Jadhav’s conviction at ICJ, Indian MEA's declining a handshake...stooping low.

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

But someone somewhere in the Pakistani apparatus knew

Why? You're making this statement based on what evidence exactly?

 

[Corona]

Why? You're making this statement based on what evidence exactly?

The fact that the most wanted man in the history of humanity was living a few kilometers away from an army camp?
The fact that your allies felt it critical to the mission's success that they keep it a secret from the Pakistani government?


I can keep stating the obvious ones. If you're asking me for an official document or physical evidence, it's not like a civilian has access to those. But people can see what's in front of them and put 2 and 2 together.

 

[Imran Khan]

and then indian delegation cries too

 

[Corona]

and then indian delegation cries too

That looks like the 'OMG I'm arguing against morons' kinda face to me..

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

The fact that the most wanted man in the history of humanity was living a few kilometers away from an army camp?
The fact that your allies felt it critical to the mission's success that they keep it a secret from the Pakistani government?

I've already addressed that in a previous post. He was living a few KM from a military academy, not an Army camp. The military doesn't go in and conduct extensive surveillance on every house near a military facility. Even if they had, OBL did not use any electronic communication that could have been eavesdropped on, and he never left the place. Ownership of the residence was possibly checked and some intelligence from locals iwas probably gathered, but the official ownership and individuals going to and from the house were nothing to set off any flags. NO ONE locally saw OBL during the duration of his stay.

So really the only thing left is conjecture, that someone must have known! That's just not a credible claim or argument.

I can keep stating the obvious ones. If you're asking me for an official document or physical evidence, it's not like a civilian has access to those. But people can see what's in front of them and put 2 and 2 together.

Without concrete evidence this is just conjecture and speculation. The 2 and 2 here is that the bomber was local, the truck was local and the explosives were local. The bomber's history has been detailed, how he was humiliated and shot by Indian security forces, how he lived through a media cycle highlighting Indian atrocities on Kashmiris, which gave him the motivation to attack.

What's shocking is the complete Indian refusal (as a nation) to engage in introspection and address their own issues. A refusal to address their policies in J&K and why a resolution of the Kashmir dispute would be beneficial for the entire region.

When Pakistan was suffering from a wave of terrorism that has had few equals in history, the government did not go around threatening to attack Afghanistan or India. Yes, it pointed out where safe havens existed, where it thought the terrorists were getting external support, but it never engaged in war mongering and continued to call for talks and cooperation. We addressed terrorism by improving domestic security, domestic intelligence gathering operations and better border controls, despite the leadership of the TTP finding sanctuary in Afghanistan (Mullah Fazlullah was only killed last year by the US in Afghanistan).

 

[maximuswarrior]

That looks like the 'OMG I'm arguing against morons' kinda face to me..

No, that is the face of someone who is experiencing excruciating pain and knows that the facts are irrefutable.

THE HAGUE: Deepak Mittal, a joint secretary in India’s ministry of external affairs, avoids shaking hands with Pakistan’s Attorney General Anwar Mansoor Khan and responds to the greeting by clasping his hands prior to the hearing of the case at the International Court of Justice on Monday.—AFP



India’s envoy to the Netherlands Venu Rajamonyon, too, refused to greet Pakistani officials in kind. However, this came as no shock to the Pakistani officials who had witnessed the same withdrawn and curt demeanour by the Indians at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in May 2017.

According to Geeta Mohan, Foreign Affairs Editor at India Today, India is angry, and this sets the mood. Till late Sunday evening, the Indian officials were eager to reach out to their Pakistani counterparts to ensure no overlapping of logistics or shared hotel accommodation for the two delegations; offering to relocate in case the Pakistani delegation had already set camp in the hotel of choice. Keep in mind, this is the first official confrontation between the two countries post-Pulwama attack, albeit in robes, lawyer versus lawyer.




full article here...


https://www.dawn.com/news/1464709/new-delhi-asks-icj-to-annul-jadhavs-conviction

Not everyone is a Hindu, Deepak. International norms are a handshake. Not a Hindu salute.

 

[Corona]

I've already addressed that in a previous post. He was living a few KM from a military academy, not an Army camp. The military doesn't go in and conduct extensive surveillance on every house near a military facility. Even if they had, OBL did not use any electronic communication that could have been eavesdropped on, and he never left the place. Ownership of the residence was possibly checked and some intelligence from locals iwas probably gathered, but the official ownership and individuals going to and from the house were nothing to set off any flags. NO ONE locally saw OBL during the duration of his stay.

So really the only thing left is conjecture, that someone must have known! That's just not a credible claim or argument.

Can you claim an active effort to suppress evidence a lack of evidence? Again, I feel like I have to point out that this was the single most wanted person alive. You can afford to miss out the odd pickpocket or shoplifter. Not this guy. You don't use your usual tricks when you're trying to find him. You're supposed to have special provisions in place to track this man, seeing as your neighbor, the Americans insisted on everyone finding the guy. An excuse like "we didn't find him cause we didn't look at that particular house" is incredibly incompetant and frankly insulting the capabilities of your own intelligence agencies, something even I know is not true.
One insinuation here is that Pakistan provided the same committment level to finding this guy as they would give a street thug. The other, is that Pakistan is feinging incompetence after being caught with a smoking barrell.

About conjecture, you claim there was nothing to trace or detect OBL with. This belief is based on whatever info is available to the Pakistani public and the Pakistani government's position, and not based on any inside info you have access to. I'm assuming like me, you're just a civilian too. If that assumption is true, then you too are basing your argument on conjecture. Just one that favours your position.

The one thing we're both sure of, like everybody else, is that:

1. OBL was killed in Pakistan
2. Pakistan's current position was established after OBL was killed.

There is a saying that goes " it's hard to convince a man about something, when his salary depends exclusively on him not understanding it".

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Can you claim an active effort to suppress evidence a lack of evidence? Again, I feel like I have to point out that this was the single most wanted person alive. You can afford to miss out the odd pickpocket or shoplifter. Not this guy. You don't use your usual tricks when you're trying to find him. You're supposed to have special provisions in place to track this man, seeing as your neighbor, the Americans insisted on everyone finding the guy. An excuse like "we didn't find him cause we didn't look at that particular house" is incredibly incompetant and frankly insulting the capabilities of your own intelligence agencies, something even I know is not true.

But why would that particular house require more focus than any other house? Like I said, the standard review would probably involve ownership documents and perhaps interviews with locals regarding the residents and potentially limited surveillance. OBL never moved out of the house once he was smuggled in, never used electronic communication, no locals saw him and the ownership documents were in the name of someone who didn't raise any flags - so on what basis would the authorities need to dedicate some sort of 'special attention' to the house he lived in?

About conjecture, you claim there was nothing to trace or detect OBL with. This belief is based on whatever info is available to the Pakistani public and the Pakistani government's position, and not based on any inside info you have access to.

My argument is based on the facts available and the official statements of multiple US government, defence and intelligence officials that there is no evidence anyone in the Pakistani government, military or intelligence had any knowledge of OBL's whereabouts.

That's not 'conjecture', that's an argument built on the available information supported by the available facts.

 

[VCheng]

The one thing we're both sure of, like everybody else, is that:

1. OBL was killed in Pakistan
2. Pakistan's current position was established after OBL was killed.

And:

3. Pakistan jailed the doctor who helped catch OBL on trumped up charges brought through the colonial FCR courts.

(And refuses to release him.)

 

[SMC]

Can you claim an active effort to suppress evidence a lack of evidence? Again, I feel like I have to point out that this was the single most wanted person alive. You can afford to miss out the odd pickpocket or shoplifter. Not this guy. You don't use your usual tricks when you're trying to find him. You're supposed to have special provisions in place to track this man, seeing as your neighbor, the Americans insisted on everyone finding the guy. An excuse like "we didn't find him cause we didn't look at that particular house" is incredibly incompetant and frankly insulting the capabilities of your own intelligence agencies, something even I know is not true.
One insinuation here is that Pakistan provided the same committment level to finding this guy as they would give a street thug. The other, is that Pakistan is feinging incompetence after being caught with a smoking barrell.

About conjecture, you claim there was nothing to trace or detect OBL with. This belief is based on whatever info is available to the Pakistani public and the Pakistani government's position, and not based on any inside info you have access to. I'm assuming like me, you're just a civilian too. If that assumption is true, then you too are basing your argument on conjecture. Just one that favours your position.

The one thing we're both sure of, like everybody else, is that:

1. OBL was killed in Pakistan
2. Pakistan's current position was established after OBL was killed.

There is a saying that goes " it's hard to convince a man about something, when his salary depends exclusively on him not understanding it".

But why would that particular house require more focus than any other house? Like I said, the standard review would probably involve ownership documents and perhaps interviews with locals regarding the residents and potentially limited surveillance. OBL never moved out of the house once he was smuggled in, never used electronic communication, no locals saw him and the ownership documents were in the name of someone who didn't raise any flags - so on what basis would the authorities need to dedicate some sort of 'special attention' to the house he lived in?

We can already answer the insinuations of @Corona by the fact that the white house has already, on multiple occasions, said that Pakistan did not know if and where OBL was hiding. This is coming from the country that was the victim of OBL. It's not surprising to see an Indian making conspiracy theories about the attack, but the victim has already answered.

My argument is based on the facts available and the official statements of multiple US government, defence and intelligence officials that there is no evidence anyone in the Pakistani government, military or intelligence had any knowledge of OBL's whereabouts.

That's not 'conjecture', that's an argument built on the available information supported by the available facts.

This alone should put the nail in the coffin of this conspiracy theory, but it's not surprising Indians want to keep the conspiracy theory alive.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

And:

3. Pakistan jailed the doctor who helped catch OBL on trumped up charges brought through the colonial FCR courts.

(And refuses to release him.)

Can't just let a Pakistani collaborate (without some sort of government approval) with a foreign intelligence agency inside Pakistan without any consequences. A lack of consequences would remove any deterrence (for Pakistani individuals) to cooperate with foreign intelligence operations inside Pakistan in the future.

 

[SMC]

And:

3. Pakistan jailed the doctor who helped catch OBL on trumped up charges brought through the colonial FCR courts.

(And refuses to release him.)

Because, you know, US would let someone cooperate with a foreign intelligence service inside their territory secretly.

 

[VCheng]

Can't just let a Pakistani collaborate (without some sort of government approval) with a foreign intelligence agency inside Pakistan without any consequences. A lack of consequences would remove any deterrence (for Pakistani individuals) to cooperate with foreign intelligence operations inside Pakistan in the future.

Yes, but the fact I mentioned has proved to be devastating to Pakistan's reputation in the saga.

Because, you know, US would let someone cooperate with a foreign intelligence service inside their territory secretly.

Please see the above.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Yes, but the fact I mentioned has proved to be devastating to Pakistan's reputation in the saga.

So be it. Setting a precedent of 'zero consequences' in collaborating with foreign intelligence agencies in Pakistan would be far worse.

While we can agree that the cause in which Shakil Afridi provided support was a good one, there is no guarantee that the next Pakistani recruited (based on whatever information a foreign intelligence agency wants to feed them) would not be used for something that might harm Pakistan. Such cooperation (outside of that sanctioned by the government) needs to be deterred.

 

[VCheng]

So be it. Setting a precedent of 'zero consequences' in collaborating with foreign intelligence agencies in Pakistan would be far worse.

While we can agree that the cause in which Shakil Afridi provided support was a good one, there is no guarantee that the next Pakistani recruited (based on whatever information a foreign intelligence agency wants to feed them) would not be used for something that might harm Pakistan. Such cooperation (outside of that sanctioned by the government) needs to be deterred.

Of course. Pakistan is perfectly within its rights to do so. And benefit from the pros, but also suffer the cons.