The Dots Remain Unconnected
NEW ORLEANS--In Saturday night's Democratic debate, moderator Charles Gibson opened the proceedings with a question about Pakistan and one about nuclear terrorism. Not one of the candidates connected the dots: the chief proliferator of nuclear knowhow and technology over the last 15 years has not been Iran, or Iraq, or Russia; it has been Pakistan, where "the father of the Pakistani A-bomb" A.Q. Khan ran an international nuclear bazaar.
Obviously, if you're worried about nuclear terrorism, one thing you should do is interrogate the chief nuclear proliferator. But, as the Dems fulminated on the two questions, trying to show toughness and resolve, not one of them suggested doing the obvious thing: calling on (assuming he's still in office when one of them is elected) President Musharraf to let the United States, or the IAEA, or anyone except Pakistani police question Khan, who remains under house arrest, unavailable for interrogation by any outside agency.
For $10 billion, the least we should expect is to get into that house.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
With so many nuclear threats, we should be
busting down the door, not knocking on it.
US officials 'sold nuclear secrets'
http://www
Our politicians love to talk about spreading 'Democracy', however no one seams to be able to name even one country that the United States actually helped to become some form of Democracy.
On the other hand, it is very easy to come up with 25 or 30 'Dictators' that we have supported!
Although Sibel Edmonds testified in a closed Senate hearing chaired by Henry Waxman, nothing seams to be moving in Washington in this regard!
We, somehow, want to think that some of these investigations will lead to prosecution of those responsible. I no longer believe that this government can correct any of the major crimes our ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES have committed!
I do not know what is wrong with people. All of us....Repu
We, the United States, are the largest arms dealer in the world!!! Not idividuals. The US government
So where did Pakistan and all the others get their information? Look on the internet for nuclear bombs and look to the US for the proliferation of?????
Talking of not connecting the dots --- where's the mention of the Sibel Edmonds story? As in,
"The Story of the Century: Neo-Con/Fa
It was in the Times (of London) yesterday.
At lot of us knew in 2003 when Bush invaded Iraq they weren't the real enemy out to do us in. Most of Bush's good buddies in the middle east like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are our worst enemies. And always have been. They both have done more to finance, broker and harbor terrorist's than Saddam did. But, I don't think anyone wants to connect the dots. Our leaders continue to delude themselves these are our friends and will until their is resounding proof they are are stabbing us in the back. They will probably deny it then. As long as common sense doesn't drive our foreign policies it's always going to be a mess.
What I want to know first is why only the Democrats were asked tough questions about Osama bin Laden and Nukes? The Republicans were given a free ride, basically only required to answer simple questions regarding immigration and taxes.
So Mr. Shearer, what you are saying is that we need to question Khan to find out if he has sold nuclear secrets? Do I have this right? I guess I just answered my own question..
It makes sense to question Khan but I doubt we will get any cooperation from Musharraf, furthermore I don't know if politicians are able to connect the dots, or if they even want to, you know?
HARRY ANSWERS: Not "if he has sold nuclear secrets", that much is known. The purpose of non-Pakistani interrogation would be to find out precisely what he sold, and, most importantly, to whom.
I saw the end of an interview with Musharraf last night. The interviewer pretty much laid out the string of events that brought Bhutto back to Pakistan - with Musharraf even traveling to one of the UAE's to hash out the "deal".
The impression given, by both interviewer and Musharraf was that the Bhutto return was brokered (more like mandated) by the Bush administration via Rice on down.
Bhutto's talking points included accelerating the "hunt for bin Laden", access to the tribal areas where the Taliban and al Qaeda have support and - I believe - access to Khan.
The history of Pakistan agreeing to US mandates in lieu of aid and performing otherwise extends back over three decades, yet we still inundate them with billions in aid to bolster their military and police.
The smell is well beyond rotten. It is not unlike the US to support a government such as Musharraf's with the means to keep their populations under control. So, why does the government that cooperates with the mighty aid-givers continue to receive support while being uncooperative? Or, are we not getting the truth?
Very rotten smell.
For a good history of US/Pakistan relations as regards Tora Bora, Afghanistan, the rise of the Taliban and the "war on terror", read "THE GHOST WARS", by Steven Coll - it's probably in paperback now.
.
As an international thief, Dr. Khan belongs to the World's Court and to the U.N., not to Pakistan. The international community has a vested right to question Dr. Khan. If it is true that Pakistan thinks otherwise, Pakistan must be universally denounced and held accountable. Sanctions should be imposed on everything Pakistani, until this matter is resolved! Is not extradition of thieves a common practice among nations? This thief has endangered the safety of the entire planet! What in the world is the U.N. waiting for? This matter requires an urgent attention, in proportion to the damage it has caused!
Another Sibel Edmonds update, with video of both Sibel and John Ashcroft
http://www
Sibel "names names" in pictures (including Denny)
http://let
How long can the MSM continue to pretend the Sibel Edmonds testimony is not out there. In the US the truth is being treated like a dirty family secret. A.Q. Khan dealt in US technology.
Taking out Musharaff would be just as stupid as taking out Saddam.
I laughed hysterically when Bill Richardson said we should use diplomacy with these thugs. President Clinton sent Richardson to meet with the Taliban in order to get them to hand over BinLaden. He failed. The rest is history.
Missing Senator Biden I guess.
'Joe Biden delivered a policy speech today about Pakistan, perhaps the most overlooked issue by either party in the 2008 presidential race.
For months, he's been the presidential candidate most vocal about the national security threat posed by Pakistan. During the Democratic debate in Philadelphia, he suggested that instead of saber-rattling over Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons, the Bush administration should be more concerned about Pakistan's already established nuclear capabilities. Since then, Pervez Musharraf has declared emergency rule, suspended constitutional government and clamped down on his political opponents.
Speaking at the New Hampshire Institute of Politics at Saint Anselm's College in Manchester, Biden offered a plan to help stabilize Pakistan, empower its Muslim moderates and keep its nuclear weapons out of the hands of ideological extremists.
In his speech, Biden reveals that he personally spoke to Musharraf and the main opposition leader Benazir Bhutto about the current crisis.'
http://www
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
