US bombs Pakistan

[Dinner]

Yes, that is the answer. The podcast version is markedly different from the print article.

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by Patroklos


What do you think happens to #4 when #3 gets killed?

Interesting that the one claiming spinning and overblowing has yet to provide any sources. Well, not so much interesting as sad and expected.

Actually I should have put #2


If the #2 guy gets killed repeatedly, and the network either grows and/or gets stronger:

1) He really wasn't the #2 guy to begin with
2) His wasn't really that important to begin with
3) His importance is being overblown

The combination of the above

I'm sorry you're falling for it though.

[Dr Strangelove]

Did anyone ever stop to ask OBL who was #2, #3, #4....... etc.? Maybe our problem is that we don't have an official list. It never hurts to ask.

[Ted Striker]

As suspected, the US is just outright lying about this whole thing. Not surprising considering the track record of our intelligence community and Executive Branch.

It seems to have worked too, considering the apologists who think it's okay to kill innocent people as long as some insignificant person who "might" be connected to Al Queda dies.

You know except for the fact that nobody from Al Queda even died there, so now that crackpot theory doesn't even hold up either.

Pakistan PM: CIA attack reports 'bizarre'
No evidence that top al Qaeda leaders were at target, he says

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Pakistani Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz on Sunday ridiculed as "bizarre" a U.S. report that senior al Qaeda leaders were killed in a CIA attack on a home along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border.

"There is no evidence, as of half an hour ago, that there were any other people there," Aziz said on CNN's "Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer."

"The area does see movement of people from across the border. But we have not found one body or one shred of evidence that these people were there."

And regarding what the Pakis think about it, and the whole issue of soverignty, is BS. They believe they control the region and have the largest presense there than anybody else. They are pissed beyond belief, and you had better damn believe their opinion is important.

Tens of thousands of Pakistanis have taken to the streets in cities nationwide to express outrage about the attack, which killed more than a dozen civilians, including women and children.

Aziz also disputed a report in Sunday editions of The New York Times that said al Qaeda supporters, foreign fighters and Taliban remnants control the remote region.

About 80,000 Pakistani troops in the area have captured around 600 al Qaeda members there, including senior leaders, Aziz said. "The reason we've done that is because this is a porous border. It's a very tough terrain. And we want to restrict movement of people who are undesirable to our security."

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/01/22/pakistan.attack/index.html

The spin going around about this crap is disgusting.

We ****ed up. We killed innocent people. We were 100% in the wrong and need to apologize.

There's a good chance they knew Al Zawahiri wasn't even there in the first place. Maybe they just threw his name in to cover up this f up. I have no proof of it. But I'm not going to take my theory as fact unlike some who will look to lies for comfort.

[notyoueither]

Should have used larger bombs.

[techumseh]

This illustrates my point, several pages ago, to Chegitz Guevara. ALL the information on this strike, comes from the CIA, the same people who made the attack. If you trust them, you'll trust anyone.

[notyoueither]

Umm, the Guardian were the first to mention getting bad guys, way back in the OP.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

From the slate audio: it just repeats what the article says. It states that unless the law is changed, IT IS ILLEGAL, unless pakistan asked us to bomb them.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by techumseh
This illustrates my point, several pages ago, to Chegitz Guevara. ALL the information on this strike, comes from the CIA, the same people who made the attack. If you trust them, you'll trust anyone.

So when Reuters says that Pakistani officials confirm that several AQ were killed in the strike it really means that the CIA says so? Don't take the brown theology man, it's tainted!

[Dinner]

Dude, it went over several different ways to look at it including multiple ways that would make it legal.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Dude, it went over several different ways to look at it including multiple ways that would make it legal.

nah man, its pretty clear. its legal only if pakistan asked us to go in there, or if the law is changed.

[Odin]

Originally posted by techumseh
This illustrates my point, several pages ago, to Chegitz Guevara. ALL the information on this strike, comes from the CIA, the same people who made the attack. If you trust them, you'll trust anyone.

The CIA was the victim and the scapegoat of Chimpy's lies, not the perputrator of them.

[lord of the mark]

Look the CIA, if they screwed up, would have plenty of reason to lie, to cover it up.

OTOH, if the CIA was telling the truth, the Paki PM has reason to lie. He wants to deny that there are AQ up there that his forces cant get. He wants to deny that his govt gave any permission to the US to strike, even if it did. He's still saying OBL and Zawahiri could be anywhere.

And the local Islamists who are claiming that the Paki govt DID give the US permission, have reason to lie as well, since they want to overthrow the Paki govt.

And the locals, who are probably sympathetic to the Islamic extremists (like most Pashtuns in the tribal areas) and who resent Pakistans attempts to assert its authority over the area, could well be lying as well.

Basically theres no way of knowing for sure what really happened.

OTOH if Pakistani intel sources are saying the US got someone important, that might be significant.

It will be interesting to see if those allegedly killed turn up again. Thats happened on occasion, though not usually.

Predator strikes have been fairly rare, esp across the Paki border. I think its fairly clear CIA at least THOUGHT they had someone big.

[lord of the mark]

Perv now says the attack DID get some AQ's.


[url]http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060124/ap_on_re_mi_ea/pakistan_musharraf/url];_ylt=Au7H5JNQb2MfDrCzNmyNdfpvaA8F;_ylu=X3oDMTA5aH JvMDdwBHNlYwN5bmNhdA--

[Ted Striker]

He said we MIGHT have killed some Al Queda.

And even if we did, who cares?