Pakistan Aids Insurgency in Afghanistan, Reports Assert(nytimes.com)
nytimes.com
Pakistan Aids Insurgency in Afghanistan, Reports Assert
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/26/world/asia/26isi.html
4 コメント
Looks like they are going to take some consideration of operational security in the relase of these documents:
"We have delayed the release of some 15,000 reports from the total archive as part of a harm minimization process demanded by our source. After further review, these reports will be released, with occasional redactions, and eventually, in full, as the security situation in Afghanistan permits."
"We have delayed the release of some 15,000 reports from the total archive as part of a harm minimization process demanded by our source. After further review, these reports will be released, with occasional redactions, and eventually, in full, as the security situation in Afghanistan permits."
>Nonetheless, senior lawmakers say they have no doubt that Pakistan is aiding insurgent groups. “The burden of proof is on the government of Pakistan and the ISI to show they don’t have ongoing contacts,” said Senator Jack Reed, a Rhode Island Democrat on the Armed Services Committee who visited Pakistan this month and said he and Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, the committee chairman, confronted Pakistan’s prime minister, Yousaf Raza Gilani, yet again over the allegations.
Wait... what? Granted, it looks pretty bad, but what does this imply about our good Democrat's view of "innocent until proven guilty"? If they have evidence, bring it out and be done with it; if not, that's a rather backwards claim.
Wait... what? Granted, it looks pretty bad, but what does this imply about our good Democrat's view of "innocent until proven guilty"? If they have evidence, bring it out and be done with it; if not, that's a rather backwards claim.
Innocent until proven guilty is for courts of law. In real life I don't go back to that restaurant that probably gave me food poisoning even though I can't prove it.
Anyway, the U.S.'s attitude to Pakistan is illogically friendly, for more see: http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/10/whats-pakistans-secret...
Anyway, the U.S.'s attitude to Pakistan is illogically friendly, for more see: http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/10/whats-pakistans-secret...
In Kandahar fields the poppies grow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.
We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved, and were loved, and now we lie
In Kandahar fields.
Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Kandahar fields.
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.
We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved, and were loved, and now we lie
In Kandahar fields.
Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Kandahar fields.
The notion that the ISI works with the Taliban is an open secret; it's alluded to more or less directly in a Frontline episode from last year, for (one) instance.
Pakistani politics are not simple. It is probably a mistake to view Pakistan as a single, coherent state. The ISI in particular does not appear to be accountable to "civilian leadership", which who knows if that even exists.