Pakistan’s Fight Against Extremism at Home Rebuffed by Trump

Washington would be wise to engage the new Pakistani administration to help fight extremism at home and bring about reasonable solutions to regional crises, rather than exacerbate them, says Ann Wright.

By Ann Wright

The relationship between the Trump administration and Pakistan is frosty after the United States cut $330 million in military aid to Pakistan in October over what Washington says is its failure to reign in militant groups operating in Afghanistan.

The Obama administration had also suspended $800 million in aid in 2011 and $350 in military aid in 2016 for the same reasons.

But the U.S. isolates itself from Pakistan at its own peril. With a population of over 202 million, Pakistan has the sixth largest population in the world following China, India, the U.S., Indonesia and Brazil. It is one of nine countries that have developed nuclear weapons, and is a key security player in Afghanistan, Iran, India and China.

During the Cold War Pakistan played a pivotal role for the U.S. that was revived after 9/11 but has since faded.

With the U.S.rebuff, it’s not surprising the new government of Prime Minister Imran Khan, a former cricket star and U.S. critic, has turned to neighbors for help, namely Iran and China. Khan’s first official meeting was with Javad Zarif, Iran’s foreign minister.

Khan: Fighting extremists and Washington. (Wikimedia Commons)

While I was in Pakistan two weeks ago speaking at a conference on “The Geopolitics of Knowledge and Emerging World Order” held by the Pakistani National Defense University, Khan again met with Zarif. Khan was also off to China as Beijing’s guest of honor at the First China International Import Expo in Shanghai. The Khan administration is banking on $60 billion in land and sea projects underway with the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a link in China’s massive project of the Belt-and-Road Initiative (BRI), otherwise known as the New Silk Road.

The Trump administration has been left on the sidelines—again—in a crucial region where the U.S. is in its 18th year of war on Pakistan’s neighbor, Afghanistan.

As I was in Pakistan from Oct. 31 to Nov. 3, the challenges for the new Pakistani government were evident. Protests paralyzed the country over the decision of the Supreme Court to acquit a Pakistani Christian, Aasia Bibi, of blasphemy (insulting Islam or the Prophet Mohammed) after she had been on death row for eight years.

The Supreme Court had ruled eight years ago there was no evidence to convict her, and the court cited the Koran to bolster its decision. But the court has now come under threat of death by the religious extremists because of its verdict.

Mere allegations of blasphemy have resulted in deaths of those accused. This has been led largely by vigilantes and religious zealots of the the Tehreek-e-Labaik Pakistan Party. Founded just three years ago, the TLP blockaded the capital, Islamabad, for several weeks last year in calling for stricter enforcement of the controversial blasphemy laws. It forced the resignation of the federal law minister. The protests also paved the way for the party to win more than 2.23 million votes in the July 25 general election.

The protests over the Bibi decision continued for three days with Khan and Pakistan’s army chief of staff warning the protesters the army would act if “chaos” resulted.

On Nov. 2, the government shut down the mobile phone system across the entire nation to disrupt the protestors’ communications. For twelve hours, Pakistan relied on landline telephones and home and business internet.

Schools were closed for two days and traffic in all major cities were snarled by the protestors’ roadblocks.

Later on Nov. 2, Taliban leader Maulana Sami Ul-Haq was stabbed and killed in his home in the military city of Rawalpindi.

Ul-Haq had been an internationally known cleric and chancellor of Pakistan’s Darul Uloom Haqqania seminary and university. The university had awarded Afghan Taliban chief Mullah Omar an honorary doctorate and the majority of Afghan Taliban leaders, including Jalaluddeen Haqqani, founder of the Haqqani network, had studied there.

Promises of Reconciliation and Challenges

After the Taliban came to power in Afghanistan in the mid-1990s, after the U.S. had aided Islamist militants, including Osama bin Laden in the 1980s, eight ministers in the Taliban government in Kabul studied at the university, which gave the now slain ul-Haq the title, “Father of the Taliban.”

After US-led talks in Qatar between a Taliban delegation and Pakistani religious leaders, Pakistan released several Taliban leaders, including co-founder and second in command Abdul Ghani Bradar, who had been detained in Pakistan since Al Qaeda’s September 11, 2001 attack.

These are the promises of reconciliation and the challenges facing the secular-leaning Khan government, which seeks a modicum of independence from Washington. Instead of support, the Trump administration is trying to undermine Pakistan.

On Sunday, Donald Trump criticized Pakistan, telling Fox News it should have revealed that Osama bin Ladin was “living in Pakistan in what I guess they considered a nice mansion, right next to the military academy. Everybody in Pakistan knew he was there. And we give Pakistan $1.3 billion a year… I ended it because they don’t do anything for us, they don’t do a damn thing for us.”

Khan responded on Monday in a series of tweets, saying the “record needs to be put straight on Mr. Trump’s tirade against Pakistan: 1. No Pakistani was involved in 9/11 but Pak decided to participate in US War on Terror. Pakistan suffered 75,000 casualties in this war & over $123 bn was lost to economy … U.S. aid was a minuscule $20 bn … Our tribal areas were devastated & millions of ppl uprooted from their homes. The war drastically impacted lives of ordinary Pakistanis … Pak continues to provide free lines of ground & air communications … Can Mr Trump name another ally that gave such sacrifices?”

In his third tweet, Khan said: “Instead of making Pakistan a scapegoat for their failures, the US should do a serious assessment of why, despite 140,000 NATO troops plus 250,000 Afghan troops & reportedly $1 trillion spent on war in Afghanistan, the Taliban today are stronger than before.”

Washington would be wise to engage the new Pakistani administration to help fight extremism at home and bring about reasonable solutions to regional crises, rather than exacerbate them.

Ann Wright served 29 years in the U.S. Army/Army Reserves and retired as a Colonel.  She was also a U.S. diplomat for 16 years and worked in U.S. Embassies in Nicaragua, Grenada, Somalia, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Sierra Leone, Micronesia, Afghanistan and Mongolia.  She resigned from the U.S. government in March 2003 in opposition to the U.S. war on Iraq.  She is the co-author of “Dissent: Voices of Conscience.”

image_pdfimage_print

48 comments for “Pakistan’s Fight Against Extremism at Home Rebuffed by Trump

  1. Kathy Gray
    November 28, 2018 at 12:36 pm

    Judge Delays Decision Whether to Unseal Assange Criminal Complaint why was this article linked to an article about Pakistan?

  2. Raymond Comeau
    November 28, 2018 at 6:26 am

    Where in hell is the Assange article

  3. Greg Cantin
    November 28, 2018 at 1:23 am

    This is the link that is supposed to go to the Assange page!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  4. dean 1000
    November 27, 2018 at 1:48 pm

    Good Article. The military aid should have been converted to civilian projects.

    Thanks for the link Mild-ly Facetious. An ATOL article in 2013 about pipelines noted in passing that Pakistan reportedly produced nuclear weapons for Saudi Arabia. The weapon(s) were reportedly awaiting shipment in Dec. 2013. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/SOU-01-171213.html

    Congress should tell the Saudis to go Solar. It should not allow U.S. companies to build nuclear power plants where solar or other alternative fuel is feasible. The US should impose sanctions on companies or countries that build nuclear power plants where alternative fuel is feasible.
    Most people on the planet would go for sanctions like that.

  5. vinnieoh
    November 24, 2018 at 12:02 pm

    It’s difficult to imagine how Imran Khan, or any mere mortal, would be able to safely navigate his Pakistani ship of state through any kind of peaceful waters. China is every bit as ruthless and exploitive as US capitalists, and they are at their border. KSA is slowly building an eastern front against Iran in southern Afghanistan and also trying to weasel their way into Khan’s good graces as a buffer against Chinese economic exploitation. Pak and India remain suspicious and incendiary neighbors, and Islamic absolutism seems to have a particularly vigorous presence there.

    What would happen to the 17 year US cruxification of Afghanistan is Pakistan closed the overland route of US supply through their territory? Ever think about that Little Donny? Ever think about anything except yourself Little Donny?

    It wouldn’t surprise me (or many others) to eventually learn that TLP mentioned above is a US covert operation. Just yesterday they exploded a bomb at the Chinese embassy in Pakistan?

  6. ErdoGUNNED
    November 23, 2018 at 8:12 pm

    Trump and his horde and their predecessors should take the blame. Religion is the numero uno threat and the source of all terror and yet Trump still cannot wake up and smell the dung. Fight religion now and fight their backers who are the reactionary Saudi regime and their erstwhile Turk islamofascist ally and all the dreaded islamist militant outfits AROUND THE WORLD. Stop supporting these people. Yet the US is supporting them!

  7. MEexpert
    November 23, 2018 at 1:26 pm

    I have maintained for a long time that Pakistan should tell the US to take all that aid and shove it. Khan should have thrown Trump’s words back at him, i.e. the US has not done a damn thing for Pakistan except to destroy what once was a beautiful North-West part of the country and create sectarian divide throughout Pakistan with the help of Trump’s friends, the Saudis.

    The fact that everybody in Pakistan knew the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden except the CIA, should tell the American people that we are wasting billions of dollars on CIA. Trump should immediately eliminate this useless giant.

  8. November 23, 2018 at 12:03 pm

    People around the Earth can find some good reason for optimism when straight-talking, no-nonsense leaders like Imran Khan becomes supported then elected by the the people of Pakistan.

    Peace.

  9. mike k
    November 23, 2018 at 7:55 am

    Trump’s greatest success is his threatening the whole world openly in a way that has caused the nations of the world to come together and respond to the naked threat of US Mafia domination. How to get the bully to back down without triggering a crazy nuclear war is the difficult task of Chinese and Russian diplomacy. The only “diplomacy” Trump and his crew use is naked Mafia threats.

    • Sam F
      November 23, 2018 at 11:21 pm

      The isolation of bullies is a success for everyone, enough to wonder whether it is planned. Sanctions disrupt trade and might bring a few jobs back, but that may be theatre.

  10. Jeffrey P. Harrison
    November 22, 2018 at 1:57 pm

    Pakistan’s response is simple. Deny the US overland passage to Afghanistan.

  11. November 22, 2018 at 12:02 pm

    Very informative article. The Prime Minister speaks the truth when he tweeted: “In his third tweet, Khan said: “Instead of making Pakistan a scapegoat for their failures, the US should do a serious assessment of why, despite 140,000 NATO troops plus 250,000 Afghan troops & reportedly $1 trillion spent on war in Afghanistan, the Taliban today are stronger than before.”

    He has a way with words, summing up our efforts in Afghanistan.

    In one way, Trump is merely doing what previous Administrations have done, albeit in an uglier way. But there is a benefit to his bullying, it causes nations to realize that their reliance on our largesse is a two edged sword and forcing them to openly defy us by seeking better relations with those on our enemies list.

    It is also in a way, a quiet revolution, that owes a great deal to our greatest demon, Vladimir Putin. It is perhaps the best explanation of just why our leaders grow apoplectic when his name is mentioned or when he achieves some diplomatic victory.

    I think in the long run forcing us to abandon our way or the highway and seek peer relationships with other countries is a good thing for us. It could make us exceptional in a good way.

    .

    • Mild -ly - Facetious
      November 23, 2018 at 8:13 am

      Herman — “In one way, Trump is merely doing what previous Administrations have done, albeit in an uglier way.”

      Yes Herman, in an Exponentially UGLIER way. …

      Saudis Want a U.S. Nuclear Deal. >>> Can They Be Trusted Not to Build a Bomb?
      (excerpt)

      By David E. Sanger and William J. Broad
      Nov. 22, 2018

      WASHINGTON — Before Saudi Arabia’s crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, was implicated by the C.I.A. in the killing of Jamal Khashoggi, American intelligence agencies were trying to solve a separate mystery: Was the prince laying the groundwork for building an atomic bomb?

      The 33-year-old heir to the Saudi throne had been overseeing a negotiation with the Energy Department and the State Department to get the United States to sell designs for nuclear power plants to the kingdom. The deal was worth upward of $80 billion, depending on how many plants Saudi Arabia decided to build.

      But there is a hitch: Saudi Arabia insists on producing its own nuclear fuel, even though it could buy it more cheaply abroad, according to American and Saudi officials familiar with the negotiations. That raised concerns in Washington that the Saudis could divert their fuel into a covert weapons project — exactly what the United States and its allies feared Iran was doing before it reached the 2015 nuclear accord, which President Trump has since abandoned.

      Prince Mohammed set off alarms when he declared earlier this year, in the midst of the negotiation, that if Iran, Saudi Arabia’s fiercest rival, “developed a nuclear bomb, we will follow suit as soon as possible.” His negotiators stirred more worries by telling the Trump administration that Saudi Arabia would refuse to sign an agreement that would allow United Nations inspectors to look anywhere in the country for signs that the Saudis might be working on a bomb, American officials said.
      …………………………………………

      Trump’s depraved love affair with MBS along with his reckless hatred of Iran (as exhibited in his vapid approval of Saudi MASS MURDER in Yemen), provide clear implication that he’d have no compunction against Selling Nukes or Nuclear Material to the Evil Villainous Saudi Prince.

    • Mild - ly Facetious
      November 23, 2018 at 8:31 am
  12. Sam F
    November 22, 2018 at 11:42 am

    Pakistan’s rapprochement with Iran may allow it to mediate between KSA and Iran, to resolve the Sunni-Shia divide, if the extreme religious faction permits. Certainly moderation and mutual understanding are the paths to peace and prosperity in the Mideast, the exact opposite course of Israel/US/KSA, and Pakistan/Russia/China appear to be far more able leaders at this point.

  13. Jke Tedesky
    November 21, 2018 at 11:39 pm

    From a Pakistani point of view I would imagine the end of the U.S. era could be a good thing. Just say’n.

  14. jose
    November 21, 2018 at 9:28 pm

    If Washington’s chief objective were to make Pakistan to turn to its neighbors for help, it has succeeded brilliantly. Personally, I would have done the same thing for sheer survival.

  15. jose
    November 21, 2018 at 9:22 pm

    Miss Wright is correct to assert that: ” Washington would be wise to engage the new Pakistani administration to help fight extremism at home and bring about reasonable solutions to regional crises, rather than exacerbate them.” On the other hand, If Washington were not interested in peace and stability for Pakistan, It will continue with its present course of action. Mr. Trump should read Pakistani history in depth so he will not be lecture by Mr. Khan again.

    • Sam F
      November 23, 2018 at 9:11 pm

      I will suggest that presidents should be advised not by a warmongering National Security Council, but by a College of Policy Debate, constituted to protect all points of view, and to conduct moderated text-only debate among experts of all disciplines on status and policy options of each region. Debate summaries commented by all sides are to be available for public study.

      The debates would require a higher standard of argument in foreign and domestic policy on both right and left, and would have much reduced the group-think that led to our endless mad wars since WWII. Extreme and naïve politicians would be easier to expose, and media commentators would have a starting point and a standard for investigation and analysis.

      While most politicians ignore and attack careful analysis, and “the common man avoids the truth [because] it is dangerous, no good can come of it, and it doesn’t pay” (Mencken), the CPD can bring the knowledge of society to public debate, educate the electorate, discourage propaganda, and expose the wrongs of society and the corruption of government that desperately need reform.

  16. Antonio Costa
    November 21, 2018 at 7:26 pm

    “Extremists”? What’s an extremist? I found this article to be based on a flawed premise. One could call as a number of polls have shown, to be an extremist nation, violating international law and currently using state terrorism in 80 sovereign nations.

    We need to end these “engagements” which are based on imperial hegemony and supported by a policy of full spectrum dominance.

  17. KiwiAntz
    November 21, 2018 at 5:31 pm

    Pakistan is being used as yet another excuse, by America, to try & explain why they can’t win a War in Afghanistan, or for that matter, anywhere else in the World? The US Govt probably knew where Bin Laden was from the very start, following 9:11 & could have taken him out within days of the attacks?? But Bin Laden had to be keep alive & not killed, early on, because if they had taken him out at that time, there would have been no justification to invade Afghanistan & Iraq as the main instigator would have been dead? No, the USA needed a necessary excuse to invade those Countries & Bin Laden’s search to capture him provided that excuse for invasion? It’s apparent now that the real intentions & goal was to invade Countries such as Iraq, Libya, Syria & Iran, Countries that had nothing to do with 9/11! It was never about the capture of one elderly Terrorist, it was always about the American Empire ‘s Regime change ambition to invade Middle Eastern Countries Lands & steal their resources & murder its citizens? It never ceases to amaze me that America didn’t just take advantage of this disgraceful lie & depraved excuse for endless War & just used this as a invasion pretext for invading Saudi Arabia & stealing its Oilfield’s, instead of stealing Iraq’s? It would have been the cheaper option & saved them 1 trillion dollars & they would have cut of the snakes head of terror in one go? These snake headed Saudi’s made up most of the Terrorists who hyjacked the Planes on 9/11 & they are the biggest sponsors of ISIS Terrorists & Al Quaeda! But now Trump, the PIMP President of the US is sucking up to this murderous Saudi Prince MBs & his Satanic Nation, which really shows that America is nothing more than Saudi Arabia’s BI*TCH! With the horrendous murder of Khashoggi & Millions dying in Yemen, Trump’s America would sell its soul to the Devil for a Dollar & cares more about making money, Saudi money via war profiteering $ arms sales! America can’t let the death of one man such as Bin Laden or Khashoggi or millions in Yemen, stand in the way of profits! Hitler & his Third Reich would have been proud of Trump & his immoral America, the new Fascist state of our age, picking up the baton from the Nazi’s & running the same depraved race of death & destruction!

    • Sam F
      November 21, 2018 at 8:19 pm

      The lack of a US coup in KSA is likely due to the difficulty of finding an acceptable custodian of the Medina/Mecca holy sites. Some propose giving the sites back to Jordan, but nearly all Jordanians oppose the US despite cooperation of their govt. A coup would cause oil price instability and might fail, so if it is on the table, it awaits feasibility or careless decision makers.

    • Sam F
      November 21, 2018 at 8:29 pm

      Pakistan’s rapprochement with Iran may allow it to mediate between KSA and Iran, to resolve the Sunni-Shia divide, if the extreme religious faction permits. Certainly moderation and mutual understanding are the paths to peace and prosperity in the Mideast, the exact opposite course of Israel/US/KSA, and Pakistan/Russia/China appear to be far more able leaders at this point.

    • John Wright
      November 26, 2018 at 9:29 pm

      KiwiAntz –

      If you do even ten minutes of research you will see that the September 11th attacks were a classic false flag and that bin Laden was little more than the head patsy of said false flag. In fact, Sudan had bin Laden very well contained and thoroughly under surveillance in the late 90’s when the Clinton administration forced them to kick him out (and back to Afghanistan).

      I highly recommend reading “Triple Cross” by Peter Lance which clearly shows that Ali Abdul Saoud Mohamed, an Egyptian serving in the U.S. military, was bin Laden’s handler for the CIA in the run up to the September 11th false flag.

      Israel very cleverly manipulates the Saudis for their own purposes and also appears to be the primary architects of the September 11th false flag. Recall that 15 of the 19 alleged “hijackers” were Saudi nationals, with some getting fairly easily traced support from the Saudi royals. All the alleged “hijackers” were being closely monitored by Mossad teams working inside the United States.

      Be well.

  18. mike k
    November 21, 2018 at 5:03 pm

    The stupidity of Donald Trump, and the deep state that he represents is astonishing. Caligula had nothing on this guy!

  19. Andrew Dabrowski
    November 21, 2018 at 2:53 pm

    Kind of rare to find CN supporting US military involvement in distant countries.

    • mike k
      November 21, 2018 at 5:06 pm

      How do you arrive at that from this article, that clearly says US military involvement has been a disaster??

      • Andrew Dabrowski
        November 23, 2018 at 12:00 pm

        Did you read the beginning? That the “…United States cut $330 million in military aid to Pakistan…” is followed by “But the U.S. isolates itself from Pakistan at its own peril.” The word “disaster” is not used in the article, one must read deeply between the lines to find any implied criticism of military aid by this former Army colonel.

        I’m glad CN is getting more diverse points of view, I just don’t think the PoV of this article should be facilely embraced.

        • John Wright
          November 26, 2018 at 9:37 pm

          Mr. Dabrowski –

          U.S. engagement with Pakistan does not have to be in the form of military aid, does it?

          Trump seems to be ceding much of the world to both the Chinese and the Russians, which is in line with the Deep State’s apparent decision to abandon the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency.

          It’s a very large and old forest, and we in the U.S. are but a few saplings.

          Be well.

          • Andrew Dabrowski
            November 27, 2018 at 5:13 pm

            “U.S. engagement with Pakistan does not have to be in the form of military aid, does it?”

            No, but the article doesn’t mention any other kind, I thought that was unusual for CN.

    • Helen Marshall
      November 21, 2018 at 9:18 pm

      Where in here is there a suggestion of support for “US military involvement in distant countries?”

    • nowbuystuff
      November 22, 2018 at 12:46 am

      I’m not sure that’s the line being advocated here. The US is responsible in a large part for the rise in militant Islamism that exists in the tribal regions of North West Pakistan. I believe the article advocates responsible diplomatic and security ties with an ally of significant value.

      This could, and I would say, should involve less military engagement rather than more. Specifically an end to the drone warfare that has been waged in Pakistani territory.

      Perhaps you just want to hear a moralistic denunciation of US policy so you can feel better about yourself?

      • Andrew Dabrowski
        November 23, 2018 at 12:09 pm

        “Perhaps you just want to hear a moralistic denunciation of US policy so you can feel better about yourself?”

        Please, let’s not descend into ad hominems, I could easily turn that line around and send it back to you.

        The beginning of the article makes it clear that is “the line being advocated here”:

        “…United States cut $330 million in military aid to Pakistan… But the U.S. isolates itself from Pakistan at its own peril.”

        • nowbuystuff
          November 26, 2018 at 3:33 am

          Fair comment, that line did make me wince, but thanks for replying despite that.

          My reading of the article is that whatever the funding is called ‘military aid’=’poor compensation’ for the real cost to Pakistan.

          Imran Khan claims economic losses in the range of 120 billion USD. Which pails in comparison to the cost in human lives and suffering. Not to mention the loss of sovereignty.

      • Sam F
        November 23, 2018 at 6:54 pm

        Yes, although it is odd that the article starts with a lament of cuts in US military aid to Pakistan, without noting that humanitarian aid is far preferable even for US security. In regions with serious security problems, even humanitarian aid might increase military budgets.

        Pakistan is a complex case, with autonomous regions harboring extremists, and intransigent autonomous factions within security agencies. But where a government intends well and has public support, aid in diplomacy, trade, and humanitarian programs should predominate, with any military aid linked to adequate oversight and demonstrably proper use. The US NSC appears to ignore such issues.

    • Eddie
      November 22, 2018 at 12:32 pm

      AD — I too was disappointed by the tacit approval that the author of the article gives to ‘military aid’ seemingly representing desirable diplomatic relations. Why not use something more benevolent as a measure, like NON-military aid (assuming we still do that nowadays…?).

      • November 23, 2018 at 11:41 am

        Likewise. I thought that it was strange that the writer apparently accepted that there was no problem with the U.S. giving military aid to Pakistan.

        I support good relations with Pakistan, but does that have to involve giving them military aid.

  20. November 21, 2018 at 12:48 pm

    “Osama bin Ladin was living in Pakistan in what I guess they considered a nice mansion, right next to the military academy. Everybody in Pakistan knew he was there. And we give Pakistan $1.3 billion a year… I ended it because they don’t do anything for us, they don’t do a damn thing for us.” ~ Donald Trump

    Trump is going to blame Obama, as this is the only consistent feature of his administration. Of course, bin Ladin was living in Pakistan. Who knows how much the US knew and when? Like everything else, the US government lied to its own citizens about his assassination.

    The Killing of Osama bin Ladins

    • mike k
      November 21, 2018 at 5:08 pm

      Trump is an idiot who thinks he is a genius.

      • O Society
        November 21, 2018 at 8:32 pm

        Yes. He’s an idiot. That’s why they elected him. To inflict an idiot on the government we all hate.

        Even a broken clock is right twice a day though. Trump is right about Pakistan. They harbored bin Ladin and they aren’t our allies.

        • nowbuystuff
          November 22, 2018 at 12:52 am

          Well, if we must go down the speculative rabbit hole regards Bin Laden…… I would ask ‘who did they hide him for?’

          So long as he remained alive the US had a soundbite worthy pretext for endless military action.

        • O Society
          November 22, 2018 at 1:29 pm

          If you’d bothered to read Hersh’s article, you’d know the situation concerns US funding of Pakistan, with both sides using Osama bin Laden as leverage in this blood pact.

          • Masud Awan
            November 25, 2018 at 7:59 am

            Hersh’s account is heavily dependent on one anonymous source. No body in Pakistan believes the story of killing of Bin Laden in Abbotabad. There is no evidence at all to show he was killed and buried in the see, as is commonly reported. Obama needed this story for re-election as Bush needed Bin Laden Tapes for his re-election. Bin Laden kind’a favoured every American presidents starting from Reagan to Obama.

          • nowbuystuff
            November 26, 2018 at 9:31 am

            I have read the article, although only a couple of times before. I read it again just now and have to concede you make a good point well.

            My problem is that as you say….

            “..Of course, bin Ladin was living in Pakistan. Who knows how much the US knew and when?..”

            Maybe it wasn’t ‘walk-ins’ and ‘back-channels’ but just straight horse trading?

            Coming back to the point at hand, is it a good idea to alienate Pakistan. No.

      • Broompilot
        November 22, 2018 at 5:25 pm

        LOL – could be said about most of the human race.

        • anon4d2
          November 23, 2018 at 7:12 pm

          But he uses the terms relative to the rest of humanity, and you both probably agree that the idiots prevail.

    • John Wright
      November 26, 2018 at 9:50 pm

      If you want to understand bin Laden’s role in history, you really need to read “Triple Cross” by Peter Lance. The book documents quite clearly that an Egyptian named Ali Abdul Saoud Mohamed was bin Laden’s CIA handler in the run up to the September 11th false flag. Mohamed was serving in the U.S. military while assisting bin Laden for years.

      Of course the U.S. knew exactly where bin Laden was, just as they knew that he was in a military hospital in Rawalpindi receiving treatment on September 10th, 2001. The ISI is connected at the elbow with the CIA and has been since it was created.

Comments are closed.