# Pakistan, al Qaeda, ISI, Taleban, etc **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 31, 2003, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pakistan-al-qaeda-isi-taleban-etc/192029 "2003-07-31T01:50:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2003, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pakistan-al-qaeda-isi-taleban-etc/192029/1 "2003-07-31T01:50:21Z")
> [@](#): > > [THE SEARCH FOR OSAMA](http://www.newyorker.com/printable/?fact/030804fa_fact) > > “The reason bin Laden is so hard to get is that people are helping him,” Cofer Black told me. The search has been stymied not so much by tactical or logistical hurdles as by political ones. The tribal regions of Pakistan are impoverished and increasingly fundamentalist, and there is ambivalence within Musharraf’s government about how vigorously to press in the fight against Muslim jihadis. Although Musharraf has been an outspoken ally of the United States, the aggressive pursuit of bin Laden poses political risks for him, since it is sure to incite his regime’s fundamentalist opponents. Some skeptics argue that the capture of bin Laden may not be in Musharraf’s interest for other reasons as well. As long as bin Laden and other top figures in Al Qaeda are believed to be on the lam in Pakistan, they say, Musharraf can be assured of receiving favorable treatment from the United States in exchange for his coöperation. Since September 11th, Pakistan has been rescued from the verge of bankruptcy. The United States lifted economic sanctions that were imposed in 1998, after Pakistan began testing nuclear weapons, and it restored foreign aid, last month promising a five-year package of three billion dollars in return for Pakistan’s continued help in the fight against terrorism. “Essentially, Musharraf was very lucky this happened in his neighborhood,” Yusufzai told me. > [@](#): > > from [washtimes.com/commentary/2003/03/24](http://washtimes.com/commentary/2003/03/24) (link no longer available) > Gen. Hamid Gul, the retired head of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency, in his latest well-publicized (in Pakistan) statement, says: “We have the nuclear capability that can destroy Madras [India]. Surely the same missile can do the same to Tel Aviv. Washington cannot stop Muslim suicidal attacks. Taliban are still alive and along with ‘friends.’ They will continue the holy jihad against the U.S. America will destroy Iraq and later on repeat the same act of war against Pakistan, Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia.” > A coalition of six extremist religious parties (MMA) now governs two of Pakistan’s four provinces — a direct result of the free elections the U.S. insisted be held after President Pervez Musharraf endorsed the Bush administration’s war on terror. MMA leader Sami ul-Haq, a newly elected senator, has also declared jihad against the U.S. and Israel. “If the U.S. attacks Iraq, the MMA alliance and all their supporters will attack Washington and Tel Aviv,” he said. > [@](#): > > “[Khalid Shaikh] Mohammed was arrested at the home of an activist of Pakistan’s oldest religious party, Jamaat-e-Islami, which has close links with the Pakistan intelligence service, known as ISI” > [@](#): > > [By Peter Slevin > Washington Post Staff Writer > Monday, March 31, 2003; Page A04](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54711-2003Mar30.html) > The Bush administration…will impose economic sanctions on a Pakistani company accused of purchasing missiles from the Pyongyang government… > > Musharraf faces strong opposition at home for his support of the United States… > [@](#): > > Pakistan Radicals Use Iraq War to Recruit > By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS > Filed at 10:23 a.m. ET > Recruitment in Pakistan of potential terrorists appears to be on the rise. Militant leaders freed from house arrest have returned to the mosques to rally the faithful against the United States. > > Musharraf’s support for Washington must be balanced against two powerful forces at home. One is the army, dominated by religious conservatives who were reluctant about the U.S. war in Afghanistan and who now staunchly oppose the war in Iraq. The second are elements within the Pakistan intelligence agency still closely allied to militants. > [@](#): > > [_link_](http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/06/international/asia/06STAN.html?pagewanted=1) > Pakistani officials deny any knowledge that senior Taliban or Al Qaeda figures are in Pakistan, but have said they will investigate. > > Nevertheless, none of the senior Taliban leaders have been apprehended, even though they have started calling friendly local journalists and giving interviews over their satellite telephones. > > Those familiar with the situation contend that Pakistan’s army and secret service are allowing the Taliban to operate in Pakistan, and even protecting them. Further, the local government, now dominated by an alliance of religious parties sympathetic to the Taliban, provides them with legitimacy by association. > > Pakistani opposition figures — who often accuse the country’s establishment, including the president, the army and the secret service, of supporting the resurgent Taliban — warned that the problem needs to be tackled at its source, that is, in these border areas, including Quetta. > > “America is in for big trouble in Afghanistan unless you remove the source,” warned one influential editor, who declined to give his name. > Habib Jalib Baloch, a former senator and leader of the Baloch National Party, said, “America should have selected to crush Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Pakistan, rather than go to war in Iraq.” He said he was sure that the Taliban leader, Mullah Muhammad Omar, and his top commanders were all in Pakistan, protected by their links to the Pakistani establishment. All of these, (xpt the 1st), are old links from old rants. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2003, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pakistan-al-qaeda-isi-taleban-etc/192029/2 "2003-07-31T02:19:25Z")
And you want to debate what again? ---
**Author:** ![pantom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/34f0e0/32.png) [@pantom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pantom)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2003, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pakistan-al-qaeda-isi-taleban-etc/192029/3 "2003-07-31T02:22:46Z")
You know, I just now finished reading that article in The New Yorker, and I thought to myself, wow, that would be a great subject for a thread. Especially the part about how resources were stripped from the hunt for Bin Laden for the Iraq war, a thing I always suspected, and a thing which just makes me even more furious about that egregious waste of lives and money. We couldn’t have a more incompetent President at the helm at a moment of need than the one we have now. I’ve never been more anxious for Election Day. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2003, 11:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pakistan-al-qaeda-isi-taleban-etc/192029/4 "2003-07-31T11:07:03Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by treis \* > \*\*And you want to debate what again? \*\* How much of a threat comes from Pakistan. and How much help is Pakistan in the WoT. ---
**Author:** ![London\_Calling](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@London\_Calling](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/London_Calling)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2003, 12:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pakistan-al-qaeda-isi-taleban-etc/192029/5 "2003-07-31T12:23:03Z")
‘War on Terrorism’ – Is this still 2001 ? You’re swallowing that Administration line again rather than look at he world around you (including the vast experiences of other societies). No point in addressing ‘terrorism’ in those (warring) terms cos you can’t beat it. Ever. Hence the US withdrawal from Saudi, etc. It might be what the public want to hear, but the phrase is a nonsense. Ask Israeli’s – now 55 years down the road - how that ‘war’ and total domination of the society that breeds the ‘terrorists’ has fared . . . FTR, [this is an old chestnut from October 2001](http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?xml=0&art_id=1454238160). One has to be concerned as to the veracity given the tension between India and Pakistan at the time: \*"NEW DELHI: While the Pakistani Inter Services Public Relations claimed that former ISI director-general Lt-Gen Mahmud Ahmad sought retirement after being superseded on Monday, the truth is more shocking. Top sources confirmed here on Tuesday, that the general lost his job because of the “evidence” India produced to show his links to one of the suicide bombers that wrecked the World Trade Centre. The US authorities sought his removal after confirming the fact that $100,000 were wired to WTC hijacker Mohammed Atta from Pakistan by Ahmad Umar Sheikh at the instance of Gen Mahumd "\* Radical Islam is everywhere, it’s institutional, mainstream and pandemic. Some actively support extremist actions/solutions, some don’t. Above all, we should understand al Qaeda is a mere symptom, an irritating visual rash. If Pakistan is a ‘threat’ today, it can be anywhere you like tomorrow. ---
**Author:** ![akrako1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c77e96/32.png) [@akrako1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/akrako1)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2003, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pakistan-al-qaeda-isi-taleban-etc/192029/6 "2003-07-31T17:51:55Z")
For all of those doubtful of claims by independent news on the web, the Wall Street Journal repeated the claim from the Times of India, that was subsequently repoted in the Dawn newspaper of Pakistan. > **[Opinion & Reviews - Wall Street Journal](https://www.wsj.com/news/opinion)** > > Get The Wall Street Journal’s Opinion columnists, editorials, op-eds, letters to the editor, and book and arts reviews. Check Out this page for a good over analysis of Pakistan’s complicity, and evidence of a doctored C. Rice interview regarding the visiting INI chief. [http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO206A.html](http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO206A.html) Remember what reported Richard Pearle was researching in Pakistan when he was abducted and killed? Pakistani links to al-Queda. Why hasn’t a possible Pakistan link been mentioned in the national press? Is this a deliberate deception - referring solely to Saudi Arabia as a sponsor? Why are we covering for Pakistan? The only rational reason would be the most logical one, that it must be done to further Bush’s own interests - like everything else. There must be a plan down the road to take Saudi Arabia. I have a problem believing that we’re covering for the ISI beacuse we need their help in the WOT. Keeping OBL on the loose just keeps the game going, lining everyone’s pockets - so we don’t really want to find him. There must be some profit to be made by us. Anyone have a good explanation for ignoring Pakistan? ---
**Author:** ![Fang](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/96bed5/32.png) [@Fang](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fang)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2003, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pakistan-al-qaeda-isi-taleban-etc/192029/7 "2003-07-31T20:11:02Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by London\_Calling \* > \*\*Radical Islam is everywhere, it’s institutional, mainstream and pandemic. Some actively support extremist actions/solutions, some don’t. Above all, we should understand al Qaeda is a mere symptom, an irritating visual rash. \*\* Of course, if we fight this “root cause”, well, we all know where that leads us… ---
**Author:** ![Roger\_Mexico](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f6c823/32.png) [@Roger\_Mexico](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Roger_Mexico)\ **Post date:** [August 1, 2003, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pakistan-al-qaeda-isi-taleban-etc/192029/8 "2003-08-01T20:54:50Z")
In response to Akrako1’s question “why are we ignoring Pakistan?,” it is such a can of worms that it is difficult to even broach a discussion here. It goes back to BCCI, the CIA’s training of the mujahideen, the links to Pakistan’s ISI, opium and heroin smuggling, Bush family’s business links with Bin Mahfouz and the Ben Ladin family, etc. etc. If the American public really understood what was going on here there would be a huge scandal. That is the “national security”–Bush’s security, not the nation’s-- that is being protected by classifying those 28 pages, and what’s in there is probably just the tip of the iceberg. Anyway, this timeline give some good background info: [http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/AAisidrugs.html](http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/AAisidrugs.html) ---
**Author:** ![pantom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/34f0e0/32.png) [@pantom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pantom)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2003, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pakistan-al-qaeda-isi-taleban-etc/192029/9 "2003-08-02T00:33:33Z")
That is an extraordinary site. Truly. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2003, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pakistan-al-qaeda-isi-taleban-etc/192029/10 "2003-08-02T03:24:04Z")
“Why are we ignoring Pakistan?”. Everyone on this board knows that I have no love for Shrub’s foreign policy, but it wouldn’t be justified to say that our refusal to demand full cooperation in the hunt for Al Queda and Taliban members is entirely to protect him. From the articles that I’ve read, it seems that the situation is that the Pakistani government enjoys solid support in some regions of the country, but there are also vast areas where the real control is held by tribal councils that are generally anti-Western and in some cases friendly to Islamic extremists. What we’d really like, of course,would be to have all such areas brought under the control of some group that would be willing to hunt agressively for Al Queda and Taliban operatives, but that’s not a practical possibility. And in the meanwhile, there’s nothing to be gained by increasing pressure on the government. If we were to say “bring us the head of bin Laden in thirty days or else the economic sanctions go back up”, there’s no telling what the response would be. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2003, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pakistan-al-qaeda-isi-taleban-etc/192029/11 "2003-08-02T03:35:06Z")
If they did bring us UbL’s head on a platter, we might be tempted to re-instate the sanctions already againstthem that we have suspended since we wouldn’t need them anymore. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2003, 3:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pakistan-al-qaeda-isi-taleban-etc/192029/12 "2003-08-02T03:53:57Z")
That’s exactly the problem. What Pakistan wants most is to be able to keep handing us some relatively minor Al Queda operative once every few months to prove that they’re “with us”, while having OBL remain alive. Since American forces cannot work within the boundaries of Pakistan proper, that means that if bin Laden actually has found a secure hiding place on the Pakistan side of the border, he’s relatively safe. With the hunt for bin Laden now a back burner issue, I can’t think of anything other than a major al Queda attack on an American target that would cause America to pressure Pakistan into going after him. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2003, 4:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pakistan-al-qaeda-isi-taleban-etc/192029/13 "2003-08-02T04:09:44Z")
We aren’t ignoring Pakistan we are getting the best possible help we could expect. Many local governments in Pakistan are moving towards the Taliban style of Islamic extremism. Helping America is not popular in many regions of the country and to mantain the central goverments power Musharraf can only do so much. Invading Pakistan is simply not an option becuase they have nukes so there is little we can to do to influence them. If we impose sanctions on them to try to get them to help more it will just drive the population away from the US ---
**Author:** ![Alan\_Owes\_Bess](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c37758/32.png) [@Alan\_Owes\_Bess](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alan_Owes_Bess)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2003, 9:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pakistan-al-qaeda-isi-taleban-etc/192029/14 "2003-08-02T09:40:07Z")
The vaguely termed “War on Terrorism” was in existence well before the coming of George II (say from the 1960’s?) and will probably continue for at least another 1 or 2 centuries. Osama Bin Laden, who is very proably dead, is no longer a major factor here except as a ‘Che Lives’ kind of inspiration to his many admirers. Whether we like it or not, over the next 20-30 years there will probably be at least another one or two dozen countries, some controlled by people who are less than civilised, with nuclear weapons. Neither the US, nor any other power, is likely to make a serious attempt to take each of them out before this happens, and some of those countries, or factions within them, would be quite happy to provide, on a clandestine basis, one or more compact nuclear devices to some group headed by an Osama MarkII, the original model having, I believe, already joined the Choir Invisible. You do not even have to smuggle such a device into country to wreak havoc. Setting it off in some vessel with an official registration of convenience (easy to get) a few miles out to sea from a coastal city would cause almost as much devastation as setting it off in a city centre. I believe that at a US Govt. press briefing about a year ago (I lost the cite, sorry) it was stated that the US Govt. would not wait until it had proof positive before responding. However, in all seriousness, what could really be done if the identity of the perp was not immediately known. ---
**Author:** ![Eva\_Luna](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e495f1/32.png) [@Eva\_Luna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eva_Luna)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2003, 11:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pakistan-al-qaeda-isi-taleban-etc/192029/15 "2003-08-02T11:48:16Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by akrako1 \* > > Remember what reported Richard Pearle was researching in Pakistan when he was abducted and killed? Pakistani links to al-Queda. [nitpick] Daniel Pearl, not Richard. (BTW, his family set up a nonprofit foundation in his name to promote cross-cultural understanding. A friend of mine in San Francisco does some of the site maintenance on a pro bono basis. You can check it out at [www.danielpearl.org](http://www.danielpearl.org).) [/np] That said, even if you can attribute the noblest of motives to Musharraf - something of which I’m not terriblly convinced - I sure as hell wouldn’t want his job. ---
**Author:** ![London\_Calling](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@London\_Calling](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/London_Calling)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2003, 12:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pakistan-al-qaeda-isi-taleban-etc/192029/16 "2003-08-02T12:04:25Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ITR champion \* > With the hunt for bin Laden now a back burner issue, I can’t think of anything other than a major al Queda attack on an American target that would cause America to pressure Pakistan into going after him. The man behind 9/11, the capture of whom is the \*single event \*most likely to boost Bush, the head of the still threatening al-Qaeda and on whom the award for information “leading to the . . .” is now $25 million is “on the back burner” ? – that’ll surprise him. Aug 02, 2003 - e.g. _Today_ [By Jane Mayer, New Yorker](http://www.jihadunspun.com/intheatre_internal.php?article=69704&list=/home.php&) In June, at a joint press conference at Camp David with President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan, the President was forced to address the bin Laden question. A reporter asked where bin Laden might be, and Bush’s response was muted and cautious. “If Osama bin Laden is alive . . . slowly but surely we’re dismantling the networks, and we’ll continue on the hunt,” he said. He added that locating bin Laden “could take years.” \ “Anyone who says that, at this point, getting bin Laden doesn’t matter is, purposefully or not, providing a completely self-serving judgment,” Rand Beers said. “It’s not true. There would be a huge favorable political fallout to finding him. It would reverberate all over the Islamic world. Maybe someday it will matter less, but right now it’s a continuing, nagging question, and a huge political embarrassment.” ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2003, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pakistan-al-qaeda-isi-taleban-etc/192029/17 "2003-08-02T17:08:54Z")
The already cited New Yorker article documents how resources have been steadily removed from the hunt for Osama to focus on other issues, meaning Iraq. I wasn’t saying that he’s been forgotten entirely, only that the government and the media are placing far less emphasis on the effort to find him. ---
**Author:** ![London\_Calling](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@London\_Calling](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/London_Calling)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2003, 9:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pakistan-al-qaeda-isi-taleban-etc/192029/18 "2003-08-03T09:33:13Z")
Just seconding the thanks to **Roger\_Mexico** for [http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/information/siteindex.html](http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/information/siteindex.html) The site is a work in progress but I particularly like the very comprehensive timelines inclusion of multi-sourced media. A very interesting project. Thanks! ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2003, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pakistan-al-qaeda-isi-taleban-etc/192029/19 "2003-08-03T12:31:05Z")
Wow! What a cite site! I read thier critique of Colin Powells UN speech. It was like watching a fox being pecked to death by carnivorous chickens. ---
**Author:** ![London\_Calling](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@London\_Calling](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/London_Calling)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2003, 1:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pakistan-al-qaeda-isi-taleban-etc/192029/20 "2003-08-03T13:29:26Z")
. . or a Mother-In-Law. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pakistan-al-qaeda-isi-taleban-etc/192029.md?page=2)