The Pakistani response depends heavily on the argument that "Hey, we're the victims here!" But Pakistan's double game and policy of steam control with jihadists and Islamic supremacist sympathizers have created the environment for more jihadist attacks, and more Pakistani casualties. An update on this story. "Pakistan denies BBC report on Taliban links," by Chris Allbritton for Reuters, October 27:
RAWALPINDI, Pakistan (Reuters) - Pakistan strongly denied Thursday a BBC report that alleged the Pakistani military, along with its intelligence arm, supplied and protected the Afghan Taliban and al Qaeda.
A number of middle-ranking Taliban commanders detailed what they said was extensive Pakistani support in interviews for a BBC documentary series, the first part of which was broadcast Wednesday.
Pakistan's Interior Minister Rehman Malik, on a visit to Britain, criticized the program, telling a London news conference that the Taliban were trying to create a wedge between their adversaries by making such allegations.
Which Rehman Malik? That Rehman Malik.
"We are victims, victims of war, we have lost over 35,000 innocent people, including senior officers, policemen, and normal foot soldiers. I think doubting us is really heartbreaking ... We have stood in the front line," Malik said, referring to Pakistan's fight against militant groups.
"We are facing daily these suicide bombers. If they had been trained by us, we should not be getting ourselves killed," he said.
A former Afghan intelligence head also told the BBC that Afghanistan gave former Pakistani president General Pervez Musharraf information in 2006 that Osama bin Laden was hiding in northern Pakistan, but the intelligence was not acted on. The al Qaeda leader was killed in the same area by U.S. special forces in May this year.
Pakistan's military denied the BBC report.
"We consider that this report is highly biased, it is one-sided, it doesn't have the version of the side which is badly hit or affected by this report," Major General Athar Abbas, spokesman for the Pakistani military, told Reuters.
"So therefore, other than that, it's factually incorrect."
One Taliban commander, Mullah Qaseem, told the BBC that Pakistan had played a significant role in providing supplies and a hiding place for Afghan Taliban fighters.
Abbas denied this, questioning Qaseem's credibility.
He said the head of Pakistan's spy agency, the Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), had already said "not a single bullet or financial support" had been given to groups named in the BBC report....
OH ..... YAWN!!!!! YET AGAIN
ANGRY & LYING PAKISTANIS
..........JUST FOR A CHANGE EH!
ARE THERE ANY OTHER.
Me thinks they protest too much. If Osama lived for 5 yrs. across the street from a military training center and the Special Forces had to sneak in and get him, Pakistan is either grossly incompetent or lying through their teeth. They certainly are not a competent, trustworthy partner in the war against terrorism.
l like how this pak official uses the word "us" as victims,, when theydo not give a frig about their lowly people in this war of islamic parasites vs the tax paying West!
There is a question. If Pakistan supports the Taliban, why are the Taliban officials giving evidence that Pakistan supports them?
"A number of middle-ranking Taliban commanders detailed what they said was extensive Pakistani support in interviews for a BBC documentary series..."
My first suspicion is that there is a 3-sided or 4-sided game between the Taliban, the Americans, and the Pakistanis. The Taliban want to be independent of Pakistani's ISI, but are totally dependent on their support. Similarly, the Pakistani government wants to use the Taliban as a pawn against India, but becomes vulnerable to its own domestic terror groups, who enjoy strong support by Islamist within its own government.
The first half of that BBC report again available here on Youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YFbnpyiceY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDuJJ5T5bTY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-Hqx1T8zC0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuVON8uSkYs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMndWdiyf2k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghQeJ_-5UNM
The second part of that BBC report will be aired on BBC next Wednesday, November 2.
Geostrategical alliances are forged on a cynical basis: the enemy of my enemy is my friend. You have a "controller" and a "pawn". Such alliances are in fact inherently made for the short term, because both parties do not have the same scheme in mind, they do not share the same interests in the long run. There's always some hidden agenda, particularly from a pawn's point of view.
Alas, it happens regularly that such alliances evolve into a seemingly permanent agreement, depending on how long it can be useful to both. And then something more ominous starts playing up: controllers erroneously assume that the interests of both parties are exactly the same out of sheer complacency, while geostrategical circumstances start changing in the background. That's a psychological thing.
Result: controllers lose control over their pawns, their pawns start biting the hand that feeds them. The controller is in for a rude awakening: "We thought this was a permanent agreement, and now they are betraying us." Wrong assumption, but it has happened all throughout the Cold War, and it still happens today ! And it will happen again and again, because history repeats itself...
Americans gave the Zia Ul Haq regime billions to crank up the capabilities of the ISI to effectively organize Mujahideen resistance against the Soviets. The ISI decided to back a unified Taliban movement to further their own interests in Afghanistan after the Soviets had to leave. And the Americans wrongly assumed Pakistan was still an ally when NATO had to move in, when everyone knows the ISI is a hotbed of Jihadism that answers to nobody, not even the Pakistani government !
If NATO is fighting the Taliban, then it is also fighting their so-called ally Pakistan ! The West has arrived at this realization a bit late, in spite of all the evidence. What does that tell us about our politicians, exactly ?
Another story about Pakistan's role in the war on terror -
Pakistan rejects US claims on border fire - (AFP)
"Lieutenant General Curtis Scaparrotti, the deputy US commander in Afghanistan, said that rocket and mortar fire against his forces appears to come from within sight of Pakistani military posts.
"In some locations from time to time you will see what just appears to us to be a collaboration... or at a minimum a looking the other way," he said."
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hIr0My6h0Me-2iIHh46iriP3UbEg?docId=CNG.e36f2a064ae9f3d680ca17681183754b.e1
Another story about Pakistan's role in the war on terror -
Pakistan rejects US claims on border fire - (AFP)
"Lieutenant General Curtis Scaparrotti, the deputy US commander in Afghanistan, said that rocket and mortar fire against his forces appears to come from within sight of Pakistani military posts.
"In some locations from time to time you will see what just appears to us to be a collaboration... or at a minimum a looking the other way," he said."
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hIr0My6h0Me-2iIHh46iriP3UbEg?docId=CNG.e36f2a064ae9f3d680ca17681183754b.e1
My Dad taught me when I was very young, that if you suspect someone is lying to you, encourage them to lie more, then compare the lies...
______________________________
From the article:
""We are facing daily these suicide bombers. If they had been trained by us, we should not be getting ourselves killed," he said."
and
""We consider that this report is highly biased, it is one-sided, it doesn't have the version of the side which is badly hit or affected by this report,"...
So therefore, other than that, it's factually incorrect.""
_______________________________________________________
Analyze these gems of convoluted logic and contradiction, and I am sure you will conclude that the Interior Minister is lying.
""We are victims, victims of war, we have lost over 35,000 innocent people, including senior officers, policemen, and normal foot soldiers. I think doubting us is really heartbreaking ... We have stood in the front line," Malik said, referring to Pakistan's fight against militant groups.
"We are facing daily these suicide bombers. If they had been trained by us, we should not be getting ourselves killed," he said".
The problem might be, Pakistan has never arrested, or helped any other country from arresting any of these terrorists.
For a very nice example of just how habitually and automatically and reflexively Muslims lie, especially when they have just been caught doing something bad, see here.
http://israelisoldiersmother.blogspot.com/2011/10/liars-just-liars.html
Friday, October 28, 2011 - "Liars, Just Liars".
"We are facing daily these suicide bombers. If they had been trained by us, we should not be getting ourselves killed," he said''
Am I the only one who finds this blackly amusing ?