The F.O. admitted that the U.S. had applied for it months ago and that the F.O. had not objected. That fulfills the requirement under international law. If Pakistan's laws don't conform with the treaty it is a signatory to that is Pakistan's problem, not America's and not Davis'.
The Pakistani FO, and FM Qureshi, poitned out that the request for Davis's diplomatic immunity was countered with more information regarding his responsibilities in Pakistan - requests that were never answered by the US. In this case notification does not do squat since Pakistan's request for more information made clear that it had concerns over Davis's exact responsibilities.
What, did you investigate? There's plenty of stuff on soldier's blogs about how their targets were tipped off within minutes of sharing info with Pakistani intelligence. It's not for nothing that, as Wikileaks revealed, the ISI is listed among the affiliation of numerous terrorists at Guantanamo.
What information? Anecdotal? Where is the official US Statement regarding these alleged 'tip off's?
There is an entire thread on this subject, where the US media allegations/propaganda have been refuted - respond to this issue on the relevant thread after reading through it.
It is unfair that the NYT gets the scoops rather than the local D.C. papers. That's probably because the NYT is less critical of this Administration than the others.
The NYT also got the 'scoop' (aka lies and US propaganda) about Iraqi WMD's. These 'scoops' are nothing but carefully issued propaganda, which is plastered in the US media without the opposing POV, or if the opposing POV is included, it is marginalized.
If you are arresting "hundreds" then they aren't leaders, just middle management and hence easily replaceable.
Khalid Shaikh Mohammd, Libbi, Ramzi Yousuf were 'leaders', and if they were 'easily replaceable', they would not have been so high on the 'target list'.
Didn't you ever question what the P.A.'s role could be in making this all possible?
Musharraf was pretty clean in stating that the PA received no cooperation or coordination in terms of the US military invasion of Afghanistan. As in the case of the Abbottabad operation, the US went it alone in Afghanistan, and did not utuilzie the PA in sealing off the Afghan borders along areas where US/NA Military operations were taking place.
Nor did the US utilize its own forces in sealing off those borders, in essence allowing the Taliban and AQ leadership and cadres to cross over into Pakistan.
We didn't "start" it. No American knew on 9/10 that war would come to us on 9/11. We joined battle with the forces we could muster, prepared or not.
The US did 'start the war', the Taliban were willing to negotiate an OBL trial in a mutually agreed upon third country - the US refused to consider those, rational, options.
This was a war of choice, with other options available, it was not a war of necessity and it was not a 'ggod war'.
At the end of the day, after hundreds of thousands dead, hundreds of billions spent and greater extremism and terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan than before the war, the US is now back to 'negotiating with the Taliban to arrive at a political settlement'.
All this bloodshed, terrorism and economic losses could have been avoided had the US chosen to negotiate with the Taliban in 2001, instead of in 2011.
Targeting security forces is usually considered an act of rebellion but going after innocent civilians is terrorism.
And what would you call the attacks on non-combatant teachers, doctors, professors, workers, miners etc.? What would you call the open claims by Baluch terrorist organizations to eliminate the 'non Baluch ethnic groups in Baluchistan' and the thousands of non-Baluch that have been killed in attacks by these terrorists?
Why Pakistan didn't more actively pursue Bugti by going public to pressure the U.S. and Afghanistan I don't know, nor do I know why the U.S. didn't take a hand in apprehending Bugti if he was in U.S. reach.
Nonsense - Pakistan raised the issue of Baluch terrorists and Bugti at every level and at every forum - surely you remember how many times on this forum alone the issue of Afghanistan sheltering Bugti and other Baluch terrorists was raised, and met with derision and denials by the likes of you and S2. The Western media, manipulated by the US establishement, derided Pakistani allegations as 'conspiracy theories and paranoia'.
And now the Wikileaks disclosures clearly indicate that the US was aware of Bugti being sheltered by Afghanistan, and did nothing about it, and in the end facilitated his travel to Switzerland to obtain 'asylum'. What is that if not blatant support for terrorism and terrorist leaders?
And Pakistan is vilified for 'supporting OBL' when not even a shred of credible evidence indicates Paksitani knowledge of his existence in Pakistan.
Perhaps lawyers intervened, saying the proof of his complicity in terror acts was insufficient? Do you know of anything specific? Did you never question that it could have been Pakistani officials, rather than American officials, committing and perpetrating errors?
I am sorry, but did the US actually 'prove the guilt of OBL' in perpetrating 9/11 before launching a war against Afghanistan and invading it?
Double standards and hypocrisy fit the US like a glove.
