Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

[Mutiny in the Pakistan army?] - 30 More Pakistani Soldiers to Get Death Penalty for Indiscipline
South Asia Tribune ^ | December 26, 2004 | M.T.Butt

Posted on 12/26/2004 6:35:58 PM PST by Saberwielder

30 More Pakistani Soldiers to Get Death Penalty for Indiscipline

By M T Butt

ISLAMABAD, December 27: As many as 30 Pakistan Army and Air Force personnel are facing the death penalty in several Court Martial proceedings going on in Military Courts in the Kharian Army Cantonment, about 60 miles from Islamabad, highly competent military sources have revealed to South Asia Tribune.

In a remarkable release of confidential information, these sources also gave the details of the Charge Sheet against the only Army soldier sentenced to death by the same military court on October 20, 2004.

Surprisingly the Charge Sheet does not accuse Sepoy Muhammad Islam Siddiqi, Army No 8831068 of any direct participation or involvement in the attack on General Pervez Musharraf in December 2003 near Chaklala Bridge in Rawalpindi, contrary to what was claimed in the official announcement on December 24.

Director General of Pakistan Army’s Inter Services Public Relations, Major General Shaukat Sultan had confirmed on Dec 24 that one Pakistani soldier had been sentenced to death. Confirming the story first broken by Karachi journalist Syed Saleem Shahzad in Asia Times Online on December 21 about the death sentence, Maj. General Sultan had also announced that another soldier had been awarded a 10-year jail sentence. Click to see original Asia Times Story

But military sources are now saying the official version given by ISPR Director General was badly distorted and in fact more than 30 Army and Air Force personnel are have been charged with the same crime and will soon get the same sentence. Announcements about these death sentences will be staggered to minimize the impact.

The ISPR claimed that the death sentence had been given for involvement in the assassination attempt on General Musharraf but actually Sepoy Muhammad Islam Siddiqi had refused to serve in South Waziristan and was at best guilty of violating military discipline along with dozens of others.

The Army prosecutors who did not want to publicly admit that largescale defiance had taken place in South Waziristan where the Army had been deployed against the tribesmen, merged the indiscipline charges against these troops with the assassination attempts on General Musharraf and sought death sentences for the accused.

According to these sources the South Waziristan operation had turned out to be biggest dent in Army discipline when several units declined to be posted in South Waziristan and dozens of troops refused to continue the fight against tribes. The Army top brass was shaken and most of these troops were recalled from the front line.

Convicted Sepoy Islam Siddiqi was among them who was arrested in South Waziristan on defiance and abetting defiance among soldiers and sent to Kharian Cantonment where, after a brief interrogation, he was tried and convicted on October 20, 2004.

Following charges under the Pakistan Army Act (PAA) were read out by a Brigadier who headed the military court:

First Charge

PAA Section 59: Committing a civil offence, that is to say receiving training in terrorism, In that he, at Bhimber (Azad Jammu and Kashmir) during August 2002, received training in the acts of terrorism, at the “Maasker” a training camp of ‘Jaish-e- Mohammed’ a proscribed organization and thereby committed an offense punishable under sub-section (7) (C) of the Anti Terrorism Act, 1997.

Second Charge

PAA Sec 55 (alternative to first charge): Conduct to the prejudice of good order and military discipline, in that he at Bhimber (Azad Jammu and Kashmir) during August 2002, improperly attended at a ‘Maasker’, the training camp of a sectarian organization.

Third Charge

PAA Section 31(d): Attempting to seduce a person in the military forces of Pakistan from his allegiance to the Government of Pakistan, in that he at Peshawar, during Feb 2003 attempted to seduce 8839274 Sepoy Hafiz Muhammad Ashfaq of 2 Defence Services Guard Battalion, from his allegiance to the Government of Pakistan.

Fourth Charge

PAA Section 31(d): Attempting to seduce a person in the military forces of Pakistan from his allegiance to the Government of Pakistan, in that he, at Peshawar during Feb 2003 to January 2004 attempted to seduce 889174 sepoy Hafiz Salah Uddin of 1 Defence Services Guard Company, from his allegiance to the Government of Pakistan.

Fifth Charge

PAA Section 59: Committing a civil offence that is to say, professing to belong to a proscribed organization, in that he, at Peshawar, Murid and elsewhere, during January 2002 to January 2004 professed to belong to ‘Jaish-e-Mohammad’ a proscribed organization: and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 11-F (2) of the Anti Terrorism Act 1997.

Sixth Charge

PAA Section 59: Committing a civil offence that is to say being a citizen of Pakistan, departing from Pakistan without passport, in that he, at Pak-Afghan border, during June 1999, being a citizen of Pakistan, departed from Pakistan without a passport to Afghanistan in contravention of Section 3(a) of the Passport Act, 1974 and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 4(1) of the Passport Act, 1974.

Seventh Charge

PAA Section 55: Conduct to the prejudice of good order and military discipline at Murid, Peshawar and elsewhere during July 2002 to January 2004, improperly remained associated with a Tanzeem (organization) of Pakistan Air Force personnel, which was advancing the object of eliminating General Pervez Musharraf, the President of
Pakistan.

Eighth Charge

PAA Section 55 (alternative to seventh charge): Neglect to the prejudice of good order and military discipline in that he, at Murid, Warsak and elsewhere, during July 2002 to January 2004, having known that some personnel belonging to a Tanzeem of Pakistan Air Force had designs to eliminate General Pervez Musharraf, the President of Pakistan neglected to report the same to his superiors.

Ninth Charge

PAA Section 55: Conduct to the prejudice of good order and military discipline, in that he, at Peshawar during September-October 2003, improperly received 6 x capsules containing poison from No 3060314 Havaldar Mohammed Younis of 98 Air Defence Regiment with ulterior motives.

Military sources and legal experts contacted by the South Asia Tribune said if these charges were made the basis of the death sentence give to Sepoy Islam Siddiqi, then hundreds or even thousands of Pakistan Army troops could be found guilty and convicted.

These experts said the closest Sepoy Siddiqi came to the assassination attempt on General Musharraf was to get “associated with an organization of Pakistan Air Force personnel, which was advancing the object of eliminating General Pervez Musharraf, the President of Pakistan.” This in no way proves, or even accuses, Siddiqi of having a hand in the unsuccessful attempt on Musharraf.

They said if Siddiqi could be sentenced to death for being associated with the organization which had “designs of eliminating General Musharraf” then the entire organization would have to be found equally guilty and put to death.

Likewise if traveling to Afghanistan without a passport was made the basis of death sentence, the entire tribal population and three-fourth of residents of NWFP could be found guilty of the same crime as no one in the Tribal Areas needs a passport to cross into Afghanistan.

Similarly defying military orders to fight in South Waziristan against fellow tribal citizens could land hundreds of Pakistan Army troops into the same category deserving death penalties.

On a political level the charges against arrested soldiers also confirm that many members of the Pakistan armed forces have been actively training with military Islamic organizations like Jaish Mohammed in Azad Kashmir and other locations within Pakistan.

“This is an implicit admission by the Army that such camps existed and elements of the Army were directly involved in one capacity or another. This could substantiate charges leveled by the Indians of Army’s active support and involvement in the insurgency in Kashmir,” a legal expert said.

Even if these elements were not supported by the top Army brass, it confirms that there were factions within the Army which did not follow the official Army and State policy and that could also turn out to be very damaging for Pakistan.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: alqaeda; isi; jaish; jihad; kashmir; musharraf; nukes; pakistan; southasia; terrorism; waziristan
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-119 next last
This is serious stuff. These guys hold the keys to about a 100 nuclear warheads!
1 posted on 12/26/2004 6:35:59 PM PST by Saberwielder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; Boot Hill; Arjun; sukhoi-30mki; Coop; Cronos

Ping!


2 posted on 12/26/2004 6:37:50 PM PST by Saberwielder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Saberwielder

So, kill them already!


3 posted on 12/26/2004 6:41:18 PM PST by Tarpaulin (Look it up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Saberwielder

Sure is serious!


4 posted on 12/26/2004 6:51:00 PM PST by nuconvert (Everyone has a photographic memory. Some don't have film.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Saberwielder
This is serious stuff. These guys hold the keys to about a 100 nuclear warheads!

Agreed , treason is a bitch. fry them already .

5 posted on 12/26/2004 7:22:44 PM PST by Deetes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Saberwielder

I don't see why anyone should object to the Pakistanis cleaning up their ranks. Why is this bad?


6 posted on 12/26/2004 7:25:23 PM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aculeus; general_re; BlueLancer; hellinahandcart; Thinkin' Gal; Happygal; AnnaZ; Poohbah; ...
.
M.T.Butt

In that region, no unusual last name, but those initials . . .

(Compare and contrast Cukoo Butt.)

7 posted on 12/26/2004 7:34:19 PM PST by dighton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
I don't see why anyone should object to the Pakistanis cleaning up their ranks. Why is this bad?

Because this is a sign of how bad the Islamist tendencies in Pakistan's army have metastasized into. If you're a student of history, you'll see parallels between this and the slow Islamization of the Iranian armed forces before the Shah was overthrown.

8 posted on 12/26/2004 7:39:02 PM PST by Saberwielder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert

Was he chewing gum with out enough for the others? Man that guy is strict! ( Blazing saddles scene for the recruitment of bad guys).


9 posted on 12/26/2004 7:42:11 PM PST by eastforker (Ask me about a free satellite TV system!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone

Because Musharraf depends on the support of 4 regional corp commanders to stay in power.No one is sure how SLAMMIC any or all of those 4 are.If one is nutcase,that can cause huge problems for everyone.


10 posted on 12/26/2004 8:24:46 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone

Wading thru it all, it would seem that these Sepoys are getting whacked for being too cozy with the Fundamental Islamists. The Pakistani military and civil authorities are in a constant balancing act between radicals who want to be the first 5th century Caliphate with a nuclear capability, and the moderates who simply want a peaceful Western democracy that has it's neighbor, Hindu India, as a smoking, irradiated ashtray from Lahore to Madras...


11 posted on 12/26/2004 8:25:46 PM PST by jonascord (What is better than the wind at 6 O'Clock on the 600 yard line?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: jonascord

", Hindu India, as a smoking, irradiated ashtray from Lahore to Madras..."

India is a secular nation with nearly as many Muslims as in Pakistan. & Lahore happens to be in Pakistan.


12 posted on 12/26/2004 9:01:38 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
Lahore is a border town.

Not three years ago India and Pakistan were within hours of nuking each other. Islam has survived, unwanted, in India for hundreds of years, and Hindus and Muslims have been slaughtering each other for hundreds of years over it. Pakistan and Bangladesh exists because the Hindus drove the Muslims out of the Raj in 1948. Kashmir is claimed by both countries, and just to make things more exciting, the Sikhs want independence from both because they seem to believe they are better than the rest of India. A pox on all the houses...

13 posted on 12/26/2004 9:22:16 PM PST by jonascord (What is better than the wind at 6 O'Clock on the 600 yard line?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: dighton
M.T.Butt

" In that region, no unusual last name, but those initials . ."

These people have NO sense of propriety...

Wouldn't the alias of M.T. Bladder made more sense??

14 posted on 12/26/2004 9:25:13 PM PST by F16Fighter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jonascord; Arjun; AM2000

East & West Pakistan were formed because of the Muslim league's demands for a separate Muslim state,not because Hindus drove Muslims out.If that was so,explain how 138 million Muslims live in India & are in far better shape than their cousins in Pakistan??& Pakistan & India were independent in 1947 & not 1948.The birth of Bangladesh in 1971 was itself a sign of the futility of Pakistan's Muslim identity-East Pakistan gave way to Bangladesh due to the action of the Indian army.Sikhs are a microscopic minority in Pakistan with no rights or privileges.A section of Sikhs & not the whole community wanted independence from India in the 80s(who were supported by Pakistan).Since then,most Sikhs are happy to be in Punjab state in India & around 4 democratic elections have been held in that state since,which is now the richest in India.The Indian prime minister is a Sikh & so is the new army chief designate.

In short,read up on the history of the subcontinent-ur knowledge on it is too stereotyped


15 posted on 12/26/2004 9:39:46 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

& Lahore is still a part of Pakistan-has been since 1947.


16 posted on 12/26/2004 9:40:50 PM PST by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: jonascord
Pakistan and Bangladesh exists because the Hindus drove the Muslims out of the Raj in 1948.

Actually, the demand for a separate Muslim homeland was first raised by the Muslim League. The Hindu-dominated Indian National Congress was against any sort of separation. They agreed to it only after it became apparent that without separation there would be no independence.

17 posted on 12/26/2004 10:55:05 PM PST by AM2000 (I am not responsible for the contents of this post.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: jonascord

You have no idea what you are talking about.


18 posted on 12/26/2004 11:54:12 PM PST by Arjun (Skepticism is good. It keeps you alive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: jonascord

Succint, India wouldn't shed a tear if it was a vice versa eh?


19 posted on 12/27/2004 12:28:50 AM PST by Atchafalaya (When you're there, thats the best!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Saberwielder; nuconvert; Dog Gone
8 These guys hold the keys to about a 100 nuclear warheads!”

I don't like contributing to your ongoing efforts to sow discord and to undermine support for the Administration's strategy in Pakistan, by adding any post that would bump your thread, but I couldn't leave that foolish statement of yours go unanswered.

Contrary to what you state, the only Pakistani access to nuclear weapons is held by the Military's top leadership, and they are the very ones that prosecuted these Islamists dogs. These trials and executions are a perfect example of the wisdom and success of Bush's policy in Pakistan and of Mushi's resolve in fighting these Islamist scum.

So, you're against protecting those nukes from Islamists? Go figure!

8 Mutiny in the Pakistan army? - 30 More Pakistani Soldiers to Get Death Penalty for Indiscipline”

You do know that it is against Free Republic rules to post imaginary titles, don't you? And you do know that the word "mutiny" is not part of the original title, nor does it even occur in the story text, don't you?

Why do you make up stuff like that? Oh, that's right, you've got an agenda you're trying to sell.

--Boot Hill

20 posted on 12/27/2004 1:24:23 AM PST by Boot Hill (Candy-gram for Osama bin Mongo, candy-gram for Osama bin Mongo!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Boot Hill
Musharraf deserves great praise for what he is trying to do in Pakistan and for what he has already accomplished. It's not easy to wrest control of the country from the Islamists, yet that is exactly what he is doing.

The ISI was completely controlled by them prior to 9/11, and certainly the population was becoming even more extremist thanks largely to the Saudi-funded madrassas.

It is impossible to change all this overnight, but Musharraf has made progress far beyond my expectations. He's survived assassination attempts while conducting purges of the ISI and the army. He's defused tensions in Kashmir and conducted sweeps of the unconquered tribal areas.

He's done everything we've asked at great personal and political peril.

Some would like him to wave a magic wand and turn Pakistan into some sort of nirvana. But the truth is that Pakistan is a far better ally than Turkey and far more helpful in the war on terrorists than our neighbors to the north.

21 posted on 12/27/2004 8:13:12 AM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Boot Hill
I don't like contributing to your ongoing efforts to sow discord and to undermine support for the Administration's strategy in Pakistan, by adding any post that would bump your thread, but I couldn't leave that foolish statement of yours go unanswered.

Gee. I didn't realize that President Bush appointed you as the Secretary of Amity and I also did not realize that we all have a calling to ignore any news that don't fit the administration's strategy on Pakistan. I'll keep that in mind next time, Mr. Secretary.

Contrary to what you state, the only Pakistani access to nuclear weapons is held by the Military's top leadership

Wow. I see that as a member of the Bush cabinet you have access to top secret material like who has access to Pakistan's nuke warheads. It must have slipped your mind that the people guarding the bunkers, silos and other facilities that house the warheads and weapons grade Uranium are not the Generals but lower level officers and enlisted men. You don't see Pakistani generals doing sentry duty, do you?

So, you're against protecting those nukes from Islamists? Go figure

So you now have the power to read other people's minds? Where did I say that?

Oh, that's right, you've got an agenda you're trying to sell.

ROTFL. And you're here without any agenda?

If you read the report carefully, you'd see that it talks about many Pakistani soldiers participating in training activities with terrorists in training camps that are still open. So why are those facilities still open? Secondly, you'd do well to read about the events in Iran before the Islamic revolution.

22 posted on 12/27/2004 9:37:11 AM PST by Saberwielder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Saberwielder
Because this is a sign of how bad the Islamist tendencies in Pakistan's army have metastasized into. If you're a student of history, you'll see parallels between this and the slow Islamization of the Iranian armed forces before the Shah was overthrown.

I don't think you'll find too many people surprised to hear about this. What is encouraging is the steps being taken to root out this problem. Pakistan has come a long way in the past three years, but there are obviously still many problems.

23 posted on 12/31/2004 4:51:44 AM PST by Coop (In memory of a true hero - Pat Tillman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: jonascord
Not three years ago India and Pakistan were within hours of nuking each other.

One of many foreign policy successes by the Bush Administration that is rarely if ever mentioned. I imagine Sec. Powell had some long, anxious nights back then.

24 posted on 12/31/2004 4:54:25 AM PST by Coop (In memory of a true hero - Pat Tillman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Saberwielder; Boot Hill
Gee. I didn't realize that President Bush appointed you as the Secretary of Amity and I also did not realize that we all have a calling to ignore any news that don't fit the administration's strategy on Pakistan. I'll keep that in mind next time, Mr. Secretary.

Your title was suspect enough, but I'd say your sarcastic response has effectively proven Boot's point. While I strongly disagree that this news is not part of the Administration's strategy in Pakistan, you obviously felt that it was and scrambled to get it posted.

But regardless of your motivation, it is an interesting article, and I'm glad to have read it.

25 posted on 12/31/2004 5:00:19 AM PST by Coop (In memory of a true hero - Pat Tillman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Coop
"Your title was suspect enough"

It was more than suspect, it was outright fraud. When Saberwielder first posted this thread, he did so without the brackets in the title. AM had to add that correction.

--Boot Hill

26 posted on 12/31/2004 12:46:21 PM PST by Boot Hill (Candy-gram for Osama bin Mongo, candy-gram for Osama bin Mongo!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Saberwielder; Coop
8 Saberwielder in December:
“It must have slipped your mind that the people guarding the [nuclear] bunkers, silos and other facilities that house the warheads and weapons grade Uranium are not the Generals but lower level officers and enlisted men. You don't see Pakistani generals doing sentry duty, do you?”   (source)

8 Saberwielder in October:
“NBC did a piece that talked about U.S having installed PALs [Permissive Action Link] on Pakistani nukes. You think people went to prison for that information coming out?”   (source)

LOL, so Saberwielder, it appears that you are now saying that the PAL's that control the nukes are in the hands of "lower level officers and enlisted men", and not the top generals. After all, wasn't it you who said: "These guys [the lower level officers and enlisted men] hold the keys to about a 100 nuclear warheads!"

--Boot Hill

27 posted on 12/31/2004 2:33:26 PM PST by Boot Hill (Candy-gram for Osama bin Mongo, candy-gram for Osama bin Mongo!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Coop
Coop,

What I find alarming is the drip-by-drip nature of these revelations.

Ever since 9/11, Musharraf had been parroting the claim that Pakistan's army is highly disciplined and the nukes were safe, etc. Earlier in 2004, after reports on the attempts on his life came out, Musharraf said: "there was involvement by some few lower-level people but there were no officers involved" But reports from Waziristan clearly said that even a Colonel rebelled.

After the Colonel level, how long before you hear of Brigadiers? And Lieutenant Generals?

Now, we can all ignore these types of events and pretend that the Bush administration is always right like some people would like to believe. Or, we can discuss the very real ramifications of the very serious happenings in Pakistan, even if it may cast doubts on our current policy of - "Musharraf can do no wrong."

There are fundamental problems with Pakistan. They can only be fixed through fundamental reforms - starting with a gradual return to civilian rule, a move away from using Islamist extremism as state tools and structural changes to the power structure. Musharraf clearly wants to enjoy the benefits of allying with us but has been using our fear of an alternative to avoid making any meaningful change to his country i.e give up power to elected rulers. The danger here is not of an imminent coup, but a slow build up of resentment where Musharraf's refusal to allow legitmate dissent causes opponents of army rule in Pakistan to find that supporting the jihadists is their only way out. There are no societal pressure release valves in a one man dictatorship.

I urge you to look up material on the last years of the Shah of Iran and see the similarities in the arguments. Just replace Pehlavi with Pervez. The Islamic revolution happened in Iran when even the secular opponents of the Shah felt so mad at the blind American support to the Shah's misrule that they lent a helping hand to Khomeini and his thugs. History is to be learnt from.

28 posted on 12/31/2004 8:06:05 PM PST by Saberwielder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Boot Hill; Coop
ROTFL! For a person who bases his ENTIRE support for the current policy towards Pakistan on an unsupported, unsubstanitated guess, you have some chutzpah criticizing others' motives. See:

Boot Hill on March 17, 2004

My guess is that if we have that kind of access to these devices, that Pakistan's entire nuclear stockpile probably rests in the read end of a U.S. C-130, fueled up and with a fresh crew on board, sitting at the end of some Pakistani runway, along with a flight of fighter escorts, awaiting a "go code" from intel telling us that the worst has happened and Musharraf has fallen and to get those damn nukes the hell out of Dodge NOW!!!.

Is this a risky plan? Heck yes, but I see no other choice that has less risk. Besides, its working (for now, at least!)

Now, by your logic, as stated in post #27, once PAL's are in place on Pakistan's warheads, the US has nothing to worry about. There are many keys to a given nuclear weapon. If having a PAL was enough, we wouldn't be spending billions to guard and disarm Russia's many warheads (Nunn-Lugar initiative), would we?

Those who aren't blinded by a desire to avoid bad news can think of stuff like many pounds of highly enriched uranium that reside inside Pakistan's warheads as well as triggering devices that could be used to construct a "dirty" bomb is a serious enough threat.

And not to mention that there are many steps before a nuclear weapon is made and there are other key sites such as the ones storing radioactive material - which Pakistan should have by the proverbial ton - all guarded by these types of guys.

Or did a little birdie tell you that we have the all the Pakistani HE Uranium extracted and sitting at the back of USAF C-130s in Dalbandin? LOL.

And finally, about the title of this thread - When the report says "hundreds or even thousands" of Pakistani troops could be rebelling against authority, it is reasonable to think of the word mutiny. If it quacks like a duck...

29 posted on 12/31/2004 8:11:02 PM PST by Saberwielder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Saberwielder
"Now, by your logic, as stated in post #27, once PAL's are in place on Pakistan's warheads, the US has nothing to worry about."

Sorry, but you only rate a D+ for that effort to wriggle out of the conundrum you've talked your way into. You started this thread with the wildly stupid notion that "lower level officers and enlisted men" actually "hold the keys to about a 100 nuclear warheads". Where's your proof for that reckless charge? Obviously, the actual keys to the Pakistani nukes are held by the general staff that prosecuted these miscreants. Only an idiot would believe otherwise.

Once again you've come to the Free Republic forum to try to sow your seeds of dissent by whipping up fear and loathing against Musharraf, Pakistan and U.S. foreign policy, with another blatantly false charge for which neither you, nor the story, offered even one iota of proof. You are dishonest.

"...it is reasonable to think of the word mutiny."

But that's not what you did, is it? You didn't just think the word "mutiny", rather you willfully chose to commit a fraud upon the forum by falsely changing the title to lead off with "Mutiny in the Pakistan army", when you knew perfectly well that no such word or phrase could be found in the actual title or body of the story. You are dishonest.

Take your irrational anti-Pakistan bias and paranoia somewhere else.

--Boot Hill

30 posted on 01/01/2005 4:34:16 AM PST by Boot Hill (Candy-gram for Osama bin Mongo, candy-gram for Osama bin Mongo!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Boot Hill
Where's your proof for that reckless charge? Obviously, the actual keys to the Pakistani nukes are held by the general staff that prosecuted these miscreants. Only an idiot would believe otherwise

Candy Gram to Boot Hill -> When you hit the bottom, stop digging.

You conveniently ignore the fact that the US government and law enforcement have explicitly stated their worries not just about nuclear warheads, but nuclear fuel being used in dirty bombs. Do you have any proof that the Pakistani Generals control all their country's nuclear fuel? You obviously don't.

Secondly, why don't you show us the proof for your claim that Pakistan's nuclear warheads are sitting at the back of a US C-130? Cat got your tongue?

Once again you've come to the Free Republic forum to try to sow your seeds of dissent by whipping up fear and loathing against Musharraf, Pakistan and U.S. foreign policy, with another blatantly false charge for which neither you, nor the story, offered even one iota of proof. You are dishonest.

Let's see. A person who guesses that the US controls Pakistan's nukes and assures his fellow forum members that everything's hunky dory based on the guess.

versus

A person who cogently lays out arguments about how Pakistan's warheads and nculear fuel are guarded by Al Qaida sympathizers and substantiates it with multiple links and sources.

Who's dishonest here? Your honesty lies in the rear end of a C-130 that flew out a long time ago.

But that's not what you did, is it? You didn't just think the word "mutiny", rather you willfully chose to commit a fraud upon the forum by falsely changing the title to lead off with "Mutiny in the Pakistan army", when you knew perfectly well that no such word or phrase could be found in the actual title or body of the story. You are dishonest.

Aw poor baby. Did I hurt your feelings by making you think?

What I did was perfectly fine because the purport of the article I posted was reflected in the title. You are just pissed because it upsets your carefully constructed fictional world.

Take your irrational anti-Pakistan bias and paranoia somewhere else.

No. And unlike you, I'm not going to ask you to take your GIS based intellectual diarrhea that you pass for analysis elsewhere.

Why? I'm not afraid to debate. But if you are afraid to argue and debate based on facts - tough.

I'm here to stay and will not hesitate to burst your bubble. Any time, any day. Try looking that up in a map. And stop the personal attacks, which is a known forum rule that you violate at will.

31 posted on 01/01/2005 10:32:07 AM PST by Saberwielder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Saberwielder
"...why don't you show us the proof for your claim that Pakistan's nuclear warheads are sitting at the back of a US C-130?"

First, as you well know, I made NO such claim, it was clearly stated to be "My guess is...". You are dishonest.

Second, if you want to revisit an issue from a previous thread and challenge a poster about what they said there, then do so on that thread, not here. Forum policy.

You can obfuscate all you want, change the subject, rant, post irrelevant diatribes, what ever. You aren't getting off the hook until you answer for your lies.

You started this thread with the lie that these "lower level officers and enlisted men" actually "hold the keys to about a 100 nuclear warheads". Where is your proof for that reckless accusation?

--Boot Hill

32 posted on 01/01/2005 2:19:52 PM PST by Boot Hill (Candy-gram for Osama bin Mongo, candy-gram for Osama bin Mongo!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Saberwielder
30 Pakistan Army and Air Force personnel are facing the death penalty

Nothing like a few public beheadings to focus the rest of the troops on their duty.

33 posted on 01/01/2005 2:45:06 PM PST by SC Swamp Fox (Aim small, miss small.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Saberwielder; Boot Hill
even if it may cast doubts on our current policy of - "Musharraf can do no wrong."

That may be your current policy, but it's not mine, Boot's or the Administration's.

34 posted on 01/01/2005 4:23:07 PM PST by Coop (In memory of a true hero - Pat Tillman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Boot Hill
Second, if you want to revisit an issue from a previous thread and challenge a poster about what they said there, then do so on that thread, not here. Forum policy.

In other words, you admit you cannot back up your bogus claim and want to hide behind "forum policy"? This is hilarious and hypocritical to boot, no pun intended. How many times have you asked others to explain what they posted in other threads? Just look at your own post above, #27. Why did you post my words from other threads, if you know it's forum policy not to challenge people's postings from other threads?

Like I said, stop digging when you hit the bottom.

You can obfuscate all you want, change the subject, rant, post irrelevant diatribes, what ever. You aren't getting off the hook until you answer for your lies.

I'm not the one hiding behind "forum policy" mister. I have answered your question - in my previous posts. Since you choose to ignore it, I'll humor you once more.

The question -> "Why do the Pakistani army's lower level officers hold the keys to Pakistan's nuclear weapons?"

The answer -> Many experts have pointed out the danger of the inside threat in Pakistan and it is not just about the warheads, but also about the nuclear fuel, which you have consistently avoided talking about.

For example, see this report by the Congressional Research Service - a US government entity, titled "Nuclear Terrorism: A Brief Review of Threats and Responses." See the report in Daily Times based on the CRS report.

Pakistan feared as source of nuclear terror

The fear regarding Pakistan is that some members of the armed forces might covertly give a weapon to terrorists or that, if President Musharraf were overthrown, an Islamic fundamentalist government or a state of chaos in Pakistan might enable terrorists to obtain a weapon.

Terrorists or rogue states might acquire a nuclear weapon in several ways. The nations of greatest concern as potential sources of weapons or fissile materials are widely thought to be Russia and Pakistan.

Many experts believe that technically sophisticated terrorists could, without state support, fabricate a nuclear bomb from HEU.

For another example, see the CNN feature titled "The Nuclear Threat." Below is a quote from nuclear expert Matthew Bunn, from the transcript available online

ENSOR: While the Pakistani military is believed to keep tight guard on nuclear facilities, who is doing the guarding is another question.

BUNN: The famous Roman question, "Who guards the guardians?" is a critical one. If 41 heavily armed terrorists can show up without warning in the middle of Moscow, imagine how many might show up at a Pakistani nuclear weapon storage facility and then do you think the guards at that facility are going to fight them off or help? That, to my mind, is a very open question.

Both the above make clear that just PALs on warheads (which is not certain BTW) are inadequate means to secure Pakistan's nukes and those who guard the Pakistani nuclear facilities are critical links in the chain. If PALs are all it took, why is the US government saying otherwise - in an official document?

The answer is that PALs are just one small safety feature, mainly intended to avoid accidental nuclear war. Who's guarding the facilities is the other key part for which you have no answer. How many Generals you know do sentry duty after getting the stars? Ergo -> I have conclusively proved my point, again, while you can only avoid questions posed to you.

Now, I challenge you yet again:

1. Why have you avoided talking about the nuclear fuel and who' guarding them - both in the warheads as well as in storage facilities?

2. If PALs are all it took to guard nukes, why is the US government spending billions of greenbacks to secure and destroy Russia's nuclear fuel - both in the warheads as well as stored elsewhere?

It is quite clear that you've got nothing other than your color coded BS and bluster and seek to hide behind "forum policy." But the time for your obfuscation is over.

You've been called out and you choose to duck.

35 posted on 01/01/2005 4:34:33 PM PST by Saberwielder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Coop
That may be your current policy, but it's not mine, Boot's or the Administration's.

Can you think of a few instances in the last couple of years where the Bush administration criticized Musharraf?

If the shoe fits...

36 posted on 01/01/2005 4:37:03 PM PST by Saberwielder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Saberwielder
You can rant and rave all you want, but in the end it will always come back to the lie you posted and the question you've refused to answer...

You started this thread with the lie that these "lower level officers and enlisted men" actually "hold the keys to about a 100 nuclear warheads". Where is your proof for that reckless accusation?

--Boot Hill

37 posted on 01/01/2005 4:43:50 PM PST by Boot Hill (Candy-gram for Osama bin Mongo, candy-gram for Osama bin Mongo!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Boot Hill; Coop; Cronos; Arjun
I take it that you have developed an ability to filter out posts on this thread.

Being beaten in a debate has that effect on some.

All the answers to your pathetic question are in Post# 35, as I'm sure everyone can see.

It is very easy to dismiss a well reasoned, to the point reply as "rant and rave," but your deceit and ineptitude are for all to see Boot Hill.

If you have a little bit of intellectual honesty left, you'll read Post #35 and learn.

How pathetic!

38 posted on 01/01/2005 4:50:07 PM PST by Saberwielder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Coop; Cronos; Arjun

Post# 38 are for a reply to Boot Hill. I just wanted you folks to see how Mr. Hill deliberately ignores stuff that is inconvenient to him.


39 posted on 01/01/2005 4:51:25 PM PST by Saberwielder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Boot Hill
Just to prove your deceit and ineptitude, I'll humor you once again.
"lower level officers and enlisted men" actually "hold the keys to about a 100 nuclear warheads". Where is your proof for that reckless accusation?

There are these things called nuclear warheads. The things that make them go boom are called nuclear fuel. It is a well known fact that except in times of war, Pakistan stores these warheads in parts, with the nuclear fuel and the detonation mechanism separately.

Pakistan's Generals, like every army's Generals, are not known to guard facilities. Ergo, enlisted men and lower level officers guard these sites. While PALs may prevent accidental detonation of nuclear devices, they do not prevent a determined group of people from emptying the HEU from a warhead and making another crude nuclear or radiological device.

Ergo, it is clear that lower level Pakistan army officers and enlisted men hold the keys to Pakistan's arsenal and any militancy in their midst poses a direct threat to American interests.

40 posted on 01/01/2005 5:27:34 PM PST by Saberwielder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Saberwielder
"It is a well known fact that except in times of war, Pakistan stores these warheads in parts, with the nuclear fuel and the detonation mechanism separately."

Assuming, arguendo, that to be a fact, it merely adds fuel to my argument that you have provided no proof (and especially not in your off-point obfuscations in post #38) to support your lie that these "lower level officers and enlisted men" actually "hold the keys to about a 100 nuclear warheads". So are you finally prepared to admit that there is no actual proof for that reckless accusation?

--Boot Hill

41 posted on 01/01/2005 6:18:36 PM PST by Boot Hill (Candy-gram for Osama bin Mongo, candy-gram for Osama bin Mongo!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Boot Hill
What do you want? Names, ranks and video tapes of the troops opening the silos?

You are such a joke. My argument above proves conclusively that Pakistani lower level officers and enlisted men hold the keys to Pakistan's nuclear warheads.

Now, why don't you be a man and answer my questions. That is assuming you have a backbone.

42 posted on 01/01/2005 6:31:37 PM PST by Saberwielder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Boot Hill
BTW, since you have claimed on many separate posts that my claim - " "lower level officers and enlisted men" actually "hold the keys to about a 100 nuclear warheads" is a lie - why don't you PROVE your claim or withdraw it.

I put up. Now you put up or shut up.

43 posted on 01/01/2005 6:33:29 PM PST by Saberwielder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Saberwielder

I've read yer article ya posted and can't find anywhere that these troops in trouble hold the keys to a nuclear weapons storage facility.....can't ya direct me to that part ?


44 posted on 01/01/2005 6:47:20 PM PST by Squantos (Be polite. Be professional. But, have a plan to kill everyone you meet. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Squantos
Where did I say that "these troops in trouble" hold the keys to a "nuclear weapons storage facility?"

Can you direct me to that part? Or do you have to communicate with Booth Hill thru Private replies to get the answer? ;)

45 posted on 01/01/2005 6:50:45 PM PST by Saberwielder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Tarpaulin
So, kill them already!

They're going to die a lot quicker than Scott Peterson.

46 posted on 01/01/2005 6:54:24 PM PST by airborne (Dear Lord, please be with my family in Iraq. Keep them close and safe.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Saberwielder

No I read that troops are in trouble , due a court martial and then down to your first post that says they own the keys to a hundred nukes...........whre did ya get that ?

Pull the chip off yer sholder and answer a simple question vs just being disruptive.


47 posted on 01/01/2005 6:56:36 PM PST by Squantos (Be polite. Be professional. But, have a plan to kill everyone you meet. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Squantos
"These guys = Pakistani troops." That is the simple anwswer.

I made it clearer in a subsequent post (#22) where I stated my claim that lower level Pakistani officers and enlisted men hold the keys to Pakistan's nukes. I substantiated that claim in Posts #35 and #40.

48 posted on 01/01/2005 7:01:10 PM PST by Saberwielder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Saberwielder

Do you work in a nuclear weapons site ?


49 posted on 01/01/2005 7:05:44 PM PST by Squantos (Be polite. Be professional. But, have a plan to kill everyone you meet. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Saberwielder
"My argument above proves conclusively that Pakistani lower level officers and enlisted men hold the keys to Pakistan's nuclear warheads."

Not even close, more importantly that is not what you claimed in your post #1. Go look, this is the lie that you posted there...

"This is serious stuff. These guys hold the keys to about a 100 nuclear warheads!"
"These guys" and "hold the keys". Where is your proof that "these guys" from the article had anything to do with nuclear weapons, whatsoever? And since, as you claim, the nukes are normally kept disassembled(LOL), how could anyone, especially "these guys" hold the keys "to about a 100 nuclear warheads"?

Here's your job, your only job...

You started this thread with the lie that these "lower level officers and enlisted men" actually "hold the keys to about a 100 nuclear warheads". Where is your proof for that reckless accusation?

--Boot Hill

50 posted on 01/01/2005 7:08:25 PM PST by Boot Hill (Candy-gram for Osama bin Mongo, candy-gram for Osama bin Mongo!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-119 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson