Pakistan 'arrests CIA informants in Bin Laden raid'

[Gerald]

Pakistan has arrested five alleged informants for the CIA who helped in the US raid that killed al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden in northern Pakistan in May, US media report.

Among those held by the intelligence agency, the ISI, was the owner of a safe house rented to the CIA to watch Bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad, the New York Times reported.

The raid strained US-Pakistan ties.

US President Barack Obama said "someone" was protecting Bin Laden.

Pakistan has denied knowing Bin Laden's whereabouts and denied the New York Times report, in particular its claim that an army major was among those arrested.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on a recent visit to Pakistan that there was "absolutely no evidence that anyone at the highest level of the Pakistani government" knew where Bin Laden was.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-13773541

Note: 15 June 2011 Last updated at 10:38 GMT

[Gerald]

http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/5269/53412754lkh7vfq3.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/137/53412754lkh7vfq3.jpg/)

[Skybird]

Not finding Bin Laden, but persecuting those who helped to get him? What else does it take to show whose side Pakistan is on?

This act is almost a war declaration.

What a worthless rathole of a failed country, and its getting worse and worse and worse. When they test-exploded their first nuclear device so many years ago, all alarm-bells should have rang amok in the est, and one should have bombed and shreddered the place to pieces the size of matchsticks before they had time to assemble the next one.

Now they are said to have 50 or 60, iirc. Great.

[BossMark]

The least said the better on this topic, but it doesn't surprise me at all

[Skybird]

Pakistani Intelligence Announces Its Full Cooperation With U.S. Forces During Upcoming Top Secret June 12 Drone Strike On Al-Qaeda At 5:23 A.M. Near Small Town Of Razmani In North Waziristan (http://www.theonion.com/articles/pakistani-intelligence-announces-its-full-cooperat,20681/?utm_source=recentnews)

Priceless.

And so true.

[Gerald]

I would not go so far as to say that it is "Top Secret"

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

Not finding Bin Laden, but persecuting those who helped to get him? What else does it take to show whose side Pakistan is on?

This act is almost a war declaration.

What a worthless rathole of a failed country, and its getting worse and worse and worse. When they test-exploded their first nuclear device so many years ago, all alarm-bells should have rang amok in the est, and one should have bombed and shreddered the place to pieces the size of matchsticks before they had time to assemble the next one.

Now they are said to have 50 or 60, iirc. Great.
Being informant is same as spying for foreign power in this case to the USA. Its and stays as treason no matter what information was delivered and what was done with it.

[Gerald]

The last word is not said yet........

[Jimbuna]

Not finding Bin Laden, but persecuting those who helped to get him? What else does it take to show whose side Pakistan is on?




The US and the UK (if we've got the balls) should immediately pull the plug on all financial aid.

[Gerald]

Quite right UK, and even the U.S. should cut off all funds.

[Skybird]

Being informant is same as spying for foreign power in this case to the USA. Its and stays as treason no matter what information was delivered and what was done with it.
Who cares in this case? That Pakistan since years harbours terrorists, and that its military and intel community to wide degree are involved with it and support it and sympathise with it and conduct terrorist strikes against Indian civilian population via proxies and with freindly support from the ISI and Pak military, is what makes Pakistan a terrorist itself.

A terrporist with nuclear weapons and a history of proliferating nuclear technology and knowledge. In effect, Pakistan already IS at war with the West. Since many years.

[Jimbuna]

I wouldn't go so far as to say they are at war Sky but they aren't a long way off.

Thing is they've got no oil plus they have some nukes.

A bit like Iran I suppose...the west lost the opportunity to act when perhaps it could be argued that they should have.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing :DL

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

A terrporist with nuclear weapons and a history of proliferating nuclear technology and knowledge. In effect, Pakistan already IS at war with the West. Since many years.

This may all be true, but nevertheless it is hard to find fault with them for arresting those CIA agents. They ARE CIA agents working in Pakistan.

Or what do you think Pakistan should have done, turn a blind eye?

[Gerald]

Who said they are CIA agents, they are communicators, which is a significantly difference.

[Skybird]

This may all be true, but nevertheless it is hard to find fault with them for arresting those CIA agents. They ARE CIA agents working in Pakistan.

Or what do you think Pakistan should have done, turn a blind eye?
Stop supporting Islamic terrorism and having arrested Bin Laden themselves. Nobody can tell me that high ranks and major parts of their military, intel and government estabishement did not know that Bin Laden was there, and where.

It seems to me you put formalities over substance here. And by substance, over the past years, Pakistan's record proves them to be as guilty as they can be.

Before caring for taking out pro-Amerian informants, they should have cared for taking out terrorists and Bin Laden. What they did now, is simply revenge. And that shows which spirit's child they are. For the same reason they want a stop of Amrican attcks against Islamic terrorists in their country - becasue thee are their allies. In the end theyvalue these terroists (their own creation, if you remember) as more dearly to them, than the option to stop them. After all, the Taliban still are seen as a combat ressource against India'S influence in Afghanistan, like they also support the mass killing and terror strikes of civilians in Kashmir via terrorist proxies. Not to mntion the three day attack on that India hotel which led almost to a war between both countries - India practically already had scrambled and Pakistan gave ground just at the very last second.

The world needs Pakistan as much like a cancerous tumour.

Jimbuna, due to Pakistan'S policies, weapons get fired at Wetsern sldiers, and terror strike assisted and supported by the ISI get carried out in Afghanistan and India and elsewhere, killing locals and foreigners alike. If that is not a policy of war showing maximum hostility, then I do not know what "war" and "hostility" mean. Brits, Germans, Yanks, and others get killed by Pak-supported proxies, Western attempts or political changes in Afghanistan get systematically sabotaged. What else do you need?

[Jimbuna]

Jimbuna, due to Pakistan'S policies, weapons get fired at Wetsern sldiers, and terror strike assisted and supported by the ISI get carried out in Afghanistan and India and elsewhere, killing locals and foreigners alike. If that is not a policy of war showing maximum hostility, then I do not know what "war" and "hostility" mean. Brits, Germans, Yanks, and others get killed by Pak-supported proxies, Western attempts or political changes in Afghanistan get systematically sabotaged. What else do you need?


I agree with you but what I am saying is you need a lot more than that before you take on a nuclear armed nation.

You need irrefutable proof...and the will to do something about it.

[AVGWarhawk]

What a worthless rathole of a failed country, and its getting worse and worse and worse. When they test-exploded their first nuclear device so many years ago, all alarm-bells should have rang amok in the est, and one should have bombed and shreddered the place to pieces the size of matchsticks before they had time to assemble the next one.




This was tried in a small country called Iraq. There was talk of nukes and alarm bells rang amok. Here we are today no better than before the shredding took place.

[Skybird]

I agree with you but what I am saying is you need a lot more than that before you take on a nuclear armed nation.

You need irrefutable proof...and the will to do something about it.
That' true. But I did not say that we are at war with them - I said they are at war with us.

;)


This was tried in a small country called Iraq. There was talk of nukes and alarm bells rang amok. Here we are today no better than before the shredding took place.
There are two major differences.

First, Iraq had no nuclear weapons, and had ended its ambition to get them years before Bush came along. Pakistan's nukes are no unproven suspicion. They are proven fact.

Second, Hussein did not actively support terrorists striking Western nations and people - for that, he was not mad enough, but quite rational: he knew he was under observation, and the Americans and British forces right over his head just waiting for a trigger to strike. What Saddam did was supporting propaganda coups, and paying "social aid" to Palestinian families whose members "martyrized" oneself from this life to the next. Pakistan on the other hand has given birth to the Taliban, they are their creation, and it is proven guilty to have a very heavy hand in directly supporting acts of murderous violence and terrorism outside Pakistan.

However, I am aware of the complications in the current situation. I am clueless on what to realistically do about Pakistan today. My point always was that one should have beaten this failed nation to death BEFORE they got nukes. Some threats you cannpot remove if you allow them to manifestate. You need to prevent them from becomeing reality.

Looking at other hotspots, namely Iran, I doubt we have learned from the Pakistani lesson.

[MH]

It seems to me you put formalities over substance here. And by substance, over the past years, Pakistan's record proves them to be as guilty as they can be.


Putting formality over substance is a new trend.
All you have to do is repeat and act by formality over and over again and every one will want to believe that you don't really mean what you DO.