Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

US Assessment - Pakistan unaware of Laden's Location

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Vinod2070
    replied
    Originally posted by Agnostic Muslim View Post
    I am sure the official investigation into the OBL compound and the material obtained from there had significantly more facts and evidence available to them that we are not privy to, and yet that same investigation concluded that Pakistani institutions were not aware of OBL's compound, as is stated in the OP and pointed out in subsequent posts.
    Lack of smoking gun evidence doesn't necessarily mean absence of guilt.

    It is likely also the need for Pakistan's help for the 2014 pullout as well as the famous "bullying from weakness" or "threatening with a trigger to one's own head" as many Americans put it, that may be working.

    But I guess we have both had our say on this issue.

    Credible evidence indicating ISI and PA personnel were killed in those attacks?
    Sure.

    The Cruise missiles the Clinton Administration fired at bin Laden’s camp in Eastern Afghanistan in 1998, after attacks on US embassies in Africa, killed several militants — and the team of ISI agents training them.
    Is Pakistan helping Haqqanis attack US in Afghanistan? – The Express Tribune

    There are many more. Just two of them here. Again google is your friend.

    In 1998, the Clinton administration launched cruise missiles at jihadist training camps in Afghanistan in retaliation for al-Qaeda’s bombing of two American embassies in East Africa. The missiles missed Osama bin Laden but killed a team of ISI agents training militants at the camps.
    Taliban - Topics - Macleans.ca

    Right, and yet you claimed above that Pakistani intelligence and military personnel chose to remain to be killed at the same camps. You are contradicting yourself while constructing/regurgitating these nonsensical claims.
    Well, I agree there is a bit of contradiction but there is a bigger contraction in Pakistan being a victim of terror and still never letting go of it as a weapon of choice for others.

    I will also suggest the book "Engaging India" by Strobe Talbot. A full read will be good but you may just choose to browse page 116 and see the factual account.

    Given that Pakistan's support for the Taliban was no secret, I am not sure why you would be surprised that Pakistan would evacuate any of its military/intelligence personnel that had not been able to leave prior to the invasion. That particular airlift was in fact approved by the US.
    Taliban and AQ were hands in glove at the time. OBL was among those favored and used even in domestic issues by Musharraf. This link should help.

    Talibanization of the heart | Pak Tea House

    You can go a few more years earlier in 1984 when General Zia sent his notorious lashkar led and supervised by no other than Brigadier Musharraf aka General Musharraf, the enlightened, the moderate. This proto-Talibanic lashkar not just burnt alive hundreds of the Shias of Gilgit, it burnt alive the animals too owned by the Shias. Of course, this can be justified because those animals were not human, Muslim, or Pakistani.
    OBL was supposedly a part of this "proto-Talibanic lashkar".

    I have looked, and I have found nothing to support your position. I am not going to spend hours 'googling' the veracity of your claims - since you are the one making them, I assume you already have the necessary facts/links to substantiate your claims and can easily post those links. If you choose not to, I can only assume that your claims do not have any credible facts supporting them.
    Well, from my perspective, you can only take the horse to the water and no further.

    Dooley is an extremist, and IMO should be classified in the same category as Nidal should have been put in (prior to his shooting rampage). I and almost all the other Americans I know do not support any 'internment plan' and will continue to oppose current US foreign policy in the Middle East and South Asia, along with illegal US military tactics such as drone strikes.
    Even we don't support all American policies in South Asia. Those policies are made by Americans for promoting American interests and we feel they have been responsible for propping up an irresponsible state, allowing it continue it's unsustainable posture as they "know" they will be saved from themselves by its benefactors, chiefly America.

    We feel those policies have resulted in much pain and many deaths in the region. They have continued for decades and are still continuing. Of course, we in the region have to share a large part of the blame as well for allowing this o happen.

    The catch is in your refusal to let go of your anti-Pakistan and anti-Muslim hatred and prejudice, and your refusal to stop distorting history and facts to demonize the aforementioned entities.
    That is a lazy way to look at it. I just want the terror coming in to stop. Rest, I am ok with any kind of relations from cold wary peace to the best neighborly relations in a few decades time. I have nothing against the ordinary people who are themselves suffering because of the country having become a "salaamati riyasat" (security state) but the last thing they have is "salaamati".
    Last edited by Vinod2070; 22 Dec 12,, 05:16.

    Leave a comment:


  • Agnostic Muslim
    replied
    Originally posted by Vinod2070 View Post
    Not really.

    You can be sure your NSA must have had tonnes of facts to make the assessment he did. Privy as he must have been to a lot that you and me are not.
    I am sure the official investigation into the OBL compound and the material obtained from there had significantly more facts and evidence available to them that we are not privy to, and yet that same investigation concluded that Pakistani institutions were not aware of OBL's compound, as is stated in the OP and pointed out in subsequent posts.

    Including the fact that the missile attacks on AQ camps in 1998 had killed many ISI agents and PA men.
    Credible evidence indicating ISI and PA personnel were killed in those attacks?
    And that OBL escaped because he was suspected of having been informed by Pakistanis.
    Right, and yet you claimed above that Pakistani intelligence and military personnel chose to remain to be killed at the same camps. You are contradicting yourself while constructing/regurgitating these nonsensical claims.
    And that many PA men were airlifted from Afghanistan after 2001 US attacks.
    Given that Pakistan's support for the Taliban was no secret, I am not sure why you would be surprised that Pakistan would evacuate any of its military/intelligence personnel that had not been able to leave prior to the invasion. That particular airlift was in fact approved by the US.
    Google is your friend and there is a lot of info out there.

    You just have to look.
    I have looked, and I have found nothing to support your position. I am not going to spend hours 'googling' the veracity of your claims - since you are the one making them, I assume you already have the necessary facts/links to substantiate your claims and can easily post those links. If you choose not to, I can only assume that your claims do not have any credible facts supporting them.

    Anyway, your country does seem to have a lot of contingency plans, both domestic and international, to deal with exigencies. Some of them seem a bit extreme to us from the subcontinent, like the supposed internment plans and what Colonel Dooley taught at your military academies and what apparently is still your country's policy.
    Dooley is an extremist, and IMO should be classified in the same category as Nidal should have been put in (prior to his shooting rampage). I and almost all the other Americans I know do not support any 'internment plan' and will continue to oppose current US foreign policy in the Middle East and South Asia, along with illegal US military tactics such as drone strikes.

    But then you are living in the only Superpower and we are not able to even put a firm end to the incessant and vile terror coming from our ever obsessed neighbor. There has to be a catch somewhere.
    The catch is in your refusal to let go of your anti-Pakistan and anti-Muslim hatred and prejudice, and your refusal to stop distorting history and facts to demonize the aforementioned entities.
    Last edited by Agnostic Muslim; 22 Dec 12,, 01:13.

    Leave a comment:


  • Vinod2070
    replied
    Originally posted by Agnostic Muslim View Post
    Correct, completely unsubstantiated opinions by the 'NSA to four presidents', refuted by the official investigation account as pointed out in the OP of this thread and my subsequent posts.
    Not really.

    You can be sure your NSA must have had tonnes of facts to make the assessment he did. Privy as he must have been to a lot that you and me are not.

    Including the fact that the missile attacks on AQ camps in 1998 had killed many ISI agents and PA men.

    And that OBL escaped because he was suspected of having been informed by Pakistanis.

    And that many PA men were airlifted from Afghanistan after 2001 US attacks. And thousands of Pakistanis were killed by Dostum's men. Many were packed in containers.

    Actually even you and me know of these two and many more. He must know much more.

    The material in that link at least does not provide the Army's explanation on why Nidal was not interviewed and why he was promoted despite the concerns about him. The excerpt in there that does specifically mention 'political correctness' as a possible cause for Nadal's promotion is in fact yet another 'opinion' - that of Rep. Duncan

    While a case can certainly be made against promoting Nidal given his erratic behavior and performance reviews, I am not convinced the same evidence (poor performance and erratic behavior) could be used to dismiss Nidal from the military, in which case he would have probably carried out his attack somewhere else.

    What does appear to be a huge oversight on the part of investigators is Nidal's communication with Awlaki, which should have resulted in him being placed under surveillance. Why the Army played a role in the investigation being prematurely ended, through providing a 'sanitized report', is something for the US Army to explain.

    The investigation into Nidal and his actions leading up to his shooting spree point more towards institutional incompetence than political correctness. The man was communicating with a known terrorist leader and he was expressing support for violent acts - I am not sure how those two 'flags' could be ignored, and you certainly won't find me arguing in favor of ignoring such 'red flags'.

    That said, if you want to argue that Muslim personnel in the US military that merely oppose US foreign policy as a matter of principle (and don't communicate with terrorists or support acts of violence against innocents) should be 'flagged', then your position would be problematic to say the least, and arguing against it would not be an example of 'political correctness'.
    Google is your friend and there is a lot of info out there.

    You just have to look.

    Anyway, your country does seem to have a lot of contingency plans, both domestic and international, to deal with exigencies. Some of them seem a bit extreme to us from the subcontinent, like the supposed internment plans and what Colonel Dooley taught at your military academies and what apparently is still your country's policy.

    But then you are living in the only Superpower and we are not able to even put a firm end to the incessant and vile terror coming from our ever obsessed neighbor. There has to be a catch somewhere.
    Last edited by Vinod2070; 21 Dec 12,, 15:23.

    Leave a comment:


  • Agnostic Muslim
    replied
    Originally posted by Vinod2070 View Post
    OK. Though obviously the doubt is much more about the intention than the actual failure in locating him. Here is a video of a NSA to four presidents expressing his "opinions".


    But of course, nothing new for me to say here than you have been discussing already.
    Correct, completely unsubstantiated opinions by the 'NSA to four presidents', refuted by the official investigation account as pointed out in the OP of this thread and my subsequent posts.


    OK, I will just share a few links but there are many more on the web. I thought this has become common knowledge by now.

    So I guess it's a bit more than just my opinion.

    Experts: Warnings ignored in Hood shootings - Army News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Army Times
    The material in that link at least does not provide the Army's explanation on why Nidal was not interviewed and why he was promoted despite the concerns about him. The excerpt in there that does specifically mention 'political correctness' as a possible cause for Nadal's promotion is in fact yet another 'opinion' - that of Rep. Duncan
    While a case can certainly be made against promoting Nidal given his erratic behavior and performance reviews, I am not convinced the same evidence (poor performance and erratic behavior) could be used to dismiss Nidal from the military, in which case he would have probably carried out his attack somewhere else.

    What does appear to be a huge oversight on the part of investigators is Nidal's communication with Awlaki, which should have resulted in him being placed under surveillance. Why the Army played a role in the investigation being prematurely ended, through providing a 'sanitized report', is something for the US Army to explain.

    The investigation into Nidal and his actions leading up to his shooting spree point more towards institutional incompetence than political correctness. The man was communicating with a known terrorist leader and he was expressing support for violent acts - I am not sure how those two 'flags' could be ignored, and you certainly won't find me arguing in favor of ignoring such 'red flags'.

    That said, if you want to argue that Muslim personnel in the US military that merely oppose US foreign policy as a matter of principle (and don't communicate with terrorists or support acts of violence against innocents) should be 'flagged', then your position would be problematic to say the least, and arguing against it would not be an example of 'political correctness'.

    Leave a comment:


  • Vinod2070
    replied
    Originally posted by Agnostic Muslim View Post
    Which was a response to arguments trying to paint the Pakistani security failure in locating OBL prior to the Abbottabad raid as something 'unique' that was somehow 'evidence of Pakistani institutional complicity in sheltering OBL'. I merely pointed out that the US, with far greater economic and technological resources, and far better domestic law enforcement and political institutions, suffered from similar 'security and intelligence failures' as Pakistan, and a whole industry of conspiracy theories about the involvement of the CIA and/or Mossad in the 9/11 attacks has come about because of conspiracy theories and speculation.
    OK. Though obviously the doubt is much more about the intention than the actual failure in locating him. Here is a video of a NSA to four presidents expressing his "opinions".



    But of course, nothing new for me to say here than you have been discussing already.

    What were the signals suggesting Nidal would commit a terrorist attack and why were they ignored? On the latter, I would like to know the official version of events from the investigations into Nidal rather than your opinions that 'political correctness and pressure from institutions like CAIR' were the reason those signals were missed/ignored.
    OK, I will just share a few links but there are many more on the web. I thought this has become common knowledge by now.

    So I guess it's a bit more than just my opinion.

    Experts: Warnings ignored in Hood shootings - Army News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Army Times

    The Army promoted Hassan despite reports from his colleagues that he made repeated comments sympathizing with Islamic extremists in general and Osama bin Laden in particular.
    Some troops may have been reluctant to express concern about Hassan’s remarks for fear of being accused of having a bias against Muslims, said Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C.


    “Service men and women are discouraged from pointing out things that they see … that should raise red flags,” Duncan said “They are scared they will be labeled an Islamophobe.”


    Duncan said he does not understand why some officials labeled Hasan’s shooting an incident of workplace violence rather than terrorism.


    Hasan is accused of using two handguns and shouting “Allahu Akbar” as he shot 13 people at Fort Hood on Nov. 5, 2009. He is facing a court-martial that could result in the death penalty.
    Nidal Hasan Exactly the Man Many Knew Him to Be | World of Psychology

    Army Maj. Nidal Hasan was exactly the kind of man many people knew him to be. And that’s why they continually promoted him and sent him some place else. Because nobody, apparently, was willing to intervene despite many warning signs about his behavior.

    Those are the findings from the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs. They found that the massacre allegedly carried out by Nidal Hasan could have have been prevented.

    Had just one person acted on the information many different people had, the tragedy that occurred at Fort Hood on November 5, 2009 may have been prevented.
    The officers who kept Hasan in the military and moved him steadily along knew full well of his problematic behavior,” the report found. “As the officer who assigned Hasan to Fort Hood (and later decided to deploy Hasan to Afghanistan) admitted to an officer at Fort Hood, ‘you’re getting our worst.’ “

    Even the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) knew about Hasan, because he came to their attention due to his constant emailing back and forth with radical Islamic cleric Anwar al-Awlaki in Yemen. But did the FBI tell the Army? Apparently not:
    The FBI conducted an “all too cursory” investigation into Hasan’s activities and left unresolved a disputed assessment between Joint Terrorism Task Forces in San Diego and in Washington, D.C., over the potential threat that he may have posed. The report found repeated delays in the FBI inquiry into Hasan that ended when an analyst mistakenly relied on Hasan’s “sanitized officer evaluation reports” to concluded that he posed no danger.



    Turns out Ft. Hood mass-murderer Major Nidal Hasan showed a few warning signs | The Daily Caller


    A Senate report on the Fort Hood shooting is sharply critical of the FBI’s failure to recognize warning signs that an Army psychiatrist had become an Islamist extremist and amounted to a “ticking time bomb.”

    The report concluded that both the Defense Department and the FBI had sufficient information to detect that Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan had been radicalized to violent extremism, but they failed to understand and act on it. It said the FBI’s top leaders must exercise more control over local field offices and put to better use the intelligence analysts who should have been able to connect the dots.


    Hasan advanced to a two-year fellowship at USUHS [Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences]…Less than a month into the fellowship, in August 2007, Hasan gave another off-topic presentation on a violent Islamist extremist subject instead of on a health care subject. This time, Hasan’s presentation was so controversial that the instructor had to stop it after just two minutes when the class erupted in protest to Hasan’s views. The presentation was entitled, Is the War on Terror a War on Islam: An Islamic Perspective? Hasan’s proposal for this presentation promoted this troubling thesis: that U.S. military operations are a war against lslam rather than based on non-religious security considerations. Hasan’s presentation accorded with the narrative of violent Islamist extremism that the West is at war with Islam. Hasan’s paper was full of empathetic and supportive recitation of other violent Islamist extremist views, including defense of Osama bin Laden, slanted historical accounts blaming the United States for problems in the Middle East, and arguments that anger at the United States is justifiable…The instructor who stopped the presentation said that Hasan was sweating, quite nervous, and agitated after being confronted by the class.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tronic
    replied
    Originally posted by Blademaster View Post
    The same thing could be said for Congress when they were pulling off these antics when BJP was in power. So yours is a non starter.


    Oh really, so nice of you to remember the activities of Congress back during the years of 2000 to 2004.

    I would say that this point is just in addition to what LT has said. It doesn't really change his point. Our opposition, whichever party that may be at the time, BJP or Congress, acts the same.

    Leave a comment:


  • Blademaster
    replied
    Originally posted by lemontree View Post
    I doubt that very much, BJPs posturing for the show window and what they know is good for the country is different.


    BJP was the first to propose and get in FDI, so they can hardly complain. They need a stick to beat the ruling party and so they use any pretext.
    The same thing could be said for Congress when they were pulling off these antics when BJP was in power. So yours is a non starter.



    The opposition tends to disrupt all Parliamentary work and ensures that no legislation happens, to further their own politican ends.
    The ruling party has used the greed and legal tangles of the regional parties to push through much needed legislation.

    The opposition is an important part in the checks and balances of a democracy, but our opposition behaves like a spoilt brat.

    .
    Oh really, so nice of you to remember the activities of Congress back during the years of 2000 to 2004.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tronic
    replied
    Originally posted by Agnostic Muslim View Post
    Good luck with the exams.
    Thanks mate.

    Leave a comment:


  • Agnostic Muslim
    replied
    Originally posted by Vinod2070 View Post
    You are of course right.

    I was just responding to your point:
    Which was a response to arguments trying to paint the Pakistani security failure in locating OBL prior to the Abbottabad raid as something 'unique' that was somehow 'evidence of Pakistani institutional complicity in sheltering OBL'. I merely pointed out that the US, with far greater economic and technological resources, and far better domestic law enforcement and political institutions, suffered from similar 'security and intelligence failures' as Pakistan, and a whole industry of conspiracy theories about the involvement of the CIA and/or Mossad in the 9/11 attacks has come about because of conspiracy theories and speculation.

    How exactly can it be dealt more effectively (to your satisfaction) without also attractive negative attention from some very conscientious individuals and organizations (like CAIR)?

    As an example, let's take major Nidal Hasan. You can of course make the same point about him. He was trained by the US army and he lived right there.

    He was also very obviously a fanatic and oozing signals to that effect. So many of his colleagues and superiors could sense that.

    No one dared to do anything about it. He even got his promotions as everybody was politically correct and afraid of the repercussions and accusations of Islamophobia that will be levied against anyone who dares speak the obvious.

    So how can non Muslim countries realistically deal with these issues while not offending innocent people within Muslim communities?

    Is that even realistically possible?

    Should they bother?
    What were the signals suggesting Nidal would commit a terrorist attack and why were they ignored? On the latter, I would like to know the official version of events from the investigations into Nidal rather than your opinions that 'political correctness and pressure from institutions like CAIR' were the reason those signals were missed/ignored.
    Last edited by Agnostic Muslim; 10 Dec 12,, 20:30.

    Leave a comment:


  • Vinod2070
    replied
    Originally posted by Agnostic Muslim View Post
    I assume US Law enforcement and intelligence is doing what it should be, given the numerous cases, known of publicly, in which potential terrorist attacks have been thwarted.
    You are of course right.

    I was just responding to your point:

    And the 9/11 hijackers lived, trained, received funding and carried out their attacks in the US ...
    How exactly can it be dealt more effectively (to your satisfaction) without also attractive negative attention from some very conscientious individuals and organizations (like CAIR)?

    As an example, let's take major Nidal Hasan. You can of course make the same point about him. He was trained by the US army and he lived right there.

    He was also very obviously a fanatic and oozing signals to that effect. So many of his colleagues and superiors could sense that.

    No one dared to do anything about it. He even got his promotions as everybody was politically correct and afraid of the repercussions and accusations of Islamophobia that will be levied against anyone who dares speak the obvious.

    So how can non Muslim countries realistically deal with these issues while not offending innocent people within Muslim communities?

    Is that even realistically possible?

    Should they bother?

    Leave a comment:


  • Agnostic Muslim
    replied
    Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    Let me get this straight.

    You want something you can't use; don't need; can't afford; will only hinder you; invite legal spies into your nuclear facilities; interview your nuclear scientists including weaponeers (to make sure everything is kosher) ... just so that you keep up with the Jones in India?
    Pakistan can operate/use NPP's, as demonstrated by KANUPP and Chashma. NPP's also offer Pakistan an opportunity to diversify its power generation away from the use of fossil fuels (Pakistan is also investing in wind and, to a lesser degree, solar). With respect to 'legal spies', I believe Pakistan is already required to invite them into our civilian nuclear facilities given that they are under IAEA safeguards.

    Leave a comment:


  • anil
    replied
    lemontree, these questions are simple and they have simple answers. You only have to use your brain.

    All parties say a lot of things but the party's action part determines its actual intent. How do we know that BJP is against FDI? because they voted against it. Aroon shourie is the my baap of disinvestment and if the BJP wanted it then it would have been done already.

    If you look clearly, both FDI and the nuke deal have no actual consent or consensus in reality. This is what makes them unreliable. In simple words, the bills brought in by the incumbent regime are valid only till a regime change.

    But it is something more important than congress. More than half a century of congress rule achieved through coalition politics is a perfect case against democracy. The viability of democracy lies with its people. I'll just say this... a coup of any kind will have the peoples blessings.

    Originally posted by lemontree View Post
    On what grounds do you call him a donkey?...
    Karan Thapars shows are nothing more than a demonstration of polished english between two equal elitist snobs lacking any kind of substance. The entire 30-60mins performance is just too comical.

    Leave a comment:


  • lemontree
    replied
    Originally posted by anil View Post
    Double Edge,
    The india US nuke deal might be scrapped or might go into a permanent limbo over discussions if the BJP comes to power.
    I doubt that very much, BJPs posturing for the show window and what they know is good for the country is different.

    I see a similar happening with the FDI. The division is that strong and there will be revenge.
    BJP was the first to propose and get in FDI, so they can hardly complain. They need a stick to beat the ruling party and so they use any pretext.

    Recall how the SP came to power and undid almost everything done by the BSP.
    What did the SP undo?...SP has only ordered probes for activities during BSP's rule.

    This is what happens when a so-called majority party storms its bills by exploiting coalition politics.
    The opposition tends to disrupt all Parliamentary work and ensures that no legislation happens, to further their own politican ends.
    The ruling party has used the greed and legal tangles of the regional parties to push through much needed legislation.

    The opposition is an important part in the checks and balances of a democracy, but our opposition behaves like a spoilt brat.

    And oh yes, Karan Thapar is a donkey
    On what grounds do you call him a donkey?...
    Last edited by lemontree; 10 Dec 12,, 06:52.

    Leave a comment:


  • Agnostic Muslim
    replied
    Originally posted by Tronic View Post
    No it hasn't. I'm in the middle of my final exams so I just don't have the time to respond. I'll get to it in a few days.
    Good luck with the exams.

    Take your time. :)

    Leave a comment:


  • Tronic
    replied
    Originally posted by Agnostic Muslim View Post
    You are late to the conversation - Tronic's (and others) characterization of the US statement (that is the subject of this thread) has been corrected.
    No it hasn't. I'm in the middle of my final exams so I just don't have the time to respond. I'll get to it in a few days.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X