U.S. Hostage Warren Weinstein Pleas For Obama'S Help In Video

[News_Editor]

U.S. hostage Warren Weinstein pleas for Obama's help in video < br /> 2012-05-09 07:56:47 GMT+7 (ICT) WASHINGTON, D.C. (BNO NEWS) -- An American aid worker who was abducted by al-Qaeda militants in Pakistan last year has pleaded in an online video with U.S. President Barack Obama to accept the demands of his captors in return for his safe release.The 2-minute video, entitled 'A Message from the Prisoner Warren Weinstein to His President', was distributed by al-Qaeda's media arm As-Sahab on Islamist Internet forums on Monday. Weinstein, 70, was kidnapped at gunpoint from his house in the Pakistani city of Lahore in August 2011."My name is Warren Weinstein. My wife is Elaine and I'd like her to know that I'm fine and well and given all my medications and being taken care of," said Weinstein, who was seated behind a table with a small stack of books and several plates of food. The room was concealed with white sheets.Weinstein, who has worked as the director of Pakistan Initiative for Strategic Development and Competitiveness (PISDAC) at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), directly appealed to Obama to accept al-Qaeda's demand to end airstrikes by the U.S. and its allies in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia and Gaza. They also demand the release of al-Qaeda and Taliban prisoners in U.S. detention."I'd like to talk to President Obama and ask him and beg him that he please accept and respond to the demands of the Mujahideen (Muslim fighters)," Weinstein said in the video. "My life is in your hands, Mr. President. If you accept the demands, I live. If you don't accept the demands, then I die. It's important that you accept the demands and act quickly and don't delay."While it is impossible to know whether Weinstein was being forced to read out a prepared statement by his captors, his message then continued to become more critical towards Obama. "I know that you have two daughters that you enjoy. You enjoy, you love them, you spend time with them, but I get the feeling that you are not paying any attention or care about my problem or my needs," he said. "And you are not paying attention and you don't give much importance to my situation."Weinstein pointed out that he is an American citizen who has worked in public service for the U.S. government for many years, and said he hopes his country will now look after him by meeting the demands of al-Qaeda. "I think that it is important that you act quickly. The demands of the Mujahideen are not difficult. They are according to Islamic law. They're easy. If you respond to them then I will live and hopefully rejoin my family and also rejoin my children, my two daughters, like you enjoy your two daughters," he said. "But it is very important that you act quickly and I'm now waiting for your response."Responding to the video's release, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said Obama was aware of it but has not seen the video. Carney and other U.S. officials ruled out they would consider agreeing to the demands. "The U.S. government will continue making every effort to see Mr. Weinstein released safety to his family, but we cannot and will not negotiate with al-Qaeda," he said. Meanwhile, U.S. State Department spokesman Mark Toner said the U.S. government has continued to work on the case despite the deteriorating relations between the U.S. and Pakistan. "We have called, and continue to call for his immediate release, and we continue to cooperate closely with Pakistani authorities on the ongoing investigation," he said. "And we're obviously also in close contact with Mr. Weinstein's family, offering appropriate consular assistance as they requested."Weinstein is the first private American citizen to have been taken hostage by terrorists in Pakistan since journalist Daniel Pearl was kidnapped in Karachi in 2002. He was tortured and subsequently beheaded on video before being left in a shallow grave. His death caused a worldwide movement in favor of journalists' protection and freedom of the press.

-- © BNO News All rights reserved 2012-05-09

[GentlemanJim]

I fear this old man who has tried to help the poor people of Pakistan is going to meet a very violent end. I have no reason to think they will treat him any different to Daniel Pearl. I also find it sad in a case like this that when a man is pleading for his life to the President, even if there is nothing the President can do in terms of negotiating with the captors, that the White House spokesman says 'The President is aware of the video but has not seen it'. Shame.

[Steely Dan]

If Obama had any balls he would reply that if the hostage is not released unharmed he will order drone attacks at double the current frequency and will bring forward the trials of those held at Gitmo and expedite execution for those that are guilty of sufficient a crime to warrant it.

Violence is the only language these dregs understand and they should be made to realize who is capable of dishing the most out.

[Colin Yai]

Yeah Dan ,of course this poor man is doomed, that is unless Obama caves in to their outlandish "requests" ,which means only one thing , more kidnaps and more demands, like you I firmly believe there is only one solution to this age old problem ,let these "people" know in no uncertain terms that retribution will follow with devastating results for both them and "their kind" , appeasement is only viewed as a sign of weakness and a prelude to further insane demands .

Edited May 9, 2012 by Colin Yai

[Morch]

If Obama had any balls he would reply that if the hostage is not released unharmed he will order drone attacks at double the current frequency

For that there will be a need of double the current number of targets (unless you're talking mindless carpet bombing - not very likely to accomplish anything).

I doubt the number of attacks is limited by budget or "holding back" - if there's a viable target, it probably gets attacked. The more you carry out those things, the better the opposition is at keeping out of harms way.

There's no magic solution here. At least nothing that would help this poor guy.

[Colin Yai]

I concur Morch, the guys chances of survival are remote, however they should be made quite aware that there is going to be a heavy price to pay for their "Jihad " I remember the words of Admiral Yamamoto after the Japs had bombed pearl harbour ," I feel all we have done is woken a slumbering Giant and filled him with a terrible resolve" , this thinking should be brought to bear with Al Qaeda and their "followers" that they will be made to answer in mega proportions for their "activity's".

Edited May 9, 2012 by Colin Yai

[flying]

I concur Morch, the guys chances of survival are remote, however they should be made quite aware that there is going to be a heavy price to pay for their "Jihad " I remember the words of Admiral Yamamoto after the Japs had bombed pearl harbour ," I feel all we have done is woken a slumbering Giant and filled him with a terrible resolve" , this thinking should be brought to bear with Al Qaeda and their "followers" that they will be made to answer in mega proportions for their "activity's".

You concur & yet everything you said is in disagreement with what he said

[Steely Dan]

Of course yes, in reality drone attacks probably do get ordered for every viable target. However in other ways we send very mixed messages such as considering prisoner releases in exchange for promises of future good conduct. The issue is the terrorists can and do act with impunity knowing they will incur no further sanction for their deeds. This is what has to stop. Why not cancel any prisoner releases unless the U.S citizen is released. Also as per Mossad put a death sentence on any terrorists responsible and hunt them down however long it takes. Finally the U.S gives Pakistan billions in aid yet they cynically play both sides and show little resolve to sort out the situation themselves, why not cut aid to Pakistan unless their army rolls it's sleeves up and crushes the Taliban, you are in effect then demonstrating that there are indeed consequences attached to hostage taking.

[Colin Yai]

Oh Yeah Flying ,read again ,I only agreed that the Chances of the guy surviving is remote , were did I agree or disagree on the rest of Morch's post.??, do you not savvy the word "however??

Edited May 9, 2012 by Colin Yai

[flying]

Oh Yeah Flying ,read again ,I only agreed that the Chances of the guy surviving is remote , were did I agree on the rest of Morch's post.??, do you not savvy the word "however??

Yes I was quite aware of the however

Yet you still managed to miss the point of his post.

Not only is it impossible to make a tribal area/ guerrilla warfare type scenario pay on a large scale...you then went on to use the Yamamoto analogy in a completely backwards fashion.

Mai Bpen Rai carry on

Edited May 9, 2012 by flying

[Colin Yai]

Oh Yeah Flying ,read again ,I only agreed that the Chances of the guy surviving is remote , were did I agree on the rest of Morch's post.??, do you not savvy the word "however??

Yes I was quite aware of the however

Yet you still managed to miss the point of his post.

Not only is it impossible to make a tribal area/ guerrilla warfare type scenario pay on a large scale...you then went on to use the Yamamoto analogy in a completely backwards fashion.

Mai Bpen Rai carry on

So in essence Flying what you are Implying is that more cannot be done in this war against terrorism?, that,s it is it?

[koheesti]

If Obama had any balls he would reply that if the hostage is not released unharmed he will order drone attacks at double the current frequency and will bring forward the trials of those held at Gitmo and expedite execution for those that are guilty of sufficient a crime to warrant it.

Violence is the only language these dregs understand and they should be made to realize who is capable of dishing the most out.

Targeting the fighters won't help this guy. Gotta target the ones who have influence over them. I am reminded of a story I heard about 20 or so years ago when hostages were being taken in Beirut. As the story goes, a Soviet diplomat was taken hostage, then the KGB took the son of some higher up and castrated him before returning him. The Soviet diplomat was soon released. Now, this is probably urban legend (although I don't remember Russians ever being taken hostage), but there is likely some value in the concept. Find some powerful sheikh in Qatar/Saudi/wherever who is known to support these terrorists but he himself and his family are vulnerable. Take it from there.

[flying]

So in essence Flying what you are Implying is that more cannot be done in this war against terrorism?, that,s it is it?

Basically Colin....John Wayne was an actor............say all you want about making them pay.

What would you call a win in Afghanistan/Pakistan etc?

Because I will lay any bet you want that in the end it will be the same.

Like years ago when it was over...Charlie was sitting in the rice paddies in his black pajamas laughing.

Parents who lost sons & daughters were crying...vets went home without limbs & cancers caused by the poisons they dropped in large quantities from the skies.

For what? The rich got richer supplying tools of the trade.....that is all

Yet what ever happened to the bad guys that they who risked their lives spent decades chasing?

Funny they dont seem so bad once they left.

There is no war on terror...........

Edited May 9, 2012 by flying

[Colin Yai]

I'm in no way saying there should be a full scale war, something far more subtle may work far better, like a cross between Dans #8 post and Koheesti's #12 Could well have the desired results ,of course if you want to throw the towel in and announce they cannot be beaten that's your prerogative. And In closing maybe you should look up the word Jihad !!.

Edited May 9, 2012 by Colin Yai

[Colin Yai]

If Obama had any balls he would reply that if the hostage is not released unharmed he will order drone attacks at double the current frequency and will bring forward the trials of those held at Gitmo and expedite execution for those that are guilty of sufficient a crime to warrant it.

Violence is the only language these dregs understand and they should be made to realize who is capable of dishing the most out.

Targeting the fighters won't help this guy. Gotta target the ones who have influence over them. I am reminded of a story I heard about 20 or so years ago when hostages were being taken in Beirut. As the story goes, a Soviet diplomat was taken hostage, then the KGB took the son of some higher up and castrated him before returning him. The Soviet diplomat was soon released. Now, this is probably urban legend (although I don't remember Russians ever being taken hostage), but there is likely some value in the concept. Find some powerful sheikh in Qatar/Saudi/wherever who is known to support these terrorists but he himself and his family are vulnerable. Take it from there.

Now Now Koheesti, one must not stoop so low ,not in the terms of the Geneva Convention (and all that crap) old boy!, we have to fight this war according to "the rules" just like they do!.

[koheesti]

If Obama had any balls he would reply that if the hostage is not released unharmed he will order drone attacks at double the current frequency and will bring forward the trials of those held at Gitmo and expedite execution for those that are guilty of sufficient a crime to warrant it.

Violence is the only language these dregs understand and they should be made to realize who is capable of dishing the most out.

Targeting the fighters won't help this guy. Gotta target the ones who have influence over them. I am reminded of a story I heard about 20 or so years ago when hostages were being taken in Beirut. As the story goes, a Soviet diplomat was taken hostage, then the KGB took the son of some higher up and castrated him before returning him. The Soviet diplomat was soon released. Now, this is probably urban legend (although I don't remember Russians ever being taken hostage), but there is likely some value in the concept. Find some powerful sheikh in Qatar/Saudi/wherever who is known to support these terrorists but he himself and his family are vulnerable. Take it from there.

Now Now Koheesti, one must not stoop so low ,not in the terms of the Geneva Convention (and all that crap) old boy!, we have to fight this war according to "the rules" just like they do!.

The Geneva Convention applies to combatants and civilians in a war zone, correct? Not to some playboy 20-something thousands of miles away whose daddy has a pet jihadist.

[flying]

of course if you want to throw the towel in and announce they cannot be beaten that's your prerogative.

Not my towel to throw.

But if you want to head over there or send your kids that is your perogative

[flying]

I'm in no way saying there should be a full scale war, something far more subtle may work far better,

??? which is it then? Does it just all depend on the wind direction?

this thinking should be brought to bear with Al Qaeda and their "followers" that they will be made to answer in mega proportions for their "activity's".

Edited May 9, 2012 by flying

[Colin Yai]

If Obama had any balls he would reply that if the hostage is not released unharmed he will order drone attacks at double the current frequency and will bring forward the trials of those held at Gitmo and expedite execution for those that are guilty of sufficient a crime to warrant it.

Violence is the only language these dregs understand and they should be made to realize who is capable of dishing the most out.

Targeting the fighters won't help this guy. Gotta target the ones who have influence over them. I am reminded of a story I heard about 20 or so years ago when hostages were being taken in Beirut. As the story goes, a Soviet diplomat was taken hostage, then the KGB took the son of some higher up and castrated him before returning him. The Soviet diplomat was soon released. Now, this is probably urban legend (although I don't remember Russians ever being taken hostage), but there is likely some value in the concept. Find some powerful sheikh in Qatar/Saudi/wherever who is known to support these terrorists but he himself and his family are vulnerable. Take it from there.

Now Now Koheesti, one must not stoop so low ,not in the terms of the Geneva Convention (and all that crap) old boy!, we have to fight this war according to "the rules" just like they do!.

The Geneva Convention applies to combatants and civilians in a war zone, correct? Not to some playboy 20-something thousands of miles away whose daddy has a pet jihadist.

Nice one!!.

[Colin Yai]

I'm in no way saying there should be a full scale war, something far more subtle may work far better,

??? which is it then? Does it just all depend on the wind direction?

this thinking should be brought to bear with Al Qaeda and their "followers" that they will be made to answer in mega proportions for their "activity's".

Do you not reckon the US withdrawing their billions in Aid to Pakistan or at least the lions share of it until they get off their arse and "pull their weight" against the Taliban would not be making them answer for it in "mega proportions"?? Edited May 9, 2012 by Colin Yai

[flying]

Do you not reckon the US withdrawing their billions in Aid to Pakistan until they get off their arse and "pull their weight" against the Taliban would not be making them answer in "mega proportions"??

Take all the aid the US gives everyone & it does not total what we waste on Israel......Do they listen?

nuff said

PS: Pakistan does not get billions per year

PSS: I am all for pulling US financial aid from all countries at this time in the US financial crisis

Humanitarian aid? Food,Medicine,Clothing etc.......All for it.

Edited May 9, 2012 by flying

[Scott]

Let's keep Israel out of the discussion.

It is bound to derail the topic.

Edit: An off-topic post removed. We are not going to discuss who gets what money.

Stay on-topic.

Edited May 9, 2012 by Scott

[Morch]

It all comes down to what is defined as "success", and a lot of room to maneuver with words. An outcome can easily be perceived as good/bad according to the one phrasing the premise, Also, such things can not usually be gouged without the benefit of time perspective. Something that seems a victory now, may turn out to have unforeseen consequences down the line.

Hitting harder, putting the fear of the Lord (or someone else) unto them, pounding them back to the stone age (well...not that far off anyway) etc etc.... good slogans, doesn't work this way.

If one's going to fight terrorism (or insurgents or whatever), better take a deep breath, and get ready for a long drawn out war, with little in the way of glorious victories and achievements. No magic solutions. Gets somewhat disappointing when it winds down as well - ending up talking with bitter rivals and cutting deals with former "bad guys".

Calling for Moar! of something or the other won't change things. The USA and NATO either accept they are there to stay, or pack off and go home. Nothing will "end" within a pre-defined time frame.

Not saying that staying there is a good decision, probably not. Then again, withdrawing got some downsides as well. Always gets messy once you step into those kinda places.

Cutting aid to Pakistan? What would that achieve? Pushing more generals over to the other side?

They can see a future where the West pulls out, guess they're keeping options open just in case.

Besides, Pakistan got nukes. Don't think nobody wants to worry about those falling into the wrong hands.

Fighting these kinda wars isn't impossible or pointless, exactly. It just requires a long term approach.

[Scott]

Apparently some posters can't read well. You will receive a suspension if you continue to post off-topic.

For those that are new to how this works, the 2nd holiday is longer than the first one.

Stay on the topic of the OP.

[Backwoods]

when a civilian enters a war zone, he knows what could happen, and it is not the bussiness to recue a civilian that went in on his own accord, or to risk a number of troups to help one man! The Us has never given in to negotiations for terrorists. He knew the risks and now want the whole country to come to aid. Stick your hand in fire, your gonna get burnt, so don't cry to mama for help! This not the first citizen ovf many countries to walk into a war zone, and say I'm just here to help! They don't want us there and are taught specificly to target Americans, so I do pity the man, but must side on the better for all

[flying]

Fighting these kinda wars isn't impossible or pointless, exactly. It just requires a long term approach.

Your whole post was well stated

But when I read the last line I would add that the costs have to be looked at these days from a risk/reward viewpoint also.

Because it will in the end be quite pointless if it means speeding up the financial collapse.

History has some very clear lessons especially when dealing in this region.

OBL clearly stated his goal & to watch what now unfolds I would say it is in fact being achieved.

So at the end of the day what really is the reward? What really is the risk?

[Scott]

when a civilian enters a war zone, he knows what could happen, and it is not the bussiness to recue a civilian that went in on his own accord, or to risk a number of troups to help one man! The Us has never given in to negotiations for terrorists. He knew the risks and now want the whole country to come to aid. Stick your hand in fire, your gonna get burnt, so don't cry to mama for help! This not the first citizen ovf many countries to walk into a war zone, and say I'm just here to help! They don't want us there and are taught specificly to target Americans, so I do pity the man, but must side on the better for all

Although he is a civilian, I think it said he was an employee of a branch of the US gov't.

[slapout]

Wish I had a viable solution to the mans (hostage) problem and the demands made. Its hard to deal with fanatics who seemly have no fear of death, on what most of us would call logical dialog/action.

One tiny chip in their armor may have emerged from OBL's demise. He had reportably instructed his family to go to the "Western countries" to get an education, make a life .If these people are considering the future welfare of their families, while carrying out atrocities on their preceived enemies, maybe this is a weakness that could be considered.

I am not proposing we revert back to the time/practice of wiping out 6 or so generations of a mans family for his misdeeds. It does seem at times, the big stick approach may need to be further reaching, while we need to decide "who" gets the carrot.

[Colin Yai]

Wish I had a viable solution to the mans (hostage) problem and the demands made. Its hard to deal with fanatics who seemly have no fear of death, on what most of us would call logical dialog/action.

One tiny chip in their armor may have emerged from OBL's demise. He had reportably instructed his family to go to the "Western countries" to get an education, make a life .If these people are considering the future welfare of their families, while carrying out atrocities on their preceived enemies, maybe this is a weakness that could be considered.

I am not proposing we revert back to the time/practice of wiping out 6 or so generations of a mans family for his misdeeds. It does seem at times, the big stick approach may need to be further reaching, while we need to decide "who" gets the carrot.

Slapout with my usual respect, No fear of death? what a crock of shit ,if thats the case why don't the leaders of these radical; Islamist groups make the supreme sacrifice and set an example for others to follow?, instead of "brainwashing" young uneducated kids that this is the "way to go" and become a "hero" for the cause , the only big time leaders of these Jihadists who have lost their lives for "the cause" have been "taken out" by the Israelis or US pilot less Drones not by their own hand (suicide bombers) !!! Edited May 9, 2012 by Colin Yai

[Morch]

Fighting these kinda wars isn't impossible or pointless, exactly. It just requires a long term approach.

Your whole post was well stated

But when I read the last line I would add that the costs have to be looked at these days from a risk/reward viewpoint also.

Because it will in the end be quite pointless if it means speeding up the financial collapse.

History has some very clear lessons especially when dealing in this region.

OBL clearly stated his goal & to watch what now unfolds I would say it is in fact being achieved.

So at the end of the day what really is the reward? What really is the risk?

Well, like I said - depends how you define "success" or "gain", and what is considered a "loss".

Then again, not that easy to predict future outcomes on that scale. Going on might mess USA economy, withdrawing got a price tag as well.

OBL said a lot things. So?

The USA presence in Afghanistan certainly costs a buck. Can the whole messed up economy be pinned on that fact? Doubtfully. In addition, there are other elements at to consider besides direct effect on the economy (such as, but not limited to, retaining the top dog position, keeping allies in place etc - both come with economic effects as well).

OBL said (or said to have said) a lot of things. So? Not very talkative lately and the same goes for quite a few of his high ups. Looking at the conflict through OBL's lenses can be a little misleading:

There's no mass revolt against foreign presence, no hordes of Jihadis signing up, they are taking punches, they have been betrayed, and it's not a like they are "winning" any more than the Western forces are.

Democracies have a hard time with long drawn conflicts: leadership changes dictates relatively short term policy, election considerations makes public opinion a huge factor, freedom of speech allows for dissent. All good from a general point of view, somewhat limiting from a military perspective.

Fighting a war that drags on and on, without anything "sexy" to show for it, effects all of the above.

Sure that there are costs, and of course they need to be factored in to reach a decision. But economy is but one of those factors. Sticking around is obviously a problematic choice, checking out can have grave results as well. Sometimes it isn't about choosing between good and bad options, but picking the less sucky one, or one which bears more predictable/managable outcomes.