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

Skip to comments.

Pakistan 'supported Kabul embassy attack' - Mike Mullen
BBC ^

Posted on 09/22/2011 7:53:52 AM PDT by jhpigott

9/21/11

The most senior US military officer has accused Pakistan's spy agency of supporting the Haqqani group in planning and conducting last week's attack on the US embassy in Kabul.

"The Haqqani network... acts as a veritable arm of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence Agency," Adm Mike Mullen told a Senate panel. In July he said Pakistan sanctioned the killing of journalist Saleem Shahzad.

Pakistan's government called that statement "irresponsible".

Pakistani officials have consistently denied links with militant groups.

'Credible intelligence'

At least 25 people died during the 20-hour attack on the US embassy, Nato headquarters and police buildings in Kabul on 22 September. The dead included 11 civilians, among them children, along with at least four police and 10 insurgents.

"With ISI support, Haqqani operatives planned and conducted a truck bomb attack, as well as the assault on our embassy," said Adm Mullen, who steps down this month as chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff.

"We also have credible intelligence that they were behind the 28 June attack against the Inter-Continental Hotel in Kabul and a host of other smaller but effective operations."

(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.co.uk ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: afghanistan; coldwar2; embassy; india; isi; pakistan; taliban; wot
One of our top military officials accuses Pakistani intel services behing behind an attack on a U.S. embassay. That's a rather serious accusation.
1 posted on 09/22/2011 7:53:55 AM PDT by jhpigott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MississippiMan; ctdonath2; LibertyRocks; GonzoGOP; b4its2late; bert; maquiladora; hennie pennie; ...

ping


2 posted on 09/22/2011 7:55:13 AM PDT by jhpigott (North Korea - The land of lousy options)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jhpigott

Mullen has clearly gotten off of the Obama script. I wonder what the back storey is?


3 posted on 09/22/2011 7:57:45 AM PDT by Truth29
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jhpigott
Mullen would not have said this if he didn't have positive proof.

Watch for US/Pakistani relationships to blow up. It was only a matter of time anyhow.

4 posted on 09/22/2011 8:04:09 AM PDT by Gritty (War is hell, but global "mentoring" is purgatory - Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jhpigott

It is getting to the point where the Joint Chiefs are going to have to have a very serious discussion amongst themselves.

The Obama Administration is completely corrupt and out of control. With a feckless Congress afraid of its own shadow, there are very few options left to save the country.

And I don’t say these things lightly.

Some seriously courageous statesmen need to step up NOW.

The present situation is light years worse than Watergate.


5 posted on 09/22/2011 8:04:17 AM PDT by exit82 (Democrats are the enemy of freedom. Sarah Palin is our Esther.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Truth29

I think Obama is off his script. He’s pissed that Pakistan turned on us after the OBL raid.

While I appreciate the new candor, I think we lack a plan. Obama wants to believe he can talk these countries back into line.

In fact, Pakistan is on the verge of becoming an enemy backed by China. We have made the mistake of thinking we can make nice with countries that really are our enemies.


6 posted on 09/22/2011 8:05:04 AM PDT by Williams (Honey Badger Don't Care)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jhpigott
"The most senior US military officer has accused Pakistan's spy agency of supporting the Haqqani group in planning and conducting last week's attack on the US embassy in Kabul."

Extremely serious accusation. And what's the Obama regime going to do about it? Increase Pakistani muslim immigration to the United States? If "The Regime" isn't going to punish Pakistan for their treachery Mullen should just keep quiet about it. This just makes the US look silly and weak.

7 posted on 09/22/2011 8:05:20 AM PDT by StormEye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: exit82

The Joint Chiefs are not going to do dick about Obama, nor should they. That remains our job as voters. Period.


8 posted on 09/22/2011 8:06:41 AM PDT by Williams (Honey Badger Don't Care)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Truth29

He’s retiring and doesn’t have anything to lose now.


9 posted on 09/22/2011 8:06:51 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner (Sarah Palin has crossed the Rubicon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Gritty
"Watch for US/Pakistani relationships to blow up. It was only a matter of time anyhow."

One wonders what could have been if Benazir Bhutto had not been assassinated in 2007. She most assuredly would have become Prime Minister. I understand that she was the Prime Minister when Pakistan went nuclear and knew about A.Q. Kahn's shennanigans. However, I think in 2007-2008 she would have been a very reliable partner in the war on Islamo Fascism. Things would be a lot different today.
10 posted on 09/22/2011 8:20:37 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Williams
"The Joint Chiefs are not going to do dick about Obama, nor should they. That remains our job as voters. Period."

I agree. Generals being involved in politics and "doing something" about the elected leaders is what happens in third world banana republics. Their job is to provide advice and options to the elected leadership. If they think that the current CnC is leading America down the wrong path (national security wise), then they should resign and speak out about it as civilians.
11 posted on 09/22/2011 8:24:50 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

That’s why they killed her.


12 posted on 09/22/2011 8:25:48 AM PDT by Iron head mike (The government will soon make criminals of us all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Gritty
It was only a matter of time anyhow.

Yup, after the OBL operation, repercussions were bound to happen.

13 posted on 09/22/2011 8:43:57 AM PDT by Michael Barnes (Obamaa+ Downgrade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jhpigott

I’m Popeye the sailor man! (toot,toot)
I’m Popeye the sailor man! (toot, toot)
I’ll flap my gums now
Cause I’m going away anyhow
I’m Popeye the sailor man! (toot, toot)


14 posted on 09/22/2011 8:45:19 AM PDT by blueunicorn6 ("A crack shot and a good dancer")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jhpigott

US chose to look the other way when India accused Pakistan of bombing the Indian embassy in Kabul. Blame it on karma.


15 posted on 09/22/2011 8:52:37 AM PDT by ravager
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

Regardless of whether or not this was Mike’s place to open his mouth, he is high enough up the food chain where what he said is going to leave a mark


16 posted on 09/22/2011 8:57:13 AM PDT by jhpigott (North Korea - The land of lousy options)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: jhpigott

New Ball game....... he is calling the Messiah out


17 posted on 09/22/2011 9:01:59 AM PDT by bert (K.E. N.P. +12 ....Rats carry plague)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden
“I understand that she was the Prime Minister when Pakistan went nuclear and knew about A.Q. Kahn’s shennanigans. “

Sorry but you are wrong yet again. Benazir Bhutto wasnt the Prime Minister when Pakistan went nuclear. She was in exile. It was Nawaz Sharif who was in power. And after him Musharraf took over. Although, A.Q Khan's nuclear gunrunning supply chain was very much in full swing during Benazir Bhutto. Benazir Bhutto and her husband (current Prime Minister) Asif Ali Zardari are just as unreliable as anyone else in Pakistan. Besides they are not really the ones in control. Its the Army and ISI who are the main power in Pakistan.

18 posted on 09/22/2011 9:03:28 AM PDT by ravager
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: jhpigott
Pakistan committed an act of war against the US.

And the WH and the State Dept. have nothing to say about it.

Somebody needs to tell Barky to turn off ESPN and start listening to his briefings.

19 posted on 09/22/2011 9:25:57 AM PDT by mojito
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jhpigott

There is only one way of solving this problem. The US needs to identify those members of the ISI who are promulgating these attacks, and assassinate them.

Our intelligence agencies should be more than able to monitor their communications enough to flesh out a “hierarchy of agents” involved in anti-US and anti-Afghan operations, then somebody like SOCOM could start taking them out.

“Plausible deniability” should be used as needed, that is, to make many of the hits look like accidents, and the actions should have a “top down” orientation, to take out the directors and managers first.

But anywhere from dozens to hundreds of such missions should convince the remainder to cut it out.


20 posted on 09/22/2011 9:38:05 AM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jhpigott

Pakistan is no friend of the USA. They’re lying now, just as they lied then, when they claimed they had ‘no idea’ that Osama Bin Laden was just living in a special compound just yards away from a military base there.

Riiiight!


21 posted on 09/22/2011 9:51:33 AM PDT by XenaLee (The only good commie is a dead commie.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Williams
The Joint Chiefs are not going to do dick about Obama, nor should they. That remains our job as voters. Period.

Yeah, that would be the hallmark of a banana republic, which is, well, what we are rapidly becoming.

I hope we get the chance to right the wrong with an election in 2012, and that Obama and his fellow crooks leave quietly. We are looking more and more like Germany in 1933. Add in a financial collapse, and the recipe is not good, indeed.

22 posted on 09/22/2011 9:55:44 AM PDT by exit82 (Democrats are the enemy of freedom. Sarah Palin is our Esther.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: jhpigott

Indeed. Act of War, if you ask me.


23 posted on 09/22/2011 9:57:21 AM PDT by Alas Babylon!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yefragetuwrabrumuy

Where can I vote for you?


24 posted on 09/22/2011 11:30:05 AM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ravager
"Although, A.Q Khan's nuclear gunrunning supply chain was very much in full swing during Benazir Bhutto."

Okay, I may have been wrong about them actually going nuclear on her watch. However, you admit I was right on the second part. She knew about the program to go nuclear. Which was my point. She was not perfect, but we're not looking for perfect in Pakistan. Just a reliable partner and I believe she would have been one.
25 posted on 09/22/2011 12:38:43 PM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden
You are still wrong. The Taliban was created and they came into power in Afghanistan under her watch. And lets for a moment assume that she is most reliable .... you are still forgetting the most importing thing. She is a civilian. In Pakistan it is the Army and ISI that is the “establishment”. They control everything. There is no way around it. In fact Bhutto's party the PPP is currently in power and her husband Asif Ali Zardari is the President. Even that of little consequence. They cant go against the will of the Army and stay in power for even a single day.
26 posted on 09/22/2011 2:29:17 PM PDT by ravager
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden
And if Bhutto/Zardari cannot go against the wishes of the Army then your contention that somehow they would still make a reliable partner is just plain wishful thinking.
27 posted on 09/22/2011 2:36:20 PM PDT by ravager
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Gritty
Watch for US/Pakistani relationships to blow up. It was only a matter of time anyhow.

If their intelligence agency is assisting in attacks on US embassies, then any relationships are a charade.
28 posted on 09/22/2011 2:37:06 PM PDT by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Williams
In fact, Pakistan is on the verge of becoming an enemy backed by China. We have made the mistake of thinking we can make nice with countries that really are our enemies.

If you think they haven't been backed by China or working against us before this year, you haven't been paying attention.
29 posted on 09/22/2011 2:38:38 PM PDT by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: mojito
"Somebody needs to tell Barky to turn off ESPN and start listening to his briefings."

I think he knows. This is an Islamist terrorist state that is attacking US interests with little MSM coverage of their involvement. Imam Obama will not only do nothing to assist the US, but by ignoring the problem strengthen the terrorists.

30 posted on 09/22/2011 2:51:51 PM PDT by Truth29
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ravager
"You are still wrong. The Taliban was created and they came into power in Afghanistan under her watch."

When did I ever say that didn't happen? You love to say I'm wrong, even for things I never said. You know, Clinton was the President when the Taliban was created. Perhaps we should blame him also. I'm not going to blame Bhutto for what transpired in Afghanistan during her watch. You're still a knucklehead...
31 posted on 09/22/2011 7:21:48 PM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden
You know, your problem is you have your facts all wrong, you always misread my posts and then draw the wrong conclusions. And when I correct you, you start throwing insults.

There is a huge difference between Clinton's role in emergence of Taliban and that of Bhutto. Bhutto was an active participant in the creation of Taliban (and Al Qaeda gaining grounds in Afghanistan and Pakistan). That in itself puts a huge question mark on her reliability. If you still don't get it then maybe you need to get your head examined. I am done explaining to an idiot like you.

32 posted on 09/22/2011 10:31:44 PM PDT by ravager
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: ravager
"You know, your problem is you have your facts all wrong, you always misread my posts and then draw the wrong conclusions. And when I correct you, you start throwing insults."

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!! You said I was wrong and then went on to say that Bhutto was prime minister when the taliban was created. I never mentioned that one way or the other!!!!! So how can I be wrong about it??? That's why you're a knucklehead!
33 posted on 09/23/2011 4:14:24 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden
The reason I mentioned Bhutto with regards to Taliban was to make a point about her reliability, regardless of what you mentioned or didnt (not that you have much to say anyways except for silly nonsense). Apparently you still don't get it. As for the knucklehead comment... you are absolutely right. Pot calling the kettle black.
34 posted on 09/23/2011 6:08:48 AM PDT by ravager
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: blam

At least Moscow does it right.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/8782370/Kremlin-hit-squad-assassinate-Chechen-Islamist-in-Istanbul.html


35 posted on 09/23/2011 8:08:19 AM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: jhpigott
One of our top military officials accuses Pakistani intel services behing behind an attack on a U.S. embassay. That's a rather serious accusation.

And he made it shortly after another top military official says that the WH tried to co-opt his testimony on LightSquared's danger to military (and civilian) GPS.

Personally, I doubt Hussein gave the Okay for the Pakistani accusation. JMO.

36 posted on 09/23/2011 8:31:03 AM PDT by Sal (We want to run against Obama because he's the weakest boob since Carter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: exit82
I hope we get the chance to right the wrong with an election in 2012, and that Obama and his fellow crooks leave quietly. We are looking more and more like Germany in 1933. Add in a financial collapse, and the recipe is not good, indeed.

It's a similar enough path (plan?) to make a person wonder if someone's deliberately repeating the successful rise to power of the Nazi dictatorship, right down to the re-creation of the brown-shirts (labor leaders exhorting their members and somebody sending out social network invitations to violent flash mobs not to mention the 80,000 muslims Hussein gave sanctuary to...).

It's even possible that the front man for this path (plan?) worked with the original Nazis when he was young and wants to see its completion before he dies.

The financial collapse is certainly being worked on now via the Fed's repeated applications of fiscal destruction that always have the opposite effect of their STATED goals. The big violence will come when the financial destruction is complete and we're getting damn close. IMO.

37 posted on 09/23/2011 8:55:16 AM PDT by Sal (We want to run against Obama because he's the weakest boob since Carter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ravager
"The reason I mentioned Bhutto with regards to Taliban was to make a point about her reliability, regardless of what you mentioned or didnt"

Well knucklehead, before mentioning it, you said I was wrong about it. Even though you admit I never talked about it. So I guess you were the one wrong. As for me not having much to say, it's strange how you are always responding to my posts and I have never responded to one of your original posts. So I guess it is you who have nothing to say worth reading.
38 posted on 09/23/2011 11:25:40 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

No mister retard, that is not what I said you were wrong about. You mentioned Bhutto as being reliable ...and.... I MENTIONED TALIBAN TO MAKE A POINT ABOUT HER UNRELIABILITY. However since you are too dense to comprehend basic English,so might as well let it go. You will never get it. Parroting the same garbage isn’t going to help.


39 posted on 09/23/2011 11:41:57 AM PDT by ravager
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Michael Barnes

And we didn’t even pull their foreign aid yet. Wonder if the worthless idiots in DC will finally do the right thing and cut them off.


40 posted on 09/23/2011 11:47:46 AM PDT by liberalh8ter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden
Its really not very difficult to size you up. You don't do too well with facts and reasoning. Personal attacks an flame war are what you do best.

Have fun.

41 posted on 09/23/2011 11:48:25 AM PDT by ravager
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: ravager
"No mister retard, that is not what I said you were wrong about."

From your post 26 to me:

"You are still wrong. The Taliban was created and they came into power in Afghanistan under her watch."

Yeah, I think it is not me that has a reading comprehension problem. It is you who have a writing comprehension problem. If you hate posting to me, why are you always responding to me? You're still a knucklehead...
42 posted on 09/23/2011 12:27:08 PM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

I wrote a whole lot more in my post then just that one line you are fixated on. Sorry but you are the only knucklehead on this thread.


43 posted on 09/23/2011 12:56:01 PM PDT by ravager
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: ravager

You can never admit when you’re wrong. Just like the last time you posted to me. That’s your problem, along with communicating in the English language apparently. Knucklehead


44 posted on 09/23/2011 7:03:58 PM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden
You are just a stubborn senile old yeller. I will just let you go.
45 posted on 09/23/2011 7:24:43 PM PDT by ravager
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: ravager

I may be old, but at least I can admit when I’m wrong. Oh, and I have reading comprehension. Another thing you lack, knucklehead...


46 posted on 09/23/2011 7:33:16 PM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

You just proved my point.


47 posted on 09/23/2011 7:34:25 PM PDT by ravager
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: ravager
"You just proved my point."

That you can't admit when you're wrong? You're welcome.
48 posted on 09/23/2011 7:52:02 PM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_rr
We have made the mistake of thinking we can make nice with countries that really are our enemies.

"We" never made that mistake. Educate the mouth breathing half wits on the left.

49 posted on 09/23/2011 7:59:25 PM PDT by Grizzled Bear (No More RINOs!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

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