What's new

'CIA doctor' accused of treason

Along with tax evasion, jaywalking, and blowing your nose without washing hands afterwards. So all of these violations merit a charge of treason?

this does no justice to you, solomon....your sarcasm and emotions don't add anything constructive to this thread.

now you're just being silly
 
.
this does no justice to you, solomon....your sarcasm and emotions don't add anything constructive to this thread. now you're just being silly
It's sarcasm, but of the constructive sort. The point is, where do you draw the line? There doesn't appear to be anything in the doctor's conduct that rises to the level of treason unless you stretch the definition so much that all other crimes are included, or else to confess that shielding Osama Bin Laden was official Pakistani policy and by helping rat him out the doctor was, in some way, undermining the constitution.

I'll remind you that the treason charge isn't going to hold water under international law since, under binding U.N. Security Council resolutions 1373 and 1368, Pakistan had failed at its sovereign obligation to at least attempt to root out Bin Laden so Pakistan has no sovereignty in this matter. Indeed, it can be construed that prosecuting the doctor will put Pakistan in violation of international law.
 
.
Along with tax evasion, jaywalking, and blowing your nose without washing hands afterwards. So all of these violations merit a charge of treason?

what gives you the right to judge what happens in pakistan and tell us what is serious or not?

---------- Post added at 08:06 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:04 PM ----------

Often courts in one country are influenced by law judgements in other countries. Though these judgements are not binding they are persusive. I cant understand the likes of zionist soloman and various indian enemies of pakistan can defend afridis actions. After all how is his actions different to Pollard a civilian American Naval intelligence analyst. In the mid 1980's (circa 1983-1984), Pollard discovered information useful to Israel's security was withheld by certain elements within the U.S. national security establishment. Israel was legally entitled to this vital security information according to a 1983 Memorandum of Understanding between the two countries. Yet Pollard has a life sentance and i think has served over 20 years. The point i am making here is that israel and america are freindly, israel was entitled to info, yet when an american citizen (dual israeli) gave info he was punished. Why should pakistan treat its citizens any different?

This is for you pRxxk Zionist

Slowman why dont you address what happend to pollard above
 
.
It's sarcasm, but of the constructive sort.

:what:

The point is, where do you draw the line?

uhh, you don't


here doesn't appear to be anything in the doctor's conduct that rises to the level of treason unless you stretch the definition so much that all other crimes are included, or else to confess that shielding Osama Bin Laden was official Pakistani policy and by helping rat him out the doctor was, in some way, undermining the constitution.

the outcome wasn't unconstitutional; but the way to go about achieving that outcome was indeed. That is why Dr. Afridi is in hot water right now, and wont be enjoying the money and green card that was offered to him. He took orders and directives from a foreign govt. without alerting the local government

as Dr. Afridi was residing in Pakistan and a Pakistani passport holder (i.e. a Pakistani citizen) it means he is bound to abide by and respect the local laws. Ignorance of those laws or praying that he'd never be caught --is no excuse to break the law.

and quite frankly, you (Solomon) were quite ''vocal'' on your views against Dr. Fai so it's very strange to see you now applying double-standards here. It's an argument you can't win.

I'll remind you that the treason charge isn't going to hold water under international law since, under binding U.N. Security Council resolutions 1373 and 1368, Pakistan had failed at its sovereign obligation to at least attempt to root out Bin Laden so Pakistan has no sovereignty in this matter. Indeed, it can be construed that prosecuting the doctor will put Pakistan in violation of international law.

using that logic, NATO's mightiest armies also failed --since they allowed him to slip from Tora Bora which was under their control. I guess in their cases, it's silly to talk about sovereignty because within 2 years, they were breaching the sovereignty of 2 countries.

2 countries which, incidentally, never attacked the U.S.

Pakistan has full sovereignty and it is a sovereign country. It is for that reason that people like Dr. Afridi are prosecuted and meet harsh consequences, otherwise a bad precedent would be set. It's bad enough we have a porous border with Afghanistan; last thing we need are to be double-crossed by people we entrust to save and protect lives, such as a doctor who ended up administering fake vaccines and putting all other NGO/humanitarian groups in jeopardy.


the spin-masters would say ''aha! look! they are prosecuting the guy who helped nab bin laden...means they must have been complicit''


well they can say that and that's what they are saying....but it's a failed argument and anyone with a clear head could see beyond that.


if you feel disillusioned and disenfranchised that Pakistan is supposedly in violation of its international obligations and international conventions --then take action. Why don't you go right ahead and use the time you post here to instead write an Op-Ed in new-york slimes and washington post, explaining why U.S. should take Pakistan to the ICJ.

What's stopping you from that? :lol:
 
. . .
Article 5 of the Constitution provides that loyalty to the States is the basic duty of every citizen and that obedience to the Constitution and law is the inviolable obligation of every citizen wherever he may be and of every other person for the time being within Pakistan.

Simply conspiring with agencies of other governments would suggest this citizen is being disloyal in my opinion

Of course, I agree with that. But disloyalty does not rise to the level of treason. There is a big difference between the two legally speaking.
 
.
Of course, I agree with that. But disloyalty does not rise to the level of treason. There is a big difference between the two legally speaking.

I think it does in this context when you are talking to agencies of other govts. But tell me what do you think what i said about pollard in earlier post
 
.
I think it does in this context when you are talking to agencies of other govts. But tell me what do you think what i said about pollard in earlier post

Fair enough. As an opinion I am okay with your point of view in this case, but proving it in a court of law will be very different. That's all.
 
.
Fair enough. As an opinion I am okay with your point of view in this case, but proving it in a court of law will be very different. That's all.

I reckon not and I will pm you why I thinks so
 
.
Fair enough. As an opinion I am okay with your point of view in this case, but proving it in a court of law will be very different. That's all.

All the analogy you are trying to imply here just don't hold Vcheng. Why, Just see what happened with Ghulaam Nabi Fai?
 
.
All the analogy you are trying to imply here just don't hold Vcheng. Why, Just see what happened with Ghulaam Nabi Fai?

Mian ghulam nabi was known to have links with ISI and kashmiri groups, by India and US too since decades. Despite of multiple Indian protests he was allowed to engage in his activities in US.

However his balls were squeezed as a response to your armys act of "tactical brilliance" of shielding US's most wanted terrorist.

Fai got screwed in the whole business.
 
.
Mian ghulam nabi was known to have links with ISI and kashmiri groups, by India and US too since decades. Despite of multiple Indian protests he was allowed to engage in his activities in US.

However his balls were squeezed as a response to your armys act of "tactical brilliance" of shielding US's most wanted terrorist.

Fai got screwed in the whole business.

STFU. there is a serious discussion going on about a pakistani matter, we don't want indian bullshit derailing the topic. Thankyou.
If you want to discuss this thing, open another thread and we will discuss there, untill then adios
 
. .
I reckon not and I will pm you why I thinks so

Replied! :)

All the analogy you are trying to imply here just don't hold Vcheng. Why, Just see what happened with Ghulaam Nabi Fai?

Dr. Fai is accused of being an unregistered agent of a foreign power, and even that is not a huge felony requiring jail time. Where he really is stuck is failing to keep his IRS paperwork in order.

Similarly, I think accusing Dr. Afridi of treason is simply not justified given his conduct, egregious as it may appear. Medical malpractice is one charge that is going to be easier to prove and perhaps equally effective is keeping him in where the government would probably want him.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom