Tuesday, May 11, 2010

Connecting Dots on Pakistan

Is something up?

In January the Pakistanis captured Taliban Number Two, Mullah Baradar. After weeks of speculation about his removal to our custody he remains in the custody of the Pakistani ISI. Nobody knows what he's spilled or if they do, they aren't saying.

Move forward to April and an attempted attack on Times Square from a naturalized American citizen of Pakistani origin. At first blush (after the mid 40s balding white guy misdirection) our Homeland Security director calls it a "one off" (lone wolf), followed by clarification, followed by leaks about Pakistan's involvement. That was beaten back later in the week by a statement from General David Petraeus that no, he was most likely a one off. Which was followed by the Attorney General two days later saying his ties run so deep up Pakistan's rear as to see the heart beating (or thereabouts).

In between Hillary was barking about 'consequences' towards the Pakis for their involvement, including comments about them knowing the whereabouts of bin Laden and Omar.

Then the very next day somebody in the DIA leaks to writer Brad Thor that Pakistan has silently captured Numero Uno, the Big Mullah himself, Omar. But the leak suggests that only parts of the military intelligence apparatus know and the info has been withheld from State and CIA. Hmmm, as the bloggers say.

Well, that leads to a few obvious questions, why being the first one. It makes sense to believe Omar might be in custody (protective even) since his right hand man was said to be singing like a male canary after his capture and the Pakis would probably want to do damage control on any ties they had to things like, oh, 9/11.

But would the Pakis want to withhold such a bombshell from their so-called US allies, especially after an attempted terror attack with the Secretary of State promising retaliation?

Or could the entire thing be a coordinated ploy to give the administration time to figure out what the hell to do with such a HVT? Remember, Holder laughed off the possibility of ever catching UBL alive, so perhaps they don't have a politically acceptable plan of justice yet.

The second obvious question is whether any of these captured Talibanis knew in advance about the Times Square thing? Such a revelation would knee-cap the whole "law enforcement approach" to terror paradigm the Obama folks have re-established from the 90s. Could that explain why Holder was hinting about loosening Miranda rules?

Well, surely the Pakis understand our pickle--and they have their own security to worry about. They weathered the storm after 9/11. Besides, the Paki Taliban aren't even on our State Dept. list of terrorists man-causers.

4 comments:

Debbie said...

So much information, where to start?

I always question when a "big" somebody is either captured or killed. We've seen too many times when this turns out to be wrong for whatever reason.

As to the timeline of statements coming out of the Obama administration on the Time Square terrorist Faisal Shahzad...
They open their mouths before they have any information, making fools of themselves over and over. It's like they throw stuff up on the wall to see what sticks, or what the public will accept.

Hillary Clinton's statements about consequences to Pakistan are almost funny. We all know nothing is going to happen.

As to Mullah Omar, we have know about his whereabouts for some time, according to what folks in the know have told me. I don't think he is in custody of anybody,(unless it is protective custody) but we have been in contact with him.

One thing I don't understand is Gen. Petraeus' recent comments calling Shahzad a "lone wolf" even after we know he had Taliban training. In recent interviews he paints this picture of the situation there that doesn't jibe with facts.

Debbie
Right Truth
http://www.righttruth.typepad.com

A.C. McCloud said...

One thing I don't understand is Gen. Petraeus' recent comments calling Shahzad a "lone wolf" even after we know he had Taliban training. In recent interviews he paints this picture of the situation there that doesn't jibe with facts.

That's the confusing there here to me as well. This leak seems to represent a behind the scenes battle between military and State/admin/CIA, and we know where Petraeus is.

SNAKE HUNTERS said...

Shahzad visited Pakistan thirteen times since he's been living here. That's no "lone wolf" from any perspective!

The next question: Who is funding this dude?

reb
__________________________________

A.C. McCloud said...

The next question: Who is funding this dude?

Probably the same people that funded the Pakistani caught in Chile at the US Embassy with explosive residue.