Sep 05 2006

Pakistan Provides Bin Laden, Taliban Haven

Published by at 5:25 pm under All General Discussions,Pakistan

Boy, if this is true then something screwy is going on. It could mean a lot of things. It could mean Pakistan is giving up the hunt and we are losing an ally thanks to all the surrender talk from the left. Or, it could also mean Pakistan is gaining political cover for some future ‘event’. Who knows.

7 responses so far

7 Responses to “Pakistan Provides Bin Laden, Taliban Haven”

  1. kathie says:

    Maybe Musharif is in trouble. He had a guy killed a few days ago that caused riots. So for now he may need to pull back. Or he needs more from the US. Or he is not happy with our relationship with India. Will be interesting to see how it plays out. Maybe he knows Osama is in Iran.

  2. pull says:

    I think it is a ruse.

    If they are already hiding him, they would profit nothing by announcing this to the world.

    There is a radical extremist party trying to win over Pakistan. If this is a product of that kind of push… we are in some serious trouble.

    India, btw, who should be a massive ally here, in all of this… we have alienated. We have sided with Pakistan against India several times also in the past. This is not wise.

    Pakistan is a real snake in the grass. It is only a matter of time before it starts biting people.

  3. kathie says:

    This is interesting from Astute Blogger-
    VOA:
    … a NATO spokesman, Major Quentin Innesm said allied forces are closing in on Taleban guerrillas, pushing them into what he called “a bit of a trap.”
    FOX/AP:
    U.S. artillery and airstrikes killed between 50 and 60 suspected Taliban militants on Tuesday, the fourth day of a NATO-led offensive in southern Afghanistan, a NATO spokesman said. … NATO has already reported more than 200 Taliban killed in the operation. … He said there had been no NATO or Afghan troop casualties.
    UK TIMES:
    The leaders of Pakistan and Afghanistan will attempt today to bury their differences and agree a joint strategy to combat Islamic militants operating on both sides of their border.

    As Nato forces fought an estimated 700 Taleban rebels in southern Afghanistan, President Musharraf prepared to make his first visit to Kabul for nearly two years, where he hopes to repair relations with President Karzai.

    “We hope it will be a major, positive step for relations between the two countries and for co-operation in fighting terrorism,” a spokesman for the Afghan Foreign Ministry said. Yesterday Pakistan took a big step towards ending the fighting in the lawless Waziristan region when it signed a peace deal with tribal leaders. The agreement commits local militants to halt attacks on both sides of the border.

    In return Pakistan will reduce its military presence and compensate tribesmen whose relatives have been killed or whose properties have been damaged. A key provision of the deal is that tribesmen will expel foreign fighters from the area. The region is believed to be a haven for al-Qaeda fighters and members of the former Taleban regime in Afghanistan. Without a base in Pakistan their operations could be seriously disrupted.
    The timing of the Paki/Waziri deal and the Paki-Afghani deal and the very high death rates for the Taliban (in the current NATO operation), and the understated quote from the NATO spokesman make me feel that Osama has finally been cornered. Stay tuned.

  4. kathie says:

    Bill Riggio confirms that it is even worse then we think.

  5. Militant PR: Terror Has a New Role……

    Those posting on latest terrorist propaganda stories…Strata-sphere: Pakistan Provides Bin Laden, Taliban Haven…

  6. CatoRenasci says:

    Macranger at Macsmind says it was denied in this report in the IHT:

    http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2006/09/06/asia/AS_GEN_Pakistan_Bin_Laden.php

    Makes more sense this way, now doesn’t it.

  7. pull says:

    Regarding new development on this:

    True, it is a miscommunication. However, what the guy actually said is still bizarre by any standard. This man should not have been doing an interview in English… and the reporter was unable to properly handle a poor English speaker.