| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
It would have cast into doubt so many of the bedrock assumptions of the "war on terror," you see.
Friend and Ally Update: "Taliban leader killed by SAS was Pakistan officer," by Christina Lamb in the Times, October 12 (thanks to Satinder):
British officials covered up evidence that a Taliban commander killed by special forces in Helmand last year was in fact a Pakistani military officer, according to highly placed Afghan officials.The commander, targeted in a compound in the Sangin valley, was one of six killed in the past year by SAS and SBS forces. When the British soldiers entered the compound they discovered a Pakistani military ID on the body.
It was the first physical evidence of covert Pakistani military operations against British forces in Afghanistan even though Islamabad insists it is a close ally in the war against terror.
Britain’s refusal to make the incident public led to a row with the Afghan president Hamid Karzai, who has long accused London of viewing Afghanistan through the eyes of Pakistani military intelligence, which is widely believed to have been helping the Taliban.
“He feels he has been telling everyone about Pakistan for the past six years and here was the evidence, yet London refused to release it, because they care more about their relations with Islamabad than Kabul,” said a source close to the president. “He knows Britain is worried about inflaming its large Pakistani population, but that is no excuse.”
So furious was Karzai that he threatened to expel British diplomats. When some months later he was informed by the governor of Helmand that British officials were secretly negotiating with the Taliban, he expelled two men and accused Britain of wanting to set up a training camp for former Taliban fighters.
Karzai will visit London next month for talks with Gordon Brown in an attempt to repair the strained relations between the two countries....
Posted by Robert at October 13, 2008 8:15 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
"He knows Britain is worried about inflaming its large Pakistani population, but that is no excuse."
On the contrary, it IS an excuse, though a tragic one. Britain's large "Pakistani" (read: Muslim) population will increasingly determine the course of British foreign and domestic policy. Get used to it.
Posted by: Cornelius![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at October 13, 2008 8:27 AM
“He knows Britain is worried about inflaming its large Pakistani population, but that is no excuse.”
From the story.
One of those famous unintended consequences of letting the Pakis into Britain en masse, and a tacit admission that Muslims are the only group that creates this kind of problem. One would think that, sooner or later, British policy makers would ask themselves whether there has been any upside to this massively misguided policy. As Cornelius noted, there are likely to be more such instances of this in the future.
Posted by: Eastview at October 13, 2008 8:43 AM
Right on the button, Cornelius, although "tragic" is a bit of an understatement. Just imagine what it would have been like if, in September 1939, there had been one million Germans living in Britain.
We have been infamously betrayed by our political class in Britain. They failed to regulate the banks, and now our economy is collapsing. They failed to control immigration, and now we have an immense fifth column within our borders.
I cannot immagine a bleaker future.
at October 13, 2008 8:46 AM
He was an innocent civilian, don't confuse me!
Posted by: sheik yer'mami at October 13, 2008 8:52 AM
Right on the button, Cornelius, although "tragic" is a bit of an understatement. Just imagine what it would have been like if, in September 1939, there had been one million Germans living in Britain.
If only it was 1 million, I would wager that the real number is probably 5x that.
at October 13, 2008 9:03 AM
We are watching a disaster in the making all over Europe. It is very sad to see this and it may very well be our future we are watching. With the corrupt political players both there and here, it is hard to envision a peaceful ending to it all.
Posted by: Spot on at October 13, 2008 9:04 AM
"He knows Britain is worried about inflaming its large Pakistani population, but that is no excuse."
When Benazier Butto was blown up even the BBC admitted that the internal politics of Pakistan are important to Britain because of its large Pakistani population – sorry community. It is remarkable that the last generation of British statesmen had the sense to get out of the empire and all its problems but these idiots with a combination of stupidity and arrogance have brought the problems here.
at October 13, 2008 9:29 AM
can't smear the reputation of the "Officers Corps" with the truth. Might be bad for morale.
Posted by: AllahSnackbar at October 13, 2008 9:39 AM
"He knows Britain is worried about inflaming its large Pakistani population, but that is no excuse."
Strange. I thought that Britain's Pakistani immigrants were ardent British patriots, fiercely devoted to the British way of life, freedom of speech and democracy, and not at all interested in congregating in ghettos, living off state handouts, speaking only in Urdu and supporting the Jihad.
Posted by: watling at October 13, 2008 9:54 AM
How much of the British attitude is influenced by Pakistan's once being part of the Empire while Afghanistan defeated British forces?
Is sentiment the overriding force? Does Britain really care what happens in Afghanistan or is it revenge they seek?
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/lohdi.php?articleid=12019
Is there any legitimacy to the sentiment expressed below?
(Taken from article linked above)
In Afghanistan, Britain's initial efforts to determine the course of Afghan events were more successful than in Iraq: ISAF, a British project which initially consisted of only British forces, was in charge of Kabul. The Northern Alliance, whose Tajik faction has close ties with London, formed the government. Hamid Karzai, the subservient nominal Pashtun, was ennobled and served as a sop to Pashtun demands for representation in any future Afghan government.
Whether or not British inspired, the proposal that the ISAF mission should be transformed into a NATO mission was of enormous benefit to Britain's ultimate objective of "destroying" the Pashtun Taliban, because Britain was fully aware that it neither had the men nor material to achieve its objectives alone – NATO forces were meant to serve the same purpose now as Britain's colonial native contingents had done in the past, and other countries were going to share the cost of avenging Britain's past military defeats in Afghanistan – Brilliant!
Posted by: PMK at October 13, 2008 10:36 AM
Just imagine what it would have been like if, in September 1939, there had been one million Germans living in Britain.
Posted by: Nokingofmine
Something akin to this did, in fact, happen in the U.S. during World War I. There was a fairly large first/second generation German immigrant population in the U.S. Support for the Kaiser was widespread in this group and there was fear it would undermine America's alliance with Great Britain. This fear led to passage of the Sedition Act of 1918 which made it illegal to use "disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language" about the United States government, flag, or armed forces during war.
The Sedition Act was an amendment to and strengthening of the earlier Espionage Act of 1917, which made it a crime to help enemies of the United States.
Both laws are still in force in the U.S., although one might wonder if they would survive a U.S. Supreme court challenge by the ACLU in today's PC climate.
If England has such laws on the books, perhaps it's time to dust them off and put them to use. If not, then God help you.
Posted by: Eastview at October 13, 2008 10:41 AM
I don't believe the SAS personnel would have been party to the cover up. They are the guys who shot that Paki officer (and probably would have been shot at by him too, given the chance). The cover up is at the political level. But I still don't understand, why, if the Brits were so concerned about annoying the Pakistani bloc-voters, what's the great idea of staying on in Afghanistan. Is their gov't schizophrenic?
The game of make-believe goes farther back. I remember the media pics of the captured Taliban fighters just after their collapse. There was one rather scared looking Westerner (US or Australian, I forget which) who was wearing a spanking new Paki army cardigan.
In this cat and mouse scenario, can anyone tell who is the cat and who is the mouse?
Posted by: Hedgehog at October 13, 2008 11:24 AM
Estimates today of Muslims in Europe:
France, 5 million
Germany, 3 million
Britain, 2 million
Holland, 1 million
Spain, 1 million
Italy, 850,000
and on and on...
Of course, just like in America, nobody really knows the actual number of illegal immigrants. It's probably higher than anyone believes.
Europe's a goner.
Posted by: Cornelius at October 13, 2008 12:34 PM
In this cat and mouse scenario, can anyone tell who is the cat and who is the mouse?
-Hedgehog
We're the cat but the cat is Tom and the mouse is Jerry.
Posted by: PMK at October 13, 2008 12:57 PM
And still they will con our governments into giving them cash.
Posted by: apostate_islam at October 13, 2008 4:44 PM
PMK
This is I am afraid, typical left wing liberal bunk and whatever reasons the British are in Afghanistan for, it is not to avenge past defeats. If the British cared about such things they would have to go to war with most of the world because as a British Field Marshall said in WW2 “The British soldier has been defeated so often he is indifferent to victory and defeat”. I think it is a compliment that several countries (including the US) actually commemorate the first time they defeated the British Army. What army wants to remember shooting up a lot of spearmen? Man when you defeat the British Army it means you have arrived on the military scene!
It is worth mentioning that the British are always being reminded of the disastrous Afghan War of 1838 but never of the second Afghan War of 1881 which was quite different. Briefly the British Resident in Kabul was killed and his bodyguard of Indian soldiers massacred after a notable fight after which the heads of the two British officers were paraded through the streets on poles. OK, its part of their culture. As it happens the resident and the commander of the guard, Lt. Hamilton were both Irishmen as was the commander of the Indian Army Lord Roberts.
As an Irishman, Lord Roberts took particular offence and brushing aside promises of the King to punish the killers force marched his army to Kabul, rounded up and hanged some Afghans and marched out again. In the process he kicked the s*** out of any Afghans who got in his way. Needless to say the leading liberal politician of the day said Afghans were as much Gods children as anyone else and painted a picture woman and children freezing in the snows of Afghanistan. Roberts reply was “If you want a repeat of 1838 you had better send another General”
This gives me an excuse to direct you to a link to the gloriously politically incorrect statue of Lt Hamilton commemorating his defence of the residency.
at October 13, 2008 5:37 PM
Fred,
Thanks. I'm going to the link in a moment.
One question, though.
What about the fact that India was part of the empire and Afghanistan wasn't?
I found that article looking for an answer to the question above. Not that there was anything malicious in the British action in Afghanistan, but that they were just used to siding with Pakistan/India.
at October 13, 2008 6:03 PM
Interesting.
Posted by: PMK at October 13, 2008 6:05 PM
PMK
The British had only two interests in Afghanistan. The first was to stop the age-old practice of Afghan tribesmen of raiding into territory that had become part of their India. The border was not defined until about 1900 and an officer in the 1930’s said the tribesmen had no political motives and raided just for sport and loot. The Afghans then and now are only doing what they have done for centuries.
The second interest was that Russian expansion eastward in the late 19th century raised the prospect of a Russian Army on the Northwest frontier of India. That kept them awake at nights and they did not give a damn about what the Afghan’s did as long as they did not let the Russians in.
Apart from that they never attempted to impose their rule on the Afghans as they knew the place was a dump and the financial and military cost was just not worth it.
at October 13, 2008 7:19 PM
So then.....
The British government are pro Islam(NuLabour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat)
The British Armed Forces/Security Services are pro Islam
The British Police are pro Islam
The British Media are pro Islam.....
How on earth are we supposed to stop the Islamisation of the UK when none of the above are on the side of the people?
Am I smelling the air of possible revolution and civil war?
Posted by: Richard the Lionheart at October 15, 2008 5:46 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)