Skip to main content

This morning, lowkell's terrific diary pointed out that the Weekly Standard is taking a big shot at Allen. That's real news. Here's some more news: they're also taking a shot at Bush.

It's not every day that the Weekly Standard says Bush is a liar. It's not every day that WS aligns itself with dKos and Maureen Dowd, on a point like this. But that's exactly what's happening, and it's worth noticing.

Most dKos readers are well-aware that Pakistan has surrendered to the Taliban, and released a large number of jihadist prisoners. This critically important developing story has been well-covered at dKos (links provided below). The main purpose of this diary is to note an important milestone: the Weekly Standard (9/23/06, print date 10/02/06) is starting to catch on:

these events may constitute the most significant development in the global war on terror in the past year--yet the media have taken little notice

Yes, the media "have taken little notice," but leading righty blogs have taken virtually no notice at all. This makes the WS article even more remarkable; they are breaking ranks, in a scathing, dramatic manner. Will they get slapped back into line? Who knows. In the meantime, this dramatic step they've taken is an indication, I think, that this story is picking up much-deserved momentum.

The Dubai ports deal was public knowledge for months, but was virtually unnoticed during that time. Then somehow a spark was lit and the story exploded with enormous political impact. Awareness of events in Pakistan might be proceeding in a similar trajectory.

Aside from highlighting the WS article, this diary evaluates the overall progress of the story by providing an overview of how it's been covered by different branches of the media.


Some highlights of the WS article

The ramifications of the loss of Waziristan are tremendous. The region that Pakistan has ceded to the Taliban and al Qaeda is about the size of New Jersey, with a population of around 800,000. ...

The Taliban and al Qaeda now have a new safe haven, and with it the freedom to train, arm, and infiltrate foot soldiers and suicide cells into Afghanistan with little fear of reprisal from the Pakistani government. ...

Musharraf has admitted that the Taliban "are crossing from the Pakistan side and causing bomb blasts in Afghanistan," yet his solution is to cede government authority over the tribal areas.

Internationally, Waziristan will serve as a training base for al Qaeda operatives of all stripes, as well as jihadists who want to attack their home countries. The 9/11 Commission Report notes that catastrophic terror attacks require sanctuaries that provide "time, space, and ability to perform competent planning and staff work." Al Qaeda has gained a new sanctuary in Waziristan. The Taliban and al Qaeda will operate with impunity. ...

Musharraf has reiterated that the U.S.-led coalition forces in Afghanistan won't be allowed into the tribal areas covered by the peace deal. "On our side of the border there will be a total uprising if a foreigner enters that area," he said. "It's not possible at all, we will never allow any foreigners into that area. It's against the culture of the people there." ...

Taliban and al Qaeda forces have consolidated great geographic gains over the past few weeks. On September 15, they also experienced a major gain in personnel when Pakistan released 2,500 foreign fighters linked to the Taliban and al Qaeda. ...

Intelligence sources indicate that the released prisoners represent a broad cross-section of the jihadist movement ... [including] several of the murderers of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. These individuals are said to be gathering in al Qaeda's new safe haven in Waziristan and reconstituting the terror group there.

It seems that at this point nobody in the U.S. government knows how to deal with the situation in Pakistan. ... Some in the State Department have even publicly defended the Waziristan Accord, while at a Friday press conference with President Bush, Musharraf stated, "The deal is not at all with the Taliban. This deal is against the Taliban. The deal is with the tribal elders." To this, President Bush replied, "I believe him."

But neither President Bush nor the State Department officials are to be believed on this point. They aren't ignorant of the problems with the accord. Rather, it seems that their concern is Musharraf's retreat from Waziristan and release of prisoners suggest he may be losing his grip on power. And as bad as Musharraf has been of late, things would be far worse if, in a critical Muslim nation with nuclear weapons, a relatively pro-Western leader were replaced by al Qaeda-linked fundamentalists.

One intelligence source has opined that the gains of the past five years were reversed in mere weeks with the loss of Waziristan and the release of 2,500 fighters.

So yes, WS has called Bush a liar, by saying he is not "to be believed on this point." And they indicate he lied knowingly. They just sort of give him a weak alibi by claiming he had no choice; if Musharraf goes down, we're out of the frying pan into the fire. Bush ostensibly has to mislead us, because Musharraf has us over a barrel, and we can't afford to get tough with him. A predicament we're in because Bush has so badly bungled both wars he started.


Dowd and WS are saying virtually the same thing, at virtually the exact same moment

How often does that happen? Dowd's column today is behind the TimesSelect subscription fence, but it can be found in full here. She makes virtually the same points as WS, but unsurprisingly her knife is a bit sharper. Some highlights:

Axis of Sketchy Allies; Pakistan is at the heart of the Faustian deal the Bush administration has made. ...

[Musharraf] tried to persuade Mr. Bush that the shabby truce he recently made with tribal leaders ... was really "against" the militants.

The Pakistan government has, in effect, simply turned over the North Waziristan area to the militants. ...

American officials are dubious about Mr. Musharraf's commitment to destroying Al Qaeda and the Taliban. But at the press conference, W.  ... acted as though he were willing to believe the Pakistani president when he says he is "on the hunt" for Osama and the Taliban at the same time he's setting up a safe haven for them -- and getting huffy at the idea that American forces have the right to go into Pakistan to track Osama.

"Americans who are concerned about a recurrence of 9/11 are worried about the Axis of Evil when the real problem is the Axis of Allies -- Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Britain,'' the British historian Niall Ferguson says. "The terrorists are funded in Saudi Arabia, they're trained in Pakistan, and they organize their plots quite easily in London.''

Mr. Ferguson ... observes that Mr. Musharraf could not survive if he truly tried to break up the cozy relationship between militants, tribal leaders and some in his Army and intelligence service. ...

The justification for invading Iraq was that [Bush et al] couldn't allow a dictator who might be harboring terrorists to stay in power. But their great ally in the war on terror is General Musharraf, a dictator who appears to be harboring terrorists, including the one we want most.


F-16s. F-16s. F-16s. F-16s. F-16s.

That's one thing WS and Dowd don't mention. We're planning to send Pakistan F-16s. Putting F-16s a heartbeat away from OBL is more insane than letting Dubai run our ports.


Wednesday. The White House. Dinner. Bush. Musharraf. Karzai.

There will be lots of news coverage about that crucial dinner. Hopefully we'll see this story get more and more attention this week.


Big righty blogs have been almost dead-silent on this issue

Power Line is perhaps the #1 righty blog. Amount of coverage they've given this story: zilch. LGF is big. Also no coverage.

Instapundit is also big. He has run two very, very small items (9/6 and 9/16). I think he is saying just enough to be able to claim that he didn't ignore the story.

Michelle Malkin is another leading righty blogger. She ran one item (9/6, "Welcome to Talibanistan"). Since then, silence.

Captain's Quarters has a fairly large audience. What's interesting is that his first item (9/6) sounded like a GOP press release (very typical for CQ): "Will Pakistani-Afghan Pact Spell The Taliban's End?" In a later item (9/15), he is coming to his senses: "Now This Is Surrender."

Summary of coverage to-date by righty blogs: very minimal. This makes the strong statement by WS quite remarkable. The righty Wurlitzer usually plays in unison. When they don't, something interesting is happening.


Excellent coverage at dKos

Front-page stories:

9/20, A Disastrous Disconnect

9/19, Won't Get Duped Again?

9/11, We Deserve Better

9/5, Pakistan and Taliban sign pact

Selected diaries (apologies to various diarists I've omitted):

9/19, Bush to Daniel Pearl's killers: "here's your reward -- F-16s!"

9/18, The REAL Reason for Secret Tribunals? Pakistan Terrorism Timeline

9/16, Pakistan empties jails of Taliban, frees Daniel Pearl's killers

9/10, U.S. approved of Pakistan's deal with the Taliban

9/9, Bush's unbelievable dodge on the Pakistan-Osama peace treaty

9/7, Bush: creating the world's first radical Islamic nuclear power

9/5, [Update: Taped call disclaimed] Breaking: Pakistan announces Bin Laden safe haven

I also recommend this: 9/22, The Left Coaster, Steve Soto, Media Falls For Another Smokescreen On Al Qaeda Pursuit


Excellent coverage at Counterterrorism Blog and at Bill Roggio's blog

The WS story was written by Daveed Gartenstein-Ross & Bill Roggio. They're both highly respected analysts. No one would dare call them moonbats. Their prior and continuing work on this subject is highly recommended, and can be found on their own blogs.

Counterrorism Blog:

9/23, Weekly Standard: Pakistan Surrenders

9/21, Is Musharraf Buying His Survival and Is Bush Giving Up on Him?

9/16, State Department Endorses Pakistan's Retreat

9/16, Pakistan Releases 2,500 Prisoners Linked to the Taliban and al-Qaeda

9/13, Pakistan Expert Discusses Powerful Al Qaeda-Taliban Network in Waziristan

9/7, Pakistan's Peace Deal with Terrorist Factions a Major Blow to U.S.

8/12, Matiur Rehman, the London Airline Plot and the Road from Pakistan and Talibanistan

Bill Roggio's blog:

9/23, al-Qaeda, Taliban behind the Waziristan Accord

9/22, The Sham Waziristan Accord

9/20, Pakistan's Safe Haven

9/18, Endorsing the Waziristan Accord

9/15, Pakistan Releases over 2,500 Taliban, al-Qaeda

9/13, The Fall of Waziristan: An Online History

9/12, The Black Guard

9/11, The Taliban breaks the "Waziristan Accord"

9/7, The Islamic Emirate of Waziristan and Greater Talibanistan

9/5, Talibanistan: The Establishment of the Islamic Emirate of Waziristan

9/4, Pakistan Negotiates Truce in Waziristan

8/31, The Lost Territories

8/28, A Hard August for the Taliban in Afghanistan

8/17, Rehman, Rauf, suspected London Airline Plotters Captured, and the Pakistani Connection


Selected MSM coverage

MSM has been drowsy, but there are signs they might be waking up.

WaPo, 9/23, Bush Seeks Increased Pakistani Cooperation

NYT, 9/23, Musharraf Defends Deal With Tribal Leaders

KRT, 9/22, Musharraf tells Bush that Pakistan is cracking down on extremists

UPI, 9/21, Analysis: An al-Qaida sanctuary? Part Two

CSM, 9/8, In border zone, Pakistan backs off from Taliban

ChiTrib, 9/8, The founding of Terroristan

Newsday, 7/10, Taliban grabs hold in Pakistan

Newsday, 2/9, Where the Taliban still rule


A righty cartoonist speaks up

Michael Ramizez is a conservative cartoonist. He understands what's happening (I found the cartoon here; I can't figure out if it's new or old):

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Originally posted to jukeboxgrad on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 11:39 AM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  this is probably the only time ever (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cotterperson, jukeboxgrad, chumley

    that I'd agree with a Mike Rameriez cartoon.

    only time ever.

    [Shut it down now!http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/9/22/212537/816]

    by terrypinder on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 11:43:57 AM PDT

  •  You're not kidding! Watch this movie if you (5+ / 0-)

    haven't already. The Pakistani ties in 9/11 blew me away and Bush is still ignoring it. Hope you don't mind this! If so, sorry, just ignore it. Good post by the way. I recommended it1
    9/11 Press For Truth: Very Best accurate movie exposing 9/11 cover up!

          As you know having read my past posts, I believe that 9/11 was allowed to happen and for a reason. I have never seen the facts that would back it up. Now I have them. This 911 movie, press for truth has got to be the very best movie exposing the 9/11 cover up. Bush, Rice, Cheney, everyone of them said over and over that there was no forewarning that terrorists were going to strike and that planes could be used as missiles to bring down buildings.

          The movie documents factually that we heard in 1995 that planes may be used but never concerned ourselves about it. We received multiple warnings prior to 9/11 that terrorists were around, planes would be used, and the towers were coming down.

          That really amazed me primarily because I have never seen the whole story together or backed up, I recommend everyone to see this and spread it around. Surprising to me was that prior to 9/11 one of the hijackers backed out and turned himself in, telling authorities what was going to happen. He was given 2 lie detector tests that he passed with ease. I don't recall who in the Administration said it. But they were told to let him go and send him back to London.

          Once it did occur we attacked Afghanistan of course. As you remember, Bin laden and many of the leadership were trapped in Tora Bora. In the past I have said Bin Laden was allowed to escape so bush could use him to keep fervor up and Afghani's were credited with being responsible for his escape. Then I watch this and find out that it was us. We knew there were four ways out and only guarded three. We gave them a way out.

          Not only that but I vaguely remember hearing about a 1,000 car caravan but it was never mentioned that we were bombing the area around it but allowed the 1,000 car caravan carrying the Bin Laden entourage to escape into Pakistan and at night, come on.

           Now this part really irks me and I for one never heard anything about it and still don't. As far as I am concerned Pakistan is no friend of America's and will partner with India and turn on us when the time comes. We also heard over and over how Bush would track down any Al Qaeda finances and try anyone involved. He made a big deal out of the fact that someone outed the fact that we were checking out electronic transfers etc. Something he himself announced.

            Now I watch this movie and find out that the head of the Pakistani ISI transferred $100,000 to Muhammad Atta just prior to the 9/11 attacks. This gets worse. Primarily because not only do we have records of this financing as well as pictures but we ignored it and supposedly are in cahoots with them. What happened to anyone caught aiding, abetting, or financing terrorism being hunted down?

           To make it worse, the joke of a sideshow they called the 9/11 commission hearings was an obvious farce. Then i have to see this movie! We knew Rice and others were lying and Bush and Cheney were allowed to hold hands and lie together (take that any way you want). I think I vaguely remember hearing this but like everything else it was dismissed as insignificant. Anyway, the guy who ran Bush's election campaign if I remember correctly, is the one running the commission hearings.

           He was the one who decided whet was significant and what wasn't as well as what questions could be asked. What the hell is that. This entire thing was stacked against the truth and the facts getting out. I don't know if it is too late to do anything about it but it is our duty as Americans to hold these liars accountable. We owe it to the victims. We owe it to our children. We owe it to our history and we owe it to ourselves.        
    http://video.google.com/...

           Please take the time and watch this. I know you never hear the truth from Bushco until it is too late to do anything about it and that is probably the case here to but we must all see the truth and hold these people accountable for what they have allowed to happen and only for selfish gain. It is unconscionable especially for an American or a so called leader. Following is why I believe 9/11 was allowed to happen.

            As you may remember, Bush was looking for something to happen that would put the country and the world behind what he already had plans to do. 9/11 gave him that something.
            He had plans right from the beginning to establish a new societal, middle east, and world order. That is why it was important to him to whip up a media and public fury which of course, he has done.
            He then used the excuse of 9/11 to attack Iraq and unsettle the middle east so he could further his idea of a new middle east and world order. In doing so he guaranteed the loss of Afghanistan as well as Iraq and the entire middle east Of course lying all the while and whipping up as much support and frenzy as he could in the media and minds he controls.
            At this point it behooves him to continue to ignore reality and continue to whip up a frenzy so he can continue staying the course in order to further prosecute his new middle east and world order.
            We are all shamelessly being used so Bush can follow his plan for new order. http://www.anaveragepatriot.com/... I wrote this 3 years ago but it is more obvious today. Let me know what you think? I won't get any deeper but it gets worse from here.                          Who knows what Iraq and Afghanistan will be like in a year or two? Plus I will guarantee you Bush will find an excuse to attack Iran so he can further his plans for the middle east and the world.
              Any way you look at it Bush has screwed up and his new middle east order will happen but it is out of his control! Bush chose to ignore this as we have said many times with all other good advice so he could attack Iraq and start to implement his idea of a new middle east order. http://www.dailykos.com/...

             It will proceed and he won't admit it but it is out of his or anyone else's control!

    Repug credo: If you can't Dazzle them with Brilliance Baffle them with Bullshit! http://anaverageamericanpatriot.blogspot.com

    by jmsjoin on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 11:47:19 AM PDT

    •  I've watched some of it... (0+ / 0-)

      ... and plan to watch the rest.

    •  I finally watched it.... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jukeboxgrad, jmsjoin

      late last night.  Highly recommended.  Excellent at connecting a lot of the dots.  (Go, Jersey Girls!)

      I had heard of Paul Thompson before, but hadn't been all that familiar with/followed very closely his 9/11 timeline (and his analysis of media coverage thereof).  Very powerful and persuasive -- watch it for yourselves, everyone!  Amazing what's been hiding in plain sight even within the crappy MSM, and couple that with some of the other more alternative news sources (all OPEN SOURCES -- the point being made that 80% of useful info/intel can be gleaned from such open sources), and it's virtually impossible to accept The Official Story of 9/11....  It's hard to imagine that a rather disturbing picture would NOT emerge for even the most diehard of anti-tinfoil hatters....

      A lot of the info will be rather old news for many here, but the presentation here is not to be missed.

      "Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich." ~ Napoleon

      by Appalachian Annie on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 12:42:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  We knew we were lied to and we would never (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jukeboxgrad

        know the truth! I thought this was phenomenal and couldn't pull myself away from it. This is as close as we are going to get to the truth. I was particularly bothered by the whole 9/11 commission set up and farce.
          I am still very bothered by the Pakistani connection to the 9/11 hijackers. And Bush is doing business with the bastards.
          If it truly was terrorism he was after he would go after them and not have attacked Iraq to destabilize an already unsettled middle east in order to prosecute his new middle east and world order which is his real goal and all that matters to him.
          That is why he must ignore reality and stay the course. He has to in order to continue to prosecute his new order. He is inept but in reality his mismanagement is a plan he has been following from the get go. http://www.anaveragepatriot.com/... I wrote this 3 years ago but it is more obvious by the day.

        Repug credo: If you can't Dazzle them with Brilliance Baffle them with Bullshit! http://anaverageamericanpatriot.blogspot.com

        by jmsjoin on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 02:31:39 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  F-16s. F-16s. F-16s. F-16s. F-16s. (6+ / 0-)

    right-- how DUMB and sappy are we going to look if we sell those fighter jets to Pakistan-- only to have to bomb them using our Air Force because the radicals finally succeeded in bumping off Musharaff and Pakistan falls to their control in a matter of days after?

    weak.

    "Peace is not the absence of war; it is a virtue; a state of mind; a disposition for benevolence; confidence; and justice." Spinoza

    by Superpole on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 11:49:12 AM PDT

    •  Money (4+ / 0-)

      No problem. It's perfectly fine, because it just means that some folks will make a lot of money.

      One of the key arguments behind building the new F-22 is that we need something better than the older stuff the bad guys have. So it's very important that we keep arming the bad guys.

      Same old story.

      •  Yep (0+ / 0-)

        we sell them our "obsolete" shit weapons-- which still work good enough-- but not as good as the latest weapons we taxpayers pay out the ass for on a continual basis.

        "Peace is not the absence of war; it is a virtue; a state of mind; a disposition for benevolence; confidence; and justice." Spinoza

        by Superpole on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 06:18:00 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Won't be the first time... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jukeboxgrad, Superpole

      ...we trained Osama, didn't we?

      "The primary aim of modern warfare...is to use up the products of the machine without raising the general standard of living."-1984

      by cwhig on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 12:47:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not Sure that (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cwhig

        we "trained" him-- but the CIA and Israel (and we the sappy taxpayers) certainly helped the Taliban mujahdin fighters get shoulder launched Stinger missiles-- and after the old Soviet army bailed out of Afghanistan after ten bullshit years-- the CIA tried to buy back the unused missiles for $2 Million apiece.. none of the fighters cooperated.

        "Peace is not the absence of war; it is a virtue; a state of mind; a disposition for benevolence; confidence; and justice." Spinoza

        by Superpole on Mon Sep 25, 2006 at 06:22:48 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Now let's talk about the money (8+ / 0-)

    We've given Pakistan billions in aid and weaponry.  We are paying them to harbour our enemies, provide them safe haven, grant them amnesty, and enable them to attack our troops in Afghanistan.

    Pakistan is among the world’s leading
    recipients of U.S. aid, obtaining some $2.63
    billion
    in direct U.S. assistance for FY2002-
    FY2005, including $1 billion in securityrelated
    aid. Pakistan also has received billions
    of dollars in reimbursement for its support of
    U.S.-led counterterrorism operations.

    The ISI provided finance to Mohammed Atta, provides the detonators for the IEDs in Afghanistan, trains the suicide bombers and terrorists who attack us.  And we cover for them and pay them billions.

    Sucks.

    "The battle, Sir, is not to the strong alone, it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave." - Patrick Henry

    by LondonYank on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 11:49:43 AM PDT

  •  Is this REAL?? (5+ / 0-)

    What the hell...Weekly Standard and Wall Street Journal are both printing TRUTH??  Against Bush?  What's happening here, people?  Have we fallen back out through the rabbit hole?  Excellent diary, jukebox.  Thank you for these links, and for the work you've done here.  Good grief, I'm still in shock this morning.  Has the tide turned yet again?

  •  Let's just rename it BinLadenstan. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jukeboxgrad, trashablanca

    See if they can ignore it then.

    -6.00, -7.03
    "I want my people to be the most intolerant people in the world." - Jerry Falwell

    by johnsonwax on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 12:02:27 PM PDT

  •  All you need is President Karzai (4+ / 0-)

    Here is what he said:

    "There are places there that, in the name of madrassas, in the name of religious schools that are not religious schools, that actually preach hatred for others, for us in Afghanistan and for the rest of the world."

    Unless those schools are closed, Afghans will continue to suffer as will the Canadians soldiers and aid workers who are trying to bring peace and democracy to a country that has known war for so many years, Mr. Karzai said.

    And there is more in the article:

    “most of them ran away and took refuge in neighbourhoods beyond our borders. Unfortunately, it was in those sanctuaries beyond our borders where they were reorganized, trained, financed, and provided with ideological motivation to come into Afghanistan, kill our children, kill our teachers, kill the clergy, destroy mosques full of worshippers, destroy schools, destroy clinics, kill international aid workers, attack international security forces, and try to bring us defeat.”

    The Globe&mail

    Perves is a dictator who supports terrorism.

    "I have a dream" King Jr.

    "I have a book deal" Perves Musharraf

    by allmost liberal european on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 12:10:49 PM PDT

  •  I diaried here 9/6 - I got a single comment (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cwhig, jukeboxgrad, KiaRioGrl79, edwardssl

    Maybe it's Inept-corrupto-burnout? I wrote a diarty about how little attention this was getting
    http://www.dailykos.com/...

    I drw a single comment.. my tip jar

    Save $ on image hosting account at smugmug - use my mYYrlt9brzUDE token to save $5

    by Blue in VA on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 12:22:57 PM PDT

    •  A number of good diaries ... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      edkra

      ... on this subject have slipped into the ozone with little or no attention.

      I think there's a certain amount of denial; the story is so appalling it's hard to take it at face value.

      I also think some people might be afraid of giving Bush an excuse to go to war against Pakistan. But I think that concern is misplaced.

      •  I bet you're right about war w/Pakistan... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jukeboxgrad

        ...and I'm increasingly expecting it.  Surprise!

        "The primary aim of modern warfare...is to use up the products of the machine without raising the general standard of living."-1984

        by cwhig on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 12:55:15 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I don't think so (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          cwhig

          They have nukes, and the seventh largest military in the world.

          What's good for business are small-medium sized wars that never end. Wall St doesn't really want a huge war that turns our economy upside down overnight.

          •  Where does Iran fall within that standard? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            jukeboxgrad

            Population of 75 million, 25 million of fighting age, 5 million under arms--no nukes yet, but nifty missiles (see Haifa etc.).  There's a col. who writes on the Americans for Conservative Action site who argues that Iran could roll up our troops in Iraq and cause a full-scale military defeat.

            "The primary aim of modern warfare...is to use up the products of the machine without raising the general standard of living."-1984

            by cwhig on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 09:27:12 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Good point (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              cwhig

              I think the saying is that we're in so-called violent agreement.

              I agree 100% with everything you said about Iran. I have a hard time deciding if Bush/GOP is self-destructively crazy enough to invade Iran. I don't know. But I think they are not self-destructively crazy enough to invade both Iran and Pakistan more-or-less at the same time.

              I think Bush personally is self-destructively crazy enough to do that. But I think (hopefully!) there are one or two semi-adults in his circle who would inject some kind of dose of reality.

  •  Every American must know what's in this diary n/t (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jukeboxgrad
  •  CYA (0+ / 0-)

    Is there a part of this in defense of musharaf's forthcoming book and his saying he was threatened by Armitage?

  •  Get ready for a Noriega. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MikeTheLiberal

    The admin. is setting up Musharraf for the kill.  The romance is off. Musharraf announced this weekend that Richard Armitage threatened to "bomb Pakistan back into the stone age" if it didn't become a partner in the "war on terror."  Armitage's non-denial denial makes it clear that he said exactly that.  

    Maybe Rove's October Surprise is going to be an attack on Pakistan?

    "The primary aim of modern warfare...is to use up the products of the machine without raising the general standard of living."-1984

    by cwhig on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 12:51:28 PM PDT

  •  Kashmir (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jukeboxgrad, MikeTheLiberal

    All's I've got to say (as an observer of how India has had to deal with Pakistani cross-border terrorism) is...

    Welcome to the club!

    Give me liberty, or give me death!

    by salsa0000 on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 01:09:19 PM PDT

  •  The book (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jukeboxgrad

    And what does the book by Musharraf in English aimed at an American audience signal?

    My guess is that Musharraf needs to set up a future supply of American currency for himself, when he flees the country, which he is anticipating. That's how bad things are there.

    fact does not require fiction for balance

    by mollyd on Sun Sep 24, 2006 at 01:45:43 PM PDT

    •  Billions in aid (0+ / 0-)

      Bush has been sending Musharraf tons of money. I bet Musharraf has managed to skim off plenty, and is hiding it in the usual places. I don't know what the motivation is for the book, but my guess is that it's not mainly money.

      Maybe Musharraf sees a future for himself as a talking head "expert" on cable news. A book fits into that kind of career planning.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site