But what is the alternative when mounting evidence indicates that the Pakistanis are double-dealing, and sometimes pre-warning the terrorists. Friend and Ally Update.
"Pakistan summons U.S. ambassador over missile strikes," from China View, October 29 (thanks to Dionysios):
ISLAMABAD, Oct. 29 (Xinhua) -- Pakistani foreign ministry on Wednesday summoned the United States ambassador to Pakistan and expressed its strong protest over the missile strikes by American drones in the country's tribal regions, Pakistani Foreign Office said in a statement."The U.S. ambassador was called to the Foreign Office today and a strong protest was lodged on the continued missile attacks by U.S. drones inside Pakistani territory," said the statement.
"It was underscored to the ambassador that the government of Pakistan strongly condemns the missile attacks, which resulted into the loss of precious lives and property," the statement noted.
A copy of the Senate resolution adopted on Monday against the missile strikes was handed over to the ambassador, it said.
"It was emphasized that such attacks were a violation of Pakistan sovereignty and should be stopped immediately," the statement stressed.
The U.S. drones based in Afghanistan have carried out 34 strikes and intrusions into Pakistani territory in the last seven months, according to News Network International news agency.
Suspected U.S. drones fired missiles targeting local militants in South Waziristan tribal region who gathered to offer prayers last Sunday night. As a result, at least 20 people were killed, according to local media reports.
"It was emphasized that such attacks were a violation of Pakistan sovereignty and should be stopped immediately," the statement stressed.
But what would he say to the Palestinians who continually launch missiles into sovereign Israeli territory, resulting in loss of "precious lives and property"?
Pakistan... what a waste of sand.
Suspected U.S. drones fired missiles targeting local militants in South Waziristan tribal region who gathered to offer prayers last Sunday night. As a result, at least 20 people were killed, according to local media reports.
that it! these drones should be in the air every time these muslims gather for prayers. could you imagine what would go on? getting killed while you pray for others to be killed.
Hope you're not looking for any earthquake aid today, Pakiland.
Yea, what 3812Michelle said: not one single dime.
Bush is getting a little more aggressive in these areas as his time is running out.
He may be doing this to help out the next president
continue the 'plan'(McCain), or to create a big mess the next President (Obama) will be too inept to handle.
I wonder what these people talk about when we are not listening?
An article posted six weeks ago:
Fitzgerald: Pakistan, we want our money back
$30 billion in military and economic aid, and debt forgiveness, has been lavished by the American government on Pakistan, and on Bush's loyal friend Musharraf -- whom he not only could count on, but who of course would remain forever in power, since late 2001 alone.
What have we gotten for that money?
And before that, decades of non-stop aid, especially military aid -- including top-of-the-line F-16s -- have gone to Pakistan, aided by the devotion of generations of American diplomats and generals, so enamored of those ramrod-straight terry-thomas-moustachioed Pakistani generals. They regarded them as our true-blue allies not despite but because of Islam, for Islam was seen only, by the Dulles brothers and those at that uncomprehending level, as a "bulwark against Communism," comparing so favorably with those Indians, seen as oily, untrustworthy and marxisants -- that America-bashing Krishna Menon with his New Left Book Club subscription, that supercilious Jawaharlal Nehru with his Fabianism presumably intact. Why else would he have allowed the Soviets to build a steel mill for the Indians, were he not untrustworthy?
What did we get for all that military aid, all those advanced planes, that we delivered to those Pakistani generals who have been impressing members of the American government and its military for the past fifty years, ever since the days when the military alliance of CENTO (Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, the U.S., Great Britain) seemed to be just the ticket.
Not much has changed.
It has taken America and the world a long time to figure out that the Pakistanis -- all of them, even the least Muslim and seemingly the most Western of them – are not trustworthy friends. See, for example, the late Pinky Bhutto, whose happiest days were spent walking from Briggs Hall to Nini's Corner to buy newspapers and magazines, unaccompanied by bodyguards, but who can be seen on YouTube ranting hysterically as she calls for Jihad against Hindus in Kashmir. It has taken a long time, and a lot of money, for Americans, and still today only a few do see it.
If the government of Pakistan today dares to criticize the Americans for taking the most minimal measures to stop the Taliban (and Al Qaeda) from wreaking havoc in Afghanistan, the same Pakistani government that continues to protect, continues to make unavailable to American interrogators the sinister I.S.I. man, A. Q. Khan, and if the Pakistanis continue to stand in the way, then let's simply cut the whole country off. We should not only cut off all aid, but also cut off Pakistan’s ability to export goods to America and the rest of the West. And in tandem with Great Britain, we should end all ties to Pakistan, and end all immigration -- including that phony "family reunion" business -- from Pakistan. And at the same time we should make it a point to investigate the tax-paying practices of Pakistani-owned "convenience stores." Oh, and we should check to see how many are here illegally -- a recent New Yorker article on shoplifting rings mentions that one of the most successful of such gangs consisted of "thirty Pakistanis, most of them illegal immigrants, some of them the owners of convenience stores." We should also check out the rug stores -- how many of those Pakistani rug dealers sell rugs made by child labor, Christian-child labor, in Pakistan?
At the same time, we should systematically put pressure on, investigate, and find out all the ways that Pakistani immigrants have fiddled the system, both here and in Great Britain. It wouldn't be hard to use the tax laws, and other laws, to reduce to manageable proportions the threat some pose, and to change the behavior, if not the real attitudes, of others, as they begin to realize that they are not home free, as too many Muslims appear to believe. Too many Muslims appear to think that they can continue to press and make demands when they are vulnerable to such investigations of their commercial and tax-paying practices.
Oh, one more thing.
We want that thirty billion dollars we have in the last seven years lavished on a mendacious and largely unhelpful Pakistan back. We want it now.
[Posted by Hugh at September 5, 2008]
It is widely debated what pakistan has done the with $30 million alocated to pakistan for countering terrorism in its northern troubled areas. This is not even 1% of what the US has spent over the years for combating the so called 'war on terror' in Iraq and Afghanistan. What have they obtained? 7 years later the soldiers are dazzled at what they are actually doing there. The US is a super power and may wish to pull which ever strings it deems right whenever, they may drop bombs over syria on evening and fly drones into Pakistan the next. My only question is, would Pakistan be any softer if they were the super power today? I dont think they have been given the chance to show what they are capable of, but I can gurantee a few prime cities being turned into Debris!
Among other provisions in international law, the Bush Administration is invoking the
the United Nations ARTICLE 51,to justify military incursions into Pakistan and Syria against known lines of infiltrators in the theatres of war in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Noting that there are no UN peace keepers manning the border of these two countries as there is in Lebanon.
Article 51:
"provides for the right of countries to engage in military action in self-defense, including collective self-defense (i.e. under an alliance). This has been cited as support for the legality of the Vietnam War.[11]
“ Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security."
The Pakistani Foreign Ministry's actions are pro forma. They are only doing what they must.
And so are we.
We want that thirty billion dollars we have in the last seven years lavished on a mendacious and largely unhelpful Pakistan back. We want it now.
[Posted by Hugh at September 5, 2008]
Posted by: Hugh at October 29, 2008 10:39 AM
Hugh,
Protect/support the corrupt POTUS/Commander-in-chief/Leader-of-the-free-world, all you want but this is just a fraction of the price USA is paying for POTUS's terrorist 'allies' in the phony 'war-on-terror', at the command of other terrorist 'friends and family', Saudi Arabia.
Mackie,
Does Article 51 apply to 9/11?
A member nation was attacked on 9/11/01 and the UN Security Council hasn't done a thing to ensure international peace and security. Many others have been attacked since then. We might as well get rid of the UN.
WE own the paks nothing at this point except increased attacks on whatever targets and where ever they may be inside Pakiratastan. This country has squandered billions of our "aid" dollars on what?? Our intelliegnce agencies are stymied at every turn from interogating islamofacist killers or the one who sold nuclear secrets and worse, islamofacist Khan. All aid should be stopped immediately, and I mean ALL aid. We should quit importing anything made or shipped from pakiratastan and let the country go to hell, and turn inward against themselves. All immigration into the USA should be stopped immediately and those who are here should be given the boot, along with their families.
As mackie pointed out artcile 51 does give us the right to take what action we deem necessary for self defense and the good of the international community. This country should be removed for the list of "allies" and added to the list of terrorist nations. Rest assured that Obumma will
try and talk to these traitors rather than deal with them miltarily as that is what is really called for, as pakiratastan has given us NOTHING back for all our support.
We might as well get rid of the UN.
Posted by: PMK at October 29, 2008 11:27 AM
Exceppent point, PMK.
Tom Tancredo, R-CO, had campaigned that, if elected, unless it stopped anti-US rhetoric, Tom would show UN the door.
You can verify Tom's records.
"Protect/support the corrupt POTUS/Commander-in-chief/Leader-of-the-free-world, all you want..."
-- from a posting above, addressed to me
What are you talking about?
"But what would he say to the Palestinians who continually launch missiles into sovereign Israeli territory, resulting in loss of "precious lives and property"?" (PMK)
That statement shows the that you have the mind of a 10 year old, but here are some facts that your brainwashed head probably doesn't know
Since 2000 over 4000 Palestinians have been killed by Israelis, that does not include targeted assassinations. Since 2000 under 300 Israelis have been killed by Palestinians. Those rockets that are apparently fired into 'Israel' seldom cause any physical damage, and pales in comparison to what the Zionist fire and drop into Palestine.
In 2008, under 20 Israelis were killed by Palestinians, whereas Palestinians killed by Israelis were over 300. Remember when the media does not mention Palestine for several months, it does not mean that no one is getting killed. During this silence Palestinians are being killed by the dozen, but then when one Israel dies or breaks a nail its front page news, this naturally deludes ignorant people like yourself.
"these drones should be in the air every time these muslims gather for prayers. could you imagine what would go on? getting killed while you pray for others to be killed." (: theygottag)
incitement if ever I heard it, but don;t worry hypocrisy rules this world
Pakistani pride is at stake. We go where they are afraid to. They look bad. Boo Hoo, here's a Tissue.
It would be so much better if they had a Beer to cry in. But that would be a waste of a perfectly good plastic cup of beer.(can't trust them with real glass)
: sliowms? its a hell lot more than the quotes you gave ahead.jen, do you have the number of muslims killing mu
Jowen, you're sick. Every single "Palestinian" killed by Israelis was killed in self-defense, and yes, that includes all the little kids HAMAS puts in trenches for their phony PR war. And more "Palestinians" have been killed in the last 10 years trying to break into Egypt than have ever been killed by Israel (a lesson the US could learn from). That's why they built a fence identical to Israel's in order to keep out the same HAMAS terrorists. Jordan killed more "Palestinians" during Black September, offensively, than have ever been killed by Israel. And of course, Kuwait killed 3 million "Palestinians." Makes the fewer than 8000 killed by Israel - all in self-defense - seem pretty insignificant, particularly given the fact that only 3 million "Palestinians" live in Gaza and the West Bank. But nice racism holding Jews to a moral standard according to which they cannot kill in self-defense but Arabs can slaughter endless millions and that's apparently just fine with you.
Muslim logic and ethics. Gotta love it.
http://www.middle-east-info.org/gateway/womenchildabuse/index.htm (1/4 of the way down)
What are you talking about?
Posted by: Hugh at October 29, 2008 12:57 PM
Hugh,
No, nothing personal. Just am surprised that people (I don't mean you... you) can't see that George Bush has sold this country to the Saudis. Infact, I would go one step furthr to say how could Americans elect such a corrupt, timid, spoilt brat to the office of a POTUS. The presiential race of 2000 was so close and controvrcially won in another Bush state... Florida. 9/11 was a test of metal which showed Bush in the light of his true nature. Even though 3000 Americans were murdered on 9/11, with twin-towers still smouldering, Bush smoked cigars with the very wahhabbi whose countrymen attacked America. In response, Bush ensured that Saudis were flown to safety, while all American flights were grounded. Then, Bush goes on to drag hi sfeet over the 9/11 commission and when it was formed, blackened out pages on Saudi Arabia. All this AFTER 9/11. Does this not raise doubts about the loyalty and integration of the POTUS? Instead of standing with wounded America, Bush chose to play the mouth-piece of the terrorists: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010917-11.html
And yet, Americans did not as much as questioned Bush's treason. Infact, thanks to the lies and fabrigations, Bush sacrificed Ameircan lives ot protect ther very wahhabbis who had attacked America. Bush sacrificed American lives for the very Saudis who had attacked America. But that is not all, Bush went on to include terrorists Saudi Arabia and Pakistan as his 'allies' in a phony 'war-on-terror'. Little did Americans know that Bush has no intentions of keeping his promise to bring Osama to justice and knew all along that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Is this the POTUS this great nation deserves? Yet, noone in congress or outside questioned POTUS. Did not Americans now that daddy Bush had made new friends and family in Al Sabahs and Al Sauds? Didn't Ameircans know that Bush Jr was financed by Bin Ladens and other wahhabbis? At the very least, POTUS had a conflict of interest. Since noone questioned POTUS, he went on to "increas" student's visas for Saudis, increasing arms and aid for both terrorist nations and continued to shield them from justice.
Question is why was Bush not questioned for dragging his feet over 9/11 commission? Why did he include countries, suspected of architecting 9/11, as his 'allies'. What was his interest in protecting the murderers of 3000 Ameericans? Why was POTUS not as much as questioned, if not impeached.
Now, in hindsight, Vincient Bugloisi has compiled a tight legal case against POTUS. Now, time has come when POTUS's allies are openly against America. Why is POTUS not quesined over his 'allies'? Why don't American, who have been sold out to POTUS's distant family in Riyadh. On oen hand, Bush sacrificed American lives to protect rich yet, murderous Saudis. If this is not the betrayal of Americans and the highest public office, what is? My point is that POTUS, who invariably on the said fo Saudis, against Americans, should be impeached on legal grounds: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45f1Riv_z1I
What are you talking about?
Posted by: Hugh at October 29, 2008 12:57 PM
Hugh,
No, nothing personal. Just am surprised that people (I don't mean you... you) can't see that George Bush has sold this country to the Saudis. Infact, I would go one step furthr to say how could Americans elect such a corrupt, timid, spoilt brat to the office of a POTUS. The presiential race of 2000 was so close and controvrcially won in another Bush state... Florida. 9/11 was a test of metal which showed Bush in the light of his true nature. Even though 3000 Americans were murdered on 9/11, with twin-towers still smouldering, Bush smoked cigars with the very wahhabbi whose countrymen attacked America. In response, Bush ensured that Saudis were flown to safety, while all American flights were grounded. Then, Bush goes on to drag hi sfeet over the 9/11 commission and when it was formed, blackened out pages on Saudi Arabia. All this AFTER 9/11. Does this not raise doubts about the loyalty and integration of the POTUS? Instead of standing with wounded America, Bush chose to play the mouth-piece of the terrorists: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010917-11.html
And yet, Americans did not as much as questioned Bush's treason. Infact, thanks to the lies and fabrigations, Bush sacrificed Ameircan lives ot protect ther very wahhabbis who had attacked America. Bush sacrificed American lives for the very Saudis who had attacked America. But that is not all, Bush went on to include terrorists Saudi Arabia and Pakistan as his 'allies' in a phony 'war-on-terror'. Little did Americans know that Bush has no intentions of keeping his promise to bring Osama to justice and knew all along that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Is this the POTUS this great nation deserves? Yet, noone in congress or outside questioned POTUS. Did not Americans now that daddy Bush had made new friends and family in Al Sabahs and Al Sauds? Didn't Ameircans know that Bush Jr was financed by Bin Ladens and other wahhabbis? At the very least, POTUS had a conflict of interest. Since noone questioned POTUS, he went on to "increas" student's visas for Saudis, increasing arms and aid for both terrorist nations and continued to shield them from justice.
Question is why was Bush not questioned for dragging his feet over 9/11 commission? Why did he include countries, suspected of architecting 9/11, as his 'allies'. What was his interest in protecting the murderers of 3000 Ameericans? Why was POTUS not as much as questioned, if not impeached.
Now, in hindsight, Vincient Bugloisi has compiled a tight legal case against POTUS. Now, time has come when POTUS's allies are openly against America. Why is POTUS not quesined over his 'allies'? Why don't American, who have been sold out to POTUS's distant family in Riyadh. On oen hand, Bush sacrificed American lives to protect rich yet, murderous Saudis. If this is not the betrayal of Americans and the highest public office, what is? My point is that POTUS, who invariably on the said fo Saudis, against Americans, should be impeached on legal grounds: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45f1Riv_z1I
Sorry for the double-post. Please remove the first. Thanks.
Dimwit (aka Jowen),
Since 2000 under 300 Israelis have been killed by Palestinians.
Who started the intifada? Why were seders bombed? Can we bomb a mosque in return?
Jowan: Those rockets that are apparently fired into 'Israel' seldom cause any physical damage, and pales in comparison to what the Zionist fire and drop into Palestine.
What do you mean 'apparently'? Now your getting into the world of lies.
The firing of these rockets into Israel is done with the 'intent' to do harm. The fact that the terrorist Palestinians can't hit what they fire at, does not alter intent.
If someone is shooting at 'you', what do you think their intent is???
And if you have the means to take the shooter out, would you do it?