In any case the prisoner swap is a severe setback for U.S. efforts in the region. The Taliban and their Pakistani tribal allies have learned that hostage taking can yield big rewards. And these days they have all the potential trading chips they could ask for in the borderlands, where Pakistan's out-maneuvered and increasingly demoralized troops are almost routinely surrendering to the militants. For now, the people of Pakistan will have to take any comfort they can from knowing that Musharraf is protecting them from lawyers and human rights activists.

It may just be me, but I get this funny feeling that Musharraf isn't really our friend.

Maybe it's time to stop the sabre rattling toward Iran and focus on the real dangers in the region. You know, like the guy who already has Nukes and is letting his Taliban prisioners go...yeah, that guy.

Trees says, "I get this funny feeling that Musharraf isn't really our friend."

No shit!

Where's Osama?

My money is on the Taliban. Washington fucks up everything they touch.

Photoshop flag.

Bush just released 9 Iranian terrorists who surely played a major role in 9-11.

250 Pakistan soldiers surrendered without firing a shot? What are they, French? Don't we deserve better stander-uppers for our 10 billion?

I bet the Indian Army is wondering what they were worried about.

'Taliban sources tell NEWSWEEK'

And if anyone could swallow the rest of the tale from that point on then get some help and who knows maybe someday you will be able to discern fact from fantasy.

Talk about cherry picking your information.

I bet the Indian Army is wondering what they were worried about.
Posted by northguy3


Good question, but they don't care so much about the soldiers as about that sudden flash brighter than 100 suns.

Zulu,

Do you have some proof to discredit this story?

If you do, would you like to share it with the rest of us? I'd love to see some links to counter the assertions laid forth in this Newsweek report, because if the Newsweek story is accurate it doesn't bode well for any strides the US might have made to stabilize the ME. It certainly doesn't bode well for one of our Chief allys in the region to be releasing the leadership of the enemy we are fighting in Afghanistan. In reality, if the Newsweek article is accurate, the situation is a full out crisis for US interests in the Middle East.

So please, if you have information that you can link to that disproves this story, share it with us. It will certainly go a long way toward my resting easier tonight.

Intelligence reports of Obaidullah's release have raised concern among American officials. At the moment they're still checking whether it was in fact the senior Taliban official who was freed and not someone else by the same name.

Apparently American intelligence consists of reading Newsweek, right Zulu?

From the Bible of the neo-cons, the Weekly Standard:


As Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf deploys tens of thousands of troops to the capital to put down protests, the government continues to cave into the demands of the Taliban in the Northwest Frontier Province. Over the weekend, the military released 25 Taliban fighters from custody in exchange for 213 soldiers captured during an ambush in South Waziristan. The government also dismissed terrorism related charges against seven of the Taliban fighters. Pakistan's Dawn reports:

Sources said that militants had brought 213 soldiers to Tiarza Khula, a remote area in South Waziristan, and handed them over to tribal elders. The military authorities brought the 25 militants in two helicopters to the brigade headquarters in Zari Noor colony near Wana. They were later taken to Tiarza Khula for the swap.

The sources said that seven militants had been released from the central jail in Dera Ismail Khan and 18 had been brought from Islamabad ... Sources in Peshawar told Dawn that the NWFP government had also withdrawn seven terrorism cases pending before the anti-terrorism court in Dera Ismail Khan against some of the arrested militants.

Even worse than the prisoner swap, the government "agreed to implement the Sararogha peace accord in letter and spirit," according to Maulvi Mirajuddin, a Pakistani member of the assembly who brokered the deal as the head of the "peace committee."

From the Bible of the neo-cons, the Weekly Standard:

That's gotta hurt.

'Do you have some proof to discredit this story? '

Perhaps I'm a little more discerning in my information sources but it seems a stretch to accept news a sworn enemy, who incidentally practices beheading as opposed to waterboarding, they have made an effort to have you believe.

Are you really so nave as to not understand why the Taliban would spread disinformation? Or do you just trust the Taliban for no good reason . . it's just what they tell you supports your already distorted belief system.

'Apparently American intelligence consists of reading Newsweek'

Based, if on anything, this pathetic assertion in the article:

'Intelligence reports of Obaidullah's release have raised concern among American officials.'

Oxymoron aside, who are these 'American officials'? I am asked to site specifics, a standard not required of Newsweek. Considering Newsweek's track record it is no surprise people don't even bother asking Newsweek to site sources, and I have to admit other than Newsweek having no source is my only defense - though it is a damned good one.

'It will certainly go a long way toward my resting easier tonight.'

Your conscience is your problem, that it deprives you of sleep is likely deserved.

SO, uh, you can't provide sources to disprove the Newsweek article.

And you've concluded that I have problems with my conscience?

Can you prove that one?

No?

Not surprising.

What I find surprising is that you dismiss this article as untrue automatically. If it is true it could mean bigger problems for the US in the region. Do I need to remind you that we have brave men and women in Afghanistan fighting for your Freedoms? If this is true, don't you care that they are in a much more dire situation now?

I guess not, since you have dismissed this disturbing article as leftist propoganda, done no research to prove that the allegations by Newsweek and its sources are false and are just choosing to believe that everything with Pakistan is AOK.

So, is this how Republicans support the troops? They just express no concern when information comes to light that paints the situation that our bravest men and women face as much more dangerous. They're not concerned that a Nuclear Power in the ME is making concilliatory gestures toward our enemy?

And your argument to justify your blase attitude is that the information is coming from Newsweek?

Wow, just wow.

Glad our boys and girls know they can count on Patriotic Conservatives like you to be concerned about their welfare.

Come into the light, children. All are welco-no no, not that light!

Zulu: besides newsweek and the weakling Standard, there are about a dozen other news sites documenting the release. Google "pakistan taliban prisoner swap".

I know reality and the Right are mutually exclusive, but still...

Or it could all just be a vast left&right wing conspiracy.

Zulu,

Doesn't it bother you that Pakistan is releasing Taliban prisoners in a general sense?

That's kind of the point here.

Not just one guy, but any Taliban at all.

In any case the prisoner swap is a severe setback for U.S. efforts in the region. The Taliban and their Pakistani tribal allies have learned that hostage taking can yield big rewards. And these days they have all the potential trading chips they could ask for in the borderlands, where Pakistan's out-maneuvered and increasingly demoralized troops are almost routinely surrendering to the militants. For now, the people of Pakistan will have to take any comfort they can from knowing that Musharraf is protecting them from lawyers and human rights activists.


It doesn't matter who has been released. It's the fact that any Taliban have been released. It's the fact that Musharraf has done this to appease the terrorists.

Not a good thing for one of our chief allys to be doing, woudln't you agree?

In an article yesterday on Musharraf's suspension of the constitution and declaration of a state of emergency, I noted the government was more likely to cut deals with the Taliban as Musharraf consolidates power in the capital. The release of 25 Taliban leaders and the reinstatement of the Sararogha accord in South Waziristan would seem to confirm our worst fears.

From the same link - the Weekly Standard.

hey, don't be so hard on ZULU, he didn't update his talking points, he's still on "...Newsweek is in conspiracy to undermine the right wingers"

He was only cooperating with us to save his own ass.

Now he's thinking that if the opposition gets the militants behind them, that poses a much bigger threat than a US whose military has been undermined and weakened by the moron in chief.

So he's pandering to the militants.

There was never any reason to expect any loyalty out of him in the first place.

I have spent some time looking into this. The preponderance of the evidence does indicate Pervez Musharraf is trying to perform some sort of balancing act where he will make any deal so long as he remains in power.

At this time I have seen no other evidence that substantiates the claim that Mullah Obaidullah Akhund has been released.

Again, why anyone would take as fact information provided by the Taliban defies logic. Wouldn't the Taliban want to keep such information secret? If Pervez Musharraf is in league with the Taliban why have they made multiple attempts to assassinate him?

If Benazir Bhutto can somehow be elected as President that could help stabilize Pakistan.

A huge factor remains that stands in the way of Bhutto taking power.

Musharraf controls the army.

The situation is very complex. Musharraf controls the army; the army controls nuclear weapons that the Islamo-Fascists doubtlessly desire.

So while Musharraf is trying to perform a balancing act the United States must also balance the goal of having the best person leading Pakistan with the goal of NOT driving the person currently leading Pakistan into the waiting arms of our enemies.

This "pressure" on PM/Gen. Musharraf is pure idiocy predicated on the proposition that "democracy" is transferrable.

As even Chris Matthews of NBC, and of MSBC's Hardball, observed, "What our objective should be is stability not democracy." We should emulate the British, who were unconcerned regarding the form of government in a particular region that they controlled, but were focused on stability that fostered their interests.

As Mr. Matthews also observed, if we install "democracy," which is to delegate to the people of certain countries the power to choose their own forms, then it is a certainty that the governments that are chosen will be theocratic Islamic governments, which will act contrary to United States' interests.

We have witnessed the consequence of such Islamic theocrats obtaining governmental power and through such power control over the resources of an entire country, and using the resources of an entire country against our interests.

Mr. Matthews has indicated that he is satisfied with "stability," and our support of such regimes as that of the King of Jordan, the President is it, of Egypt, and Mr. Musharraf in Pakistan.

Let's be sensible and be satisfied with what is feasible and congenial to our interests rather than playing word games and harming our interests.

Some lefties have good sense and are not so obsessed with words and forms that they continue to inveigh and insist that we participate and even foment the creation of a world that will be weighted against us. But the ossified and addled brains of some lefties seeks such a conclusion. They are pre-programmed to respond to words and phrases in such a way as to further creations of situations antithetical to our interests. They seem to feel that they are detached from reality. They don't seem to even realize that they are not merely observers, but are "participant-observers, and that the world they engineer will affect them either negatively or positively.

what people are bitching about releasing taliban militants possible AQ members....and then on the other say close Gitmo.....my my.... fucking unbelievable.... how about Mosshie lets his 213 troops get beheaded and their be a bigger antiwar story

Again, why anyone would take as fact information provided by the Taliban defies logic.

Did you even bother to read the articles Zulu-the quoted a pakistani general. Now, unless the taliban have infiltrated the Paki army to the extent the iraqi insurgenst have infiltrated the stander-uppers...
And Judass, Bush has released a lot more "terrorists"from Gitmo than the 25 Mushie just popped.
I'm guessing the saudi royals anted up the bribes.
Or maybe they weren't really terrorists at all.

As even Chris Matthews of NBC, and of MSBC's Hardball, observed, "What our objective should be is stability not democracy." We should emulate the British, who were unconcerned regarding the form of government in a particular region that they controlled, but were focused on stability that fostered their interests.

Chris "No Balls" Matthews can suck on a frozen turdsicle as far as Spud is concerned.

Stability = Compliant Client State who economy is virtually controlled from DC.

This is why Brazil's conomy and much of south and central america has been directed from w/o fer so long now.

This is also why the US has had such an abominable track record in supporting strong arm dictators over popularily elected nationalist leaders.

This is partially why America has enjoyed an unfair economic advantage over the rest of the world and it's in large part why a large number of folks in the world is not so fond of the US.

And yer leaders haff the balls to say it's because "They hate our freedoms"

Why folk are still stupid enuff to buy into the ill logic is anybodies guess but Spud imagines it's the end result of years of a corporately corrupted MSM spewing out government invented propaganda as truth incarnate.

And fear, of course.

Be Well.

THATS WHAT SPUD GETS FOR WATCHING CNN

His arrest on Feb. 26 seems to have been anything but a coincidence. That was the very day that Vice President Dick Cheney arrived in Islamabad on an unannounced visit to demand a crackdown on Taliban operations in Pakistan.

Apparently Mushy is now more afraid of the extremists in his midst than even Dickless Cheney and his man sized safe.

10 Bllion a year fer an "ally" like this?

WTF do y'all pay yer enemies?

Be Well.

THATS WHAT SPUD GETS FOR WATCHING CNN

The Corporate News Network?

Hell yeah, Spud'll watch it fer a giggle just like MSNBC. If Spud really wants a larf he'll watch Fox News aka "Faux Noise". Spud prefers the BBC World and CBC Newsworld and C-Span over them though. The alternate media sources in blgworld seem to hold the most truth though. The further one gets away from corporate influence the closeer one seems to get to the truth.

Reading from a variety of sources and viewpoints also helps.

How does Judas do it per se?

Be Well.

'Did you even bother to read the articles Zulu-the quoted a pakistani general.'

From the article:

'Taliban sources tell NEWSWEEK that the top man on the list was Mullah Obaidullah Akhund--the highest-ranking Taliban official ever captured by the Pakistanis.'

If there is a link showing a Pakistani general has said Mullah Obaidullah Akhund has been released provide it. The word 'general' isn't even in the article.

So other than Taliban 'news sources' is there any reputable proof this 'Mullah Obaidullah Akhund' has been released?

Zulu: Read, or have your mom read, the Weekly Standard report.

I guess our check bounced.

China's fault!

Northguy- If his mother could comprehend what she read, she would have taught Zulu to do the same.

Next.

I think that declarings a poster upon the Drudge Retort not understanding something is OK(Lord knows I have done so many times) I don't think it' right to go after the parent and or child of a poster is right. Just My two cents worth.

Larry Mohr

It was a joke, larry. Get over it.