to it.
Well, let''s see, we had Prescott Bush and his wealthy US friends who helped Hitler to power, and sold the fuel for the Nazi war machine, and on the other side the US embargo on Japan is now recognized as provoked by the US to create a reason to enter a war that the rich wanted, but the non-rich people did not.
You must have flunked history.
He even humbled the normally bulldog-ish Sen. Levin D-Mich., and by the end of his opening statement, the Republican senator was almost crying.
Of course the news media never mentioned it, watch it on you tube, and find out why.
You must have flunked history.
Posted by brianbwb at 09:32 AM : Oct 08, 2008
Wow. Just when I thought I found the most brainwashed, myopic, drooling Bush-hater, you pop up.
Blaming Republicans for WWII.....wow.
Do you mind if I print that post? I tell others about people like you & they think I''m embellishing.
Thanks!
It is true, that Iraq had nothing to do with the 911 attack. Saddaam Hussien considered Osama Bin Laden a lunatic by Iraqi standards and wanted nothing to do with him.
It is true, that Saddaam Hussien was more fearful of an Iranian invasion than a USA invasion.
It is true, that Saddaam Hussien had WMD around the time of the Gulf War in ''92 but lost them during the war and afterwards. It is true, he maintained a defiant posture to the UN weapons inspectors and remained mysterious to keep his Iranian neighbors from exploiting his disadvantage.
It is true, the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait was started over horizontal drilling techniques used by Kuwait to extract oil from Iraq. When confronted, the Kuwait leader told Saddaam Hussien if Iraq tried to stop them, Kuwait would turn every woman in Iraq into a $10 prostitute.
The US State Department has been ineffective in their diplomatic missions and know very little about Mid-East Cultures.
Posted by easeup
Here is a deal, google "Prescott Bush trading with the enemy", check out the public court records, and also google "US foreign policy toward Japan pre-Pearl Harbor", and then print all of it so the obviously history challenged "friends of yours might learn something.
Central banking systems cannot survive with countries developing their own energy and their sources of water.
The libor rate (British Interbank lending rate) is the key component in the British Empire in which has a interest rate spread based on countries and people taking out loans to buy oil and trade food and water.
If a country like Iran develops it''s own nuclear energy then it can demand real products that are now under sanctions for their oil instead of worthless paper Federal Reserve Notes.
That''s the issue, always has been always will...commodities for worthless paper ''dollars'' or for real products like airplane parts.
Look at the nuclear deal between the U.S. and India, it''s a joke because they want to force India to rely on imported fiscile material instead of them developing it independently. Why?
To keep India reliant on worthless paper Federal Reserve Notes.
Posted by Nancy_Naive at 10:02 AM : Oct 08, 2008
Actually it more than just half they hate about 70 percent of America because they are not like them.
Well that game is over, India now has the brain power, and is now breaking out from British tactics, they already have nuclear power and nuclear weapons, and in the north are all the minerals they need, the power plants are being built now, with help from Japan, Korea, and other countries with the architectural expertise to build very quickly.
The two new power centers, India and China are now coming into their own, and there is nothing the "west" can do to stop them.
Just as Rome fell, so did the British Empire, and now the American empire follows. India and China will have their day, and as it has in the past theirs will also end. Nothing is permanent, and very little is real.
They love America like the Taliban loves Afghanistan. They see anyone that thinks different as an enemy.
Now, the boosh dealing''s with the bin ladens makes a lot of sense.
George Galloway testified in the senate hearing on the Iraq oil for food scandal. "You tube" it, check out his opening statement, every word was undeniable, and he tore Bowman -R., and Levin -D., both new ones. He did mention the Saudis, check it out.
Solid gold.
Because the Democrats, while sleazy, are not quite as sleazy as the Republicans. Bush Sr. dogged McSame, alleging that he fathered a "Black" baby, and this time we notice how Mr. Obama''s relatives are used as anti Obama justification.
Yet the Democrats would not use this public information against any of the Bushes, and as we''re talking about Bush Sr.''s father, there is a direct link.
Perhaps they thought it would actually benefit Bush''s ultra right to know their leader had a close link with their German Messiah.
Posted by brianbwb at 11:00 AM : Oct 08, 2008
They''re too busy laughing at your post about the Republicans starting WWII.
Classic
Great, glad they enjoyed it, now go to the google sites, and really give them something to laugh about.
Or are you afraid of the truth? Oh, that''s right, you all are probably voting McSame, so that question is moot.
Just because Prescott Bush''s companies did business with German companies doesn''t mean he STARTED WORLD WAR II!!
That is just plain delusional.
Laugh at this.
"...Of critical importance in this memo is the portion that reads:
9. It is not believed that in the present state of political opinion the United States government is capable of declaring war against Japan without more ado; and it is barely possible that vigorous action on our part might lead the Japanese to modify their attitude. Therefore, the following course of action is suggested:
A. Make an arrangement with Britain for the use of British bases in the Pacific, particularly Singapore.
B. Make an arrangement with Holland for the use of base facilities and acquisition of supplies in the Dutch East Indies.
C. Give all possible aid to the Chinese government of Chiang-Kai-Shek.
D. Send a division of long range heavy cruisers to the Orient, Philippines, or Singapore.
E. Send two divisions of submarines to the Orient.
F. Keep the main strength of the U.S. fleet now in the Pacific in the vicinity of the Hawaiian Islands.
G. Insist that the Dutch refuse to grant Japanese demands for undue economic concessions, particularly oil.
H. Completely embargo all U.S. trade with Japan, in collaboration with a similar embargo imposed by the British Empire.
10. If by these means Japan could be led to commit an overt act of war, so much the better. At all events we must be fully prepared to accept the threat of war.
- H. McCollum
More on the way.
McCain''s Iran policies will simply give new life to an increasingly unpopular regime. Obama reaches out and inspires the young. (After all a lot of young men in Iran share Obama''s middle name.) Perhaps, Obama is more popular among the young than the current regime of mullahs. With these facts in mind, our best hope of bringing about a regime change in Iran is to stage a regime change in the US.
We need to elect Obama with a landslide.
It is only delusional if it is not true.
"While there is no suggestion that Prescott Bush was sympathetic to the Nazi cause, the documents reveal that the firm he worked for, Brown Brothers Harriman (BBH), acted as a US base for the German industrialist, Fritz Thyssen, who helped finance Hitler in the 1930s before falling out with him at the end of the decade. The Guardian has seen evidence that shows Bush was the director of the New York-based Union Banking Corporation (UBC) that represented Thyssen''s US interests and he continued to work for the bank after America entered the war."
In short, those who helped Hitler rise to the chancellery of Germany are guilty of causing WW2.
Still laughing?
Are your "friends" still laughing?
I have referenced just a small bit of the mountain of evidence for my point, where is the evidence for your refutation?
Don''t have any? Then it seems you are the delusional one...
Let me see if I have this straight. A few naval intelligence officers debate what will happen if Japan attacks or England folds. One suggested goading Japan into war. FDR (the DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT) even sees the memo, so this makes the Republicans responsible for WWII.
Got it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by Petro49L at 11:20 AM : Oct 08, 2008
You''ve got that part right. This recession is due to the rise in oil. people can''t pay their morgages because opec took the money ouit of there pockets
You almost have it, FDR not only saw the memo, but acted upon it, every suggestion was followed.
Bottom line is that the major parts of WW2 were in Europe and the Far East, and the policies of the Republicans, dictated as usual by wealthy industrialists, was the major factor leading to both.
The evidence is public information and irrefutable, and a small bit of it is right before your eyes, so are your friends still yukking it up?
Reading is fundamental, try this one again.
"...10. If by these means Japan could be led to commit an overt act of war, so much the better. At all events we must be fully prepared to accept the threat of war." - H. McCollum
"If Japan attacks"? Read this one slowly, you can move your lips if that helps.
The McCollum Memo had NOTHING to do with Republicans, yet you presented it to back up the claim that Republicans started WWII.
"Bottom line is that the major parts of WW2 were in Europe and the Far East, and the policies of the Republicans, dictated as usual by wealthy industrialists, was the major factor leading to both."
Now you have completely changed your assertion by making a blanket statement backed-up by nothing. BTW, FDR (the DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT) began his term in 1933.
Face it, Brian, you''ve got nothing, but it was fun.
Worse, this is the logical conclusion of a sequence of events that started in Eisenhower''s day, the S.E. Asian debacle, from 1956 to 1973, which war profiteers used to rob the treasury of $13 trillion, forced Nixon to sell the US gold from the treasury, because the FED printed bills just to keep currency in circulation. In order to succeed, he needed a new standard, so he convinced OPEC to accept US dollars only in payment for oil. His wage /price controls (a bit socialist for a GOP-er) held hyperinflation in check, but expired during Carter''s term, so Carter got the blame for high inflation.
Enter Reagan, trickle down, union busting, the expatriation of the automakers factories, Iran Contra, and other corruptions that further weakened the US middle class.
Bush''s wholesale theft of $3 trillion for his lie-based wars, and now the last stage of the corporate feeding frenzy, the little fish are all finished, so now they start to eat each other.
The dollar has shrunk steadily since August 1972, now worth only 22% of its value then, this has actually been a 34 year contraction, or recession.
Again, reading is fundamental. Where in my original post,(repeated so you don''t have to search back) did I use the word Republicans?
Although I will say both parties have actually homogenized since then, but now the Republicans are the party of war.
Seems you are the one changing things. The water here is too deep for you.
Like most neocon war apologists, you seize on irrelevant statements as refutation. The evidence I referenced is public information, and just a tiny bit at that, that backs up my assertion.
You, on the other hand rely on nothing but attempts to deny the existence of the historical evidence, mixed with supposition and irrelevancies for yours.
Like I said reading is fundamental, try it. Not just what I posted, but look around, there is much information that you either do not know, or don''t wish to know, but your personal preference is irrelevant to those of us who actually have memories, and also listened in class.
Perhaps you fear true freedom, but many of us don''t. knowledge will set you free.
Although I will say both parties have actually homogenized since then, but now the Republicans are the party of war.
Seems you are the one changing things. The water here is too deep for you.
Posted by brianbwb at 12:46 PM : Oct 08, 2008
Gee....maybe "BUSH" had something to do with it! The memo you posted was completely irrelevant. If the Republicans are the "party of war" when FDR was in office 8 years before the start of WWII then you are smoking crack.
You make these assertions on these boards to make yourself feel smart, then when someone challenges your posts, you start spinning like a record. Go ahead & keep posting your opinions & keep trying to portray them as "facts." It''s quite funny.
Although I will say both parties have actually homogenized since then, but now the Republicans are the party of war.
Seems you are the one changing things. The water here is too deep for you.
Posted by brianbwb at 12:46 PM : Oct 08, 2008
Gee....maybe "BUSH" had something to do with it! The memo you posted was completely irrelevant. If the Republicans are the "party of war" when FDR was in office 8 years before the start of WWII then you are smoking crack.
You make these assertions on these boards to make yourself feel smart, then when someone challenges your posts, you start spinning like a record. Go ahead & keep posting your opinions & keep trying to portray them as "facts." It''s quite funny.
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 58 Comments