Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 2011

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 28 May 2011 07:17

Mango Abdul is humorous; Mango American is an abuse of the language IMO. Apple American sounds better.

Rajdeep · Post by **Rajdeep** » 28 May 2011 07:36

Who Created Pakistan's Nuclear Arsenal?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jamyang-n ... 64124.html

Pakistanis may proudly hail Khan as the father of the "Islamic bomb," but what is generally not mentioned is that Khan's PhD is in metallurgical engineering. Khan was certainly responsible for stealing blueprints for the manufacture of enriched uranium from a Dutch laboratory in 1972, but he was not involved with the actual design, development and testing of Pakistan's nuclear weapons. He wasn't even living in the country when Pakistan's nuclear weapon program was secretly launched in 1972. Khan was only put in charge of Pakistan's uranium enrichment program in 1976

A_Gupta wrote:Mango Abdul is humorous; Mango American is an abuse of the language IMO. Apple American sounds better.

How about Average Joe or John Doe or if you want to be nasty

HillBilly

arun · Post by **arun** » 28 May 2011 07:57

VikramS wrote:http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/fo ... stan_n.htm

Pakistan needs a Marshall Plan (Why did she misspell martial?)

The comments on this article do not need any help from BR.

USA Today is as main stream as it gets. The message is getting through to the Mango Joe.

FWIW the same article by the Pakistani Parliamentarian Ms. Farahnaz Ispahani about the Islamic Republic of Pakistan being entitled to a Marshall Plan in the "Hindu's conspiring to undo the Momin" obsessed Nation :

Where is Marshall Plan for Pakistan?

Nandu · Post by **Nandu** » 28 May 2011 07:59

arun, look at the last line. They copied the article from USA Today, most likely without permission.

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 28 May 2011 08:23

http://www.dawn.com/2011/05/28/what-fri ... ivate.html
What friends say about Pakistan in private

The concern over Pakistan’s nuclear weapons programme is, of course, a recurrent theme in many countries’ representatives conversations with US diplomats. According to the cable referenced earlier, for example, Mr Levitte, the French adviser to President Sarkozy, told the Americans that the French government was “not sure that the Pakistani nuclear deterrent is secure,” especially “with the frequent movement of nuclear weapons by the Pakistani military.” The French, he said, would provide technical assistance to Pakistan on issues of nuclear safety but “he firmly stated that the GOF would not supply nuclear energy technology.”

Rajdeep · Post by **Rajdeep** » 28 May 2011 08:32

Why are we ignoring ISI-LeT nexus: US Senator

http://www.rediff.com/news/report/why-a ... 110527.htm

He then asked Christine Fair, one of the experts testifying before the Committee, what choices the US had, and she replied, " First of all, we need to take some responsibility. Pakistan has never given us anything but these signals. Right? We dismissed Lashkar-e-Tayiba for years as an India's threat. Pakistan never turned its back on Laskhar-e-Tayiba."

Fair said, "I'll point out that, to my utter astonishment -- well, I wasn't astonished, I was disappointed -- that the Secretary of State certified that Pakistan was in compliance with the conditionalities on security assistance vis-a-vis Kerry-Lugar-Berman (aid bill, which provides Pakistan with $1.5 billion annually over a five- year period). This was done on March 18 despite full knowledge that we were engaging in an operation to get bin Laden, despite full knowledge that the Pakistani state has continued to harbor and assist Laskhar-e-Tayiba among other elements."

"So we have to be honest and self-reflective. Why is it that we have been unable to actually enforce what already is in our own legislation? The reality is, however, we don't have a lot of options with Lashkar-e-Tayiba. We know from the Raymond Davis affair it's very difficult to operate in that terrain. The ISI knows what we're up to, and they're seeking to undermine it."

But Fair said, "I do think we have options to contain it. Let me put something somewhat obnoxious on the table. Lashkar-e-Tayiba's largest theater of operations for its support is in Pacific Command where we actually have a lot of assets and we have a lot of partners. We should be aggressively targeting Laskhar-e-Tayiba's assets in the Pacific Command, in Europe and North America. They can't do what they do without outside support."

"And so while it may sound somewhat disappointing that we don't have more aggressive options, I think we have more options than we believe," she said.

"They can't do what they do without outside support, and so while it may sound somewhat disappointing that we don't have more aggressive options, I think we have more options than we believe."

When Cardin asked Fair flat out if the ISI was supporting and coordinating its activities with the LeT, Fair said, " It certainly is. Pakistan is the arsonist and it's the fireman. It will help us on groups that it shares the sense that it is a threat, but yes, it is my assessment it is continuing to work with LeT in a -- in a very close way."

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 28 May 2011 08:51

ISI LET model is same as many irregular warfare units raised by British Intelligence in WWII. Only thing is LeT is based in TSP itself unlike all those irregular warfare units. The wonderment is due to how can a intelligence agency raise a irregular warfare unit inside its own country to fight outside? And another ploy used by ISI was to have an Islamist preacher to blur the lines of secular West.

Joseph · Post by **Joseph** » 28 May 2011 09:05

In past years, the PA would rotate or retire Generals that the U.S. considered to be too Green.

Is General Kayani facing enough internal dissent within the highest levels of the PA that he is no longer able to rotate or retire Generals that are considered to be too pious by the U.S. or even those that he has identified as being the possible leaders of a coup against him?

Serving Generals of the Pakistan Army

Would the Hamid Gul and Javed Nasir types (retired military) have some influence in regards to the timing & direction of a coup?

amit · Post by **amit** » 28 May 2011 09:44

Joseph wrote:Would the Hamid Gul and Javed Nasir types (retired military) have some influence in regards to the timing & direction of a coup?

Interesting line of thought. The terrorist army has staged many coups against the civilian government. But has there been a General's coup within the Army itself? Can a couple of core commandus drive in tanks to Khiya nahi's residence one fine morning and ask him politely to not go to office?

What would the US do in such a situation? And what would be the position of the Air Force? As regards the Navy, given the recent activities I think they would have a coup of its own.

Finally what about the crown jewels?

Ambar · Post by **Ambar** » 28 May 2011 09:52

Pakis have a long way to go before an "internal military coup " takes place. Hamid Gul/Javed Nasir/Ijaz Shah kind know all too well that the army cannot sustain its pretentious grandiose unless they continue suck off the west. Chinese are way too smart to pick up tabs of some paki general/colnel's new custom Range Rover. If there is a mutiny, then it'll be led by mid or lower ranked officers/soldiers who'll try to Qadri-fry the entire top brass and take over the army. But again, things need to get much worse before we reach that stage.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 28 May 2011 10:10

arun wrote:FWIW the same article by the Pakistani Parliamentarian Ms. Farahnaz Ispahani about the Islamic Republic of Pakistan being entitled to a Marshall Plan in the "Hindu's conspiring to undo the Momin" obsessed Nation :Where is Marshall Plan for Pakistan?

The need for a Marshall Plan was mooted, AFAIK, by Shortcut Aziz when he was the Finance Minister. Pakistan wants to hedge against a possible drying up of alms from the West. KSA has not been like what it was earlier. China anyway does not give hard cash. So, it has been angling for a new mode of begging and struck upon the Marshall Plan.

The original Marshall Plan had two important objectives, one to rebuild a war devastated Europe and the second was to stop some of these countries, or portions thereof, from falling into the lap of the Communists like the way East Germany went. There were stringent conditions though.

The West Germans were made to de-nazify. All vestiges of Nazi rule were thoroughly removed. In Pakistan, that would translate into cleansing Pakistan of Islamism, jihadism, sectarianism and terrorism. Now, who would do that ? Pakistan is well and truly beyond such cleansing efforts. Marshall Plan cannot work there. The only plan that could work is the division of Pakistan.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 28 May 2011 10:16

I think the USA should consider a Marshall Plan for TSP if all the Pakistanis convert to Christianity overnight!

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 28 May 2011 10:21

Siachen to figure in talks

The contentious issue of the Siachen glacier region will be on the table when the Defence Secretaries of India and Pakistan hold talks here on May 30 and 31. The 12th round of talks, being held after a gap of four years, is part of the larger effort by the two sides to resolve outstanding issues between the two countries.

The Indian delegation will be led by Defence Secretary Pradeep Kumar and include Special Secretary R.K. Mathur, Director-General, Military Operations, Lt. Gen. A.M. Verma and the Surveyor-General S. Subba Rao.

The Pakistani delegation will be led by Defence Secretary Lt. Gen. (Retd.) Syed Athar Ali. The other members include Major-General Ashfaq Nadeem Ahmed, Major-General Munwar Ahmed Solehri and Major-General (Retd.) Mir Haider Ali Khan.

This is the second time in a month that service personnel from Pakistan will engage with interlocutors from India. The Pakistani delegation for the Sir Creek talks also included service personnel from the Navy.

The Defence-Secretary-level talks between the two countries to resolve the Siachen issue date back to 1985, following discussions between Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi and Pakistan President General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq in Oman and New Delhi.

The talks became a part of the composite dialogue with Pakistan on all issues, including Kashmir, from the eighth round of talks in August 2004 in New Delhi.

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 28 May 2011 12:04

RajeshA wrote:I think the USA should consider a Marshall Plan for TSP if all the Pakistanis convert to Christianity overnight!

Germany converting to Islam would be the death blow of Islam in its present form.
same way, Pakistan converting to Chistianity would be the death blow of Christianity as it exists now. (assumption is that Pakis still retain their TFTA attitude).

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 28 May 2011 12:35

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Foreign-Po ... vet-hammer
"At tense time for US-Pakistan ties, Hillary Clinton swings velvet hammer
In Pakistan, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton took care to say senior leaders there didn't know Osama bin Laden was hiding near Islamabad. But she also pushed hard for Pakistan to hunt down certain Islamist extremists.
In an attempt to pull US-Pakistan relations out of a downward spiral, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is telling Pakistani officials the steps they must take soon – including chasing down specific Islamist extremists long thought to enjoy the protection of the country’s intelligence services."
President Clinton also tried to talk tough with the Pukis in his last visit there. But other than the tamasha of flying a decoy plane and all that, it did not work. This will not work too. Pukis will not sudhrofy by just talks.
Gautam

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 28 May 2011 12:36

China's Port in Pakistan?

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 28 May 2011 14:32

Personal attacks has to be a part of the mix, just remember to use American sounding handles for her! It is ok to call her a terrorist b*tch, but it should be john doe calling her that, and not Madhusudhan Gupta!

Why that approach at all? That's the typical Paki approach you are advocating. Why call her a terrorist b*tch? Why not say she is becoming guilty of supporting terror herself by equating LeT and India. There are so many myriad ways of putting your point across without resorting to deceit. Name calling starts really when you don't have points to put up. Rajesh Ji my apologies, but i am disappointed by your propagating this approach.

Sri · Post by **Sri** » 28 May 2011 14:43

Must Watch

Guys, this is a gem. Talat Hussain painstakingly lists the arguments Pakistan Establishment has been making to the Americans in past 1 years, viz a viz as to why they can't act on terrorist organisations in Pakistan.

I propose we listen to them carefully and then start a thread and chronologically list all the media reports of the same.

Also if admins will consider making this link a permanant fixture in the first post of every new TSP thread.

SS Saar, it would be great if we have your views on this too.

arun · Post by **arun** » 28 May 2011 15:05

Inevitable.

An organisation that adopts a motto of “Iman Taqwa Jihad Fi Sabilillah” or translated “Faith, Piety and Jihad in Path of Allah”, as the Army of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan has done, is fertile ground for infiltration by Jihadi Islamic Terrorists of the Un-uniformed variety.

The Washington Post :

Pakistan’s top military officials are worried about militant collaborators in their ranks

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 28 May 2011 16:38

Islamabad: The US has handed over to Pakistan a list of five terrorists, seeking immediate intelligence information on them. It reportedly also expects Pakistan to possibly target these terrorists in joint operations.

The list was discussed during two meetings between Pakistani and US officials in the past two weeks, and also during Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's talks with Pakistani leaders in Islamabad yesterday, ABC News quoted a US official as saying.

The list includes Al Qaeda's second-in-command Ayman al Zawahiri, Ilyas Kashmiri and Afghan Taliban chief Mullah Omar. It also includes commander Sirajuddin Haqqani, the operating chief of Haqqani network and Atiya Abdel Rahman, the Libyan operations chief of Al Qaeda, who had emerged as a key intermediary between bin Laden and Qaeda's affiliate networks across the world.

"The message given to Pakistani leaders was loud and clear: you either cooperate with us on these terrorists or we'll take care of them by ourselves," the source was quoted as saying by the newspaper.

Hillary did send a powerful message to Pakistan. I am expecting a OBL raid redux in a major Pakistani city this week. MO might be the first to get 72. Interesting times ahead!

Popcorn and Beer please

Vivek_A · Post by **Vivek_A** » 28 May 2011 16:55

Farahnaz Ispahani is the wife of Hussain Haqqani.
If you're going to comment on the article, you might want to consider quotes from Haqqani's book about the ISI.

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 28 May 2011 17:21

Theories are theories. Conspiracy or otherwise. Every theory can be put to test. If it has any merit it must show result at least to the opposite that it is not true.
If there is any merit to those theories that Pakis transferred tech to Chinese, US will send a very powerful message followed by action. They will not take it lightly.
They did send Hillary to deliver a powerful message. She is SoS. She speaks for the President.
We WILL see action to followup the warnings by her. So let us all just chill out and enjoy the show. Lets us not argue and spoil the nice action movie.
Peace!

Patni · Post by **Patni** » 28 May 2011 17:22

Suicide Bomber Claims at Least 5 at Pakistan Restaurant

By SALMAN MASOOD
Published: May 28, 2011

ISLAMABAD — At least five people were killed on Saturday when a suicide bomber ripped through a restaurant in the restive northwestern tribal region of Bajaur, officials said. At least 10 were wounded, several in a critical condition.

Local officials said the suicide bomber detonated his explosives in a restaurant at 10:40 a.m. in the center of the town of Pasht Bazar in a northern corner of Bajaur known as Salarzai.

The Taliban claimed responsibility and officials said the bombing appeared to be an act of retribution. The target of the attack was a prominent member of a local militia that is supportive of the government and has taken up arms against Taliban insurgents.

A local Salarzai official, Saad Muhammad, said by telephone that the targeted local militia member was Malik Tehsil Khan, whom he described as active and loyal to the anti-Taliban militia.

“In our assessment, he was the target of the attack because others who have been killed were just ordinary people,” Mr. Muhammad said.

“The low intensity blast destroyed the one-room restaurant, where people had gathered over tea in the morning. An adjacent jewelry shop was damaged. The owner of the restaurant was also killed in the bombing,” Mr. Muhammad added.

Taliban insurgents have repeatedly attacked leaders and members of anti-Taliban militias, which are known here as peace committees, in order to force them into submission or deter them from aiding the government.

“We carried out the bombing against the peace committee because they had joined the government and were maligning Taliban,” Tehreek-i-Taliban spokesman Ehsanullah Ehsan said in a report fromthe Agence French Presse news service.

arun · Post by **arun** » 28 May 2011 17:26

Altair wrote:
Islamabad: The US has handed over to Pakistan a list of five terrorists, seeking immediate intelligence information on them. It reportedly also expects Pakistan to possibly target these terrorists in joint operations.

The list was discussed during two meetings between Pakistani and US officials in the past two weeks, and also during Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's talks with Pakistani leaders in Islamabad yesterday, ABC News quoted a US official as saying.

The list includes Al Qaeda's second-in-command Ayman al Zawahiri, Ilyas Kashmiri and Afghan Taliban chief Mullah Omar. It also includes commander Sirajuddin Haqqani, the operating chief of Haqqani network and Atiya Abdel Rahman, the Libyan operations chief of Al Qaeda, who had emerged as a key intermediary between bin Laden and Qaeda's affiliate networks across the world.

"The message given to Pakistani leaders was loud and clear: you either cooperate with us on these terrorists or we'll take care of them by ourselves," the source was quoted as saying by the newspaper.
Hillary did send a powerful message to Pakistan. I am expecting a OBL raid redux in a major Pakistani city this week. MO might be the first to get 72. Interesting times ahead!

Popcorn and Beer please

Au contraire.

The public record, as opposed to comments by anonymous officials, shows no such powerful message delivered by the US to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Any statement that could be interpreted as powerful regards Islamic Terrorism was promptly watered down by singing paeans to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s sacrifices to the acts of Islamic Terrorists once nurtured by them.

IMO the visit was more about granting absolution to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan for the fact that Osama Bin Laden was taking refuge in the cradle of the Pakistani Military and head off any rumblings of Aid Cut in an era calling for austerity by US Parliamentarian’s.

So what we now have, to paraphrase B. Raman, is the State-to-State relations going back to their sickening normalcy with the US exercise to feed and fatten the Pakistani Army and intelligence resuming.

To use a BRF metaphor, the US was doing a fair bit of downhill skiing here leaving me to holdoff on the beer and popcorn.

Check out this transcript of US Secretary of State Clintons press interaction along with the Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen in Islamabad to guage for yourself:

Clicky

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 28 May 2011 17:32

arun
US does not want Pakistan to feel insecure by using threatening language. The least they could do is to tone down the language in the press. US still needs someone at helm in Pakistan.
Behind closed doors is a total different story. Just wait for 72 hours (yeah!) and you would understand what i mean.

Rajdeep · Post by **Rajdeep** » 28 May 2011 17:37

a picture is louder than a 400% words.

Clinton's cool (sic) {I think he means cold} reception suggests new low in US-Pak ties
http://www.rediff.com/news/slide-show/s ... 110528.htm

But administration officials traveling with Clinton said that the seriousness of the current crisis had forced both sides to confront the possible consequences of an irreconcilable breach and that the talks were marked by a new level of frankness," said The Washington Post.

vanand · Post by **vanand** » 28 May 2011 17:47

Gagan wrote:
vanand wrote: Vanand-ji,
That seems to be a 6 bunker secure location holding precious items inside.
Notice that there is a big sand wall around these, and the bunkers are embedded in the earth, with the doors leading outside.

Now on this base, there are at least two other locations apart from this (that makes it 3) where they might be keeping precious items.
In addition there are two distinct construction areas, one that I have outlined earlier, and another in the north-western corner of the compound where an underground bunker seems to be under construction.

Gagan Sir,

The site is vast and full of fall out shelters, if you look into the southeast we can also see tunnels at the edge of the mountain. Sure Pakistan is making it as a nuclear fall out site with second strike capability. I am not able upload any images due to my google earth error

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 May 2011 17:50

I have always believed that Pakis are good at psy ops. The photo below is a fabulous example. It can be used both ways. One can say "Pakistanis are protesting against Clinton" or it can be said "These people don't even know what they are protesting about - it's just a rent-a-crowd by some "misguided elements"

Rajdeep wrote:

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 28 May 2011 17:56

http://tribune.com.pk/story/177133/pns- ... aisalabad/

Traced phone calls from a terrorist’s cell phone, recovered after the 17-hour siege at PNS Mehran Base, led to the arrest of a suspect in Satiana, about 32 kilometres from Faisalabad, on Friday.
According to sources, Qari Qaiser, 30, was arrested Friday morning and was shifted to an unknown location for further interrogation.
The accused, originally belonging to Dera Ghazi Khan, was reportedly running Zainil Abideen Madrassah in Chak No.383 in Satiana.
The suspect was reportedly in contact with the attackers of the naval base. Qaiser was already on the watch-list of various law enforcing agencies and was under surveillance.
He was earlier arrested after a blast in Faisalabad on March 8, which killed 25 people and injured over 130. However, he was released under mysterious circumstances.

jrjrao · Post by **jrjrao** » 28 May 2011 18:11

Photu of Sec. Clinton meeting with Zardari and co. yesterday. The seating arrangement appears to show Zardari, Groping Gilly and Rehman Malik as the big cheese, and Kayani as a small cheese.

Assphuck Kayani looks like he took it in the front this time -- a sharp blow from Hillary's pointed shoes into his testimonials, that is....

http://www.thefrontierpost.com/wp-conte ... -Pic15.jpg

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 28 May 2011 18:22

jr^2 - was going to put that photo too...(above photo
But pan the camera a little right .
.Pan right to above photo
Or body language here..

Check out the body language here too..( From State Dept)
pic 1
or
pic 2

And Here ... in the words of the photographer .. (Actual words)

Stony faced Clinton nod impassively as Zardari yakked on.

Anindya · Post by **Anindya** » 28 May 2011 18:49

FWIW, from http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 625933.cms

Hillary Clinton did not give clean chit to ISI: US
PTI | May 28, 2011, 05.46pm IST

WASHINGTON: US secretary of state Hillary Clinton has not given clean chit to Pakistan's ISI over Osama bin Laden's presence in the country, her spokesman said on Saturday.

"I don't think she (Clinton) gave them (ISI) a free chit," state department spokesman Mark Toner told reporters at his daily news conference when asked if Clinton has given a clean chit to ISI with regard to its links to terrorists.

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 28 May 2011 18:53

arun wrote:
VikramS wrote:http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/fo ... stan_n.htm

Pakistan needs a Marshall Plan Where is Marshall Plan for Pakistan?

To qualify for a Marshall Plan, the pakis would need to be first carpet bombed by us, their standard of living brought to stone age level, the remaining mango abduls need to beg for international forgiveness, hold their ears and do situps in public and have their society purged of all Islamists (akin to the de-nazification programs). Then a bridgehead will be established from Afghanistan to the remaining airfields in wastelands of pa'astan. That's when aid will flow in.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 28 May 2011 18:55

The US gave a list of 5 terrorists it wants from Pakistan. Something doable. Thats why i always maintained that India should give a list of really key terrorists only. Dawood Ibrahim for 93 blasts; Kandahar Hijackers; 26-11 planners. India on the other hand should express disappointment that US is not including Dawood Ibrahim, Kandahar Hijackers and 26-11 terrorists. The US should be categorically told that Pakistan cannot and will not mend ways against the West if they allow India targeting terrorists to flourish. But all the same i think people are realizing in the West too that Pakistan is becoming a real pain in the butt for all..and there is no solution to this except denuclearization and balkanization of this terrorist rathole.

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 28 May 2011 18:58

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-13570803
"Clinton exonerates Pakistan over Osama Bin Laden
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said there is no evidence senior people in Pakistan knew that Osama Bin Laden lived so close to Islamabad. But she said that the US and Pakistan needed to do more to battle Islamist militancy and that bilateral relations had reached a turning point.
Mrs Clinton said any peace deal in Afghanistan would not succeed unless Pakistan was part of the process. She expressed Washington's "strong commitment" to relations with Pakistan...."
It is back to the usual again.
Gautam

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 28 May 2011 18:59

^^^ Her statements always had qualifiers like "highest levels", "civilian", "government" etc.. even in the press conference she pointed out that Pakis themselves have admitted that .. "some one, some where, must have known something"

What is even more remarkable - There were no joint statement.. and even the Paki statement (a very short one) made NO mention about things like core-issues..H&D..sovereignty (over OBL raid).. clean chit...only a commitment to fight jointly.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 28 May 2011 19:09

Sri wrote:Must Watch

Guys, this is a gem. Talat Hussain painstakingly lists the arguments Pakistan Establishment has been making to the Americans in past 1 years, viz a viz as to why they can't act on terrorist organisations in Pakistan.
.

which of the N videos on that page?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 28 May 2011 19:09

All,
Looks like terrorist attacks in TSP are so normal that we didn't open a new thread for PNS Mehran attack!

Its the new normal in TSP!!!

Rajiv Lather · Post by **Rajiv Lather** » 28 May 2011 19:10

My attempt to cut out the diplomatic noise and get to the crux of her public message. Add to this their body language, the stern faces and absence of joint communique. In her own words:

SECRETARY CLINTON: But this was an especially important visit because we have reached a turning point.
Usama bin Ladin is dead, but al-Qaida and its syndicate of terror remain
a serious threat to us both. There is momentum toward political
reconciliation in Afghanistan, but the insurgency continues to operate
from safe havens here in Pakistan. There is
absolutely no evidence that anyone at the highest levels of the
Pakistani Government knew that Usama bin Ladin was living just miles
from where we are today. Many of the leaders of the Taliban continue to live in
Pakistan, and Pakistan has very legitimate interests in the outcome of
this process. But we also discussed that Pakistan has a responsibility to help us help
Afghanistan by preventing insurgents from waging war from Pakistani
territory. A third major area where America’s and
Pakistan’s interests intersect is the future of this country itself. In
recent years, the United States has tried to be a very good friend to
Pakistan. We have repeatedly delivered on what we promised by providing
billions of dollars in new assistance to address Pakistan’s energy and
other economic challenges. We’ve expanded assistance to your security
forces. And we led ongoing international relief efforts to respond to
last year’s devastating floods. We’ve built the largest educational and
cultural exchange program anywhere in the world as an investment in the
youth of Pakistan. But let me be clear, as I was
today, America cannot and should not solve Pakistan’s problems. That’s
up to Pakistan. But in solving its problems, Pakistan should understand
that anti-Americanism and conspiracy theories will not make problems
disappear.

Well, let me speak first from my perspective. I cannot speak for the
Pakistani leadership with whom we met. We have critical interests that intersect in a
number of important areas, which we both have mentioned – the issue of
extremism, the future of Afghanistan, the economy, long-term stability.
But we both know there can be no quarter given, that there
can be no peace, no stability, no democracy, no future for Pakistan
unless the violent extremists are removed, either by coming to their
senses and recognizing that they should be part of a political process
if they have a point of view to present and not try to inflict their
ideology or their prejudices on an entire nation, or they will have to
be killed or captured. So I think that I return to Washington ever more committed to
doing whatever I can to make sure that the cooperation we’re seeking is
forthcoming and the cooperation that we’ve been asked for by our
counterparts is also occurring from our part.

We both – both in my country and in your country, we
need to do a better job. We need to do a better job of actually getting
the story out. But what is not helpful is either not knowing what
we are doing on both sides or deliberating distorting what we are doing.
So I think we have some work ahead to try to do a better job to just
tell the truth about what we are working on together and the level of
aid that the United States is providing. I mean, we provide more support
than Saudi Arabia, China, and everybody else combined. But I will stand
here and admit that I’m not sure many Pakistanis know that. We provided,
I think, the most even after all of it came in, in the aggregate, the
most aid for the floods. But I bet not many Pakistanis know that. So let’s clear away the underbrush.
Let’s have the kind of open, candid conversation that you and I are
having now and that we had earlier today, and then let the chips fall
where they may. But let’s not be misinterpreting and misrepresenting
each other, because then we can never, ever find common ground.

On the last one, we discussed very frankly, and our counterparts in the government
were very forthcoming in saying that somebody, somewhere was providing
some kind of support. And they are carrying out an investigation. And we
have certainly offered to share whatever information we come across, and
we intend to be consulting closely as we go forward with them providing
information they are finding and us reciprocating. You may know that
today the United States Government got access to the compound, thanks to
the cooperation of the ISI and the military. And we are working to try
to untangle the puzzle of bin Ladin’s presence in Abbottabad. But I want
to stress again that we have absolutely no reason to believe that anyone
in the highest levels of the government knew that. In fact, they were
quite emotional in conveying how they would have gone after them if they
had known he was there, because as the President said, there’s a lot of
reason to believe al-Qaida was behind his wife’s murder.

With respect to visas, look, our security assistance is provided in
coordination and at the request of the Pakistani Government and the
Pakistani military, and we work closely with Pakistan to try to ensure
that they have the training and the equipment and that we have the
personnel necessary to support their counterinsurgency efforts. And the
size of our presence at any time in Pakistan is a function of the amount
and type of work that is needed to be done to meet the Pakistani
Government’s request. And we have not noticed any official statement
from the Government of Pakistan that in any way would demonstrate that
they’re not going to be continuing to request the kind of assistance we
provide, and we’re going to continue to offer what we believe is in our
mutual best interests.

And Mullen's words:

ADMIRAL MULLEN: But in particular, I want to echo her
comments about the shared sense of urgency. I think we all realize the
challenges under which this relationship now labors, but now is not the
time for retreat or for recrimination. Now is the time for action and
closer coordination; for more cooperation, not less; for the friendship
to get stronger, not weaker. But this particular
relationship with Pakistan is too critical, and now is too critical a
time to allow whatever differences we may still have with one another
impede the progress we must still make together. I harbor no illusions
about the difficulties ahead nor do I leave here misinformed about the
trust which still needs to be rebuilt between our two militaries.

Well, from the military perspective – again, I met with General Kayani and the military
leadership and did so at a time of great stress, obviously, in the
relationship, which is one of the reasons that we’re here. And from my perspective, no one
should doubt for a minute the long-term commitment to this relationship,
to the need to rebuild on the trust that certainly was recently shaken,
and that the strength of that relationship in the long term will, I
think, support a more stable, peaceful, prosperous Pakistan but also a
more stable, peaceful, and prosperous region.

(On visas) The only thing I’d add, Karen, is certainly I’ve talked with
General Kayani and in recent really weeks and months about the level of
military support. We’ve been here for some time at the invitation of the
Pakistani Government and Pakistani military working a training mission,
and those numbers go up and down over time. And there have been requests
to reduce those numbers, and those are being considered – and going through
the details of what that means and how that looks in the future is
something we’re working our way through with them, literally, as we
speak.

arun · Post by **arun** » 28 May 2011 19:11

Anindya wrote:FWIW, from http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 625933.cms

Hillary Clinton did not give clean chit to ISI: US
PTI | May 28, 2011, 05.46pm IST

WASHINGTON: US secretary of state Hillary Clinton has not given clean chit to Pakistan's ISI over Osama bin Laden's presence in the country, her spokesman said on Saturday.

"I don't think she (Clinton) gave them (ISI) a free chit," state department spokesman Mark Toner told reporters at his daily news conference when asked if Clinton has given a clean chit to ISI with regard to its links to terrorists.

Rightly FWIW.

There is a bit of nuance here

.

Absolution has been granted by the US on the issue that Osama Bin Laden was discovered taking refuge in the cradle of the Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan but apparently not (as yet?) for the Mumbai Islamic Terrorist attack.

Mark Toner and Raghubir “The Foil” Goyal on absolution being granted by the US for Osama Bin Laden taking refuge in Abbotabad:

MR. TONER: I believe those were addressed in the aftermath of the previous incident. Yeah.

Go ahead, Goyal.

QUESTION: May I go to the Secretary’s visit to Pakistan? Admiral Mullen --

MR. TONER: The Secretary’s visit to Pakistan, sure.

QUESTION: Yeah. Admiral Mullen and the Secretary was in Pakistan, and what I’m asking you is that before Admiral Mullen left, that he spoke at the Wilson Center in Washington, where –

MR. TONER: Admiral Mullen?

QUESTION: Yeah.

MR. TONER: Okay.

QUESTION: And where he said that he doesn’t see any evidence of high-ranking ISI or Pakistani military officials as far as hiding of Usama concerned. Same thing now the Secretary is saying in Islamabad.

MR. TONER: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: What I’m asking you: How can they say – how do they – how sure they are that the very long hand of any high officials, because most Pakistanis believe that ISI and military at the top must be knowing or they are hiding from them and from the U.S.? So what I’m asking now: Is there any U.S. policy change in Pakistan or Afghanistan as far as their visit is concerned?

MR. TONER: As far as –

QUESTION: Secretary’s visit is concerned.

MR. TONER: Well, Goyal, as you know, the Secretary, along with Admiral Mullen, gave a press conference earlier today in Islamabad. You’ve all seen the transcript. It’s important to note that she did meet with and had a very frank, open discussion with the leadership of Pakistan, President Zardari, and then Prime Minister Gilani, Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Khar, Foreign Secretary Bashir, Chief of the Army Staff Kayani, as well as General Pasha.

The Secretary, I think, was very frank in her assessment of those meetings. She thought they were very constructive. She reiterated what we said before, which is that there are challenges in this relationship, and – but we’re committed to working through them because, frankly, it’s in the interests both of the United States and Pakistan to do so.

And with respect to your question, the Secretary – both the Secretary and Admiral Mullen said they see no evidence. They repeated that again today. I think the Secretary spoke of the fact that, with the president, that he may have been behind – that al-Qaida may have been behind the attack on his wife. And so this is – again, it’s worth noting that Pakistan is a country that’s been deeply touched by the scourge of terrorism. It’s had thousands killed by terrorists on its soil, and so they face an existential threat from al-Qaida and other terrorists as well. We’re committed to working with Pakistan moving forward on this.

Mark Toner and Tejinder Singh for the bit about absolution not being granted (as yet?) for the Mumbai Islamic Terrorist attack:

QUESTION: Continuing on the same –

MR. TONER: Okay. I was going to go – but Tejinder, then –

QUESTION: The Secretary seems to have given a clean chit to Pakistan. On what basis this is being given while the Chicago court is listening to all what Headley has to say against the ISI? And also that – does this mean that we have evaluated all the material that we took from bin Ladin compound?

MR. TONER: I think the Secretary acknowledged that – in her press availability that – and we’re appreciative of the Government of Pakistan giving us access to bin Ladin’s compound.

In relation to your other question, I don’t think she gave them a free chit, if you will. We acknowledge that there are difficulties in the relationship, but the bottom line is that this is a relationship that’s in our interest and in Pakistan’s interest, and so we need to work through these challenges moving forward.

QUESTION: So we cannot conclude that Pakistan’s hand is not in the attacks?

MR. TONER: I’m sorry. You’re talking about the Mumbai attacks?

QUESTION: In the Mumbai attacks and also in hiding bin Ladin.

MR. TONER: I’m aware of the Headley trial that’s playing out in Chicago. We’ve talked about it before. But I’m restricted in what I can comment on it while it’s an ongoing legal process.

QUESTION: And you mention about the transcript. In her transcript she says many of the leaders of the Taliban continue to live in Pakistan. So on what basis she says that and did she meet any of them or --

MR. TONER: Well, Tejinder, we’ve – it’s widely known that in some of the FATA areas of Pakistan that there are Taliban leaders, that the borders are very porous and they move freely across them, and that’s a challenge that we need to confront in – we can’t put pressure on Afghanistan and not apply that same pressure within Pakistan. And it’s something frankly that – something that the Pakistan armed forces have taken on. They have made progress in that area.

Read it all:

Daily Press Briefing - May 27, 2011