What's new

Pakistan rubbishes Shakeel Afridis ISI tirade

US will spring the doctor out, if not by diplomatic means , then by a similar obl type raid to rescue...

Never.. This doctor imprisoned in Pakistan is the perfect situation for USA to keep berating Pakistan's record on terrorism at will.. Thats precisely the reason they left him behind in the 1st place..
 
I don't understand why some people here can defend ben Laden who kills thousand of innocent people all around the world on purpose. It would be like if we support the Mehsuds and TTP (I know some people thinks we do, with the sionist, etc.)
 
Never.. This doctor imprisoned in Pakistan is the perfect situation for USA to keep berating Pakistan's record on terrorism at will.. Thats precisely the reason they left him behind in the 1st place..

An Example:

"In Pakistan, Shakil Afridi helped us to get Osma bin Laden. He's been tortured, kept in prison and now been given a life sentence. I’ve asked one simple thing. I would like to have 15 minutes, have a discussion and have a vote on whether or not we should continue to send money to Pakistan. I've said we should send not one penny to Pakistan until this doctor is released," Paul said on the Senate floor yesterday.

"We offered at one time a USD 50 million reward for helping getting bin Laden. Young men and women sacrificed their limbs to go to Afghanistan. Many sacrificed their lives to go to Pakistan to get bin Laden. And this man who helped get bin Laden, we're now letting him rot in a prison," he said.

"Is this how we treat a friend of America? I've asked for 15 minutes to have a vote. Why don't they want to have a vote? Because they know the American people are with me. If you ask questions, should we send money to countries that don’t like us and disrespect us? Eighty percent to 90 percent of the American people are with me on this. They're afraid to vote on this issue personally. I've been giving them a chance to debate this for six weeks," he said.

Bill moved to strip US aid to Pak, Egypt, Libya
 
Pakistan on Tuesday rubbished an interview of Dr Shakil Afridi, convicted for helping the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in sniffing out and eliminating al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, saying the allegations were intended to destabilize Pakistan-US relations.
“Afridi’s purported interview to Fox News is devoid of facts and completely baseless.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...bishes-afridi-s-isi-tirade.html#ixzz26RpChZgf
'Devoid of facts and completely baseless'? Really? Even that part where he says that the ISI is funding and supporting militants?

Didn't Kayani himself admit to his American counterpart that militants were his 'strategic assets'? And then there's the ISI's 'S' Wing........

Oh never mind. Carry on....
 
bro if u have any understanding of how agencies work then u will know why this is happening?.....please first go through the manual of CIA then u will understand y this is being done to any operative who is non-american

That's a good point and can I get some insight from you on it or a link?
 
I would have never thought that a Pukhtoon named Afridi could be a traitor to Pakistan. Pukhtoons have a long and proud history of being loyal and faithful Pakistanis. What poor mother gave birth to this lowlife.
 
I would have never thought that a Pukhtoon named Afridi could be a traitor to Pakistan.
You might want to remind yourself that Dr. Afridi was never convicted in a jury trial or before a judge with representation by a lawyer but was condemned through an administrative procedure, as Stalinist Russia did to innumerable zeks in the Soviet gulag.
 
You might want to remind yourself that Dr. Afridi was never convicted in a jury trial or before a judge with representation by a lawyer but was condemned through an administrative procedure, as Stalinist Russia did to innumerable zeks in the Soviet gulag.

What did you want the court to prove?

And e was tried under FCR, not a communist law from the bad old Ruskies or those Eastern little guys, but by the ever so democratic and peace loving nation of United Kingdom, during the British Raj to hold the opposition of the Pashtuns to British rule.
 
What did you want the court to prove?
That his action constituted treachery as understood by the people of Pakistan, not the government or Army or ISI.

And e was tried under FCR, not a communist law from the bad old Ruskies or those Eastern little guys, but by the ever so democratic and peace loving nation of United Kingdom, during the British Raj to hold the opposition of the Pashtuns to British rule.
That's an instrument not of democracy but of colonial control that Pakistan would have done well to do away with decades ago, don't you agree?
 
That his action constituted treachery as understood by the people of Pakistan, not the government or Army or ISI

Ofcourse the people understand it as treachery. You ask any guy on the street, and tell him that this guy worked with CIA, and he will brand him as a traitor. That is the general feeling in Pakistan.

That's an instrument not of democracy but of colonial control that Pakistan would have done well to do away with decades ago, don't you agree?

Yes. Our state should have done away with this law long time ago, and although Gilani vowed to do away with it, he didn't follow up. That still doesn't take away the fact that this man is getting what he deserved.
 
Gustaakhi ma'aaf Sir, isn't Pakistan itself only a pawn in the overall game of giants? And of course, in keeping with your comment, it exaggerates its own importance in the game to its own detriment, does it not?

A Well Placed Pawn Can Take out the King ... . . Remember that.
 
Ofcourse the people understand it as treachery. You ask any guy on the street, and tell him that this guy worked with CIA, and he will brand him as a traitor. That is the general feeling in Pakistan.
A "general feeling" shaped by fanaticism fuelled by the government. He never had a chance to state his case. The government didn't let him - because, apparently, it doesn't have a legal case at all, only an emotional one.

Or are you saying justice is some sort of popularity contest?
 
A "general feeling" shaped by fanaticism fuelled by the government. He never had a chance to state his case. The government didn't let him - because, apparently, it doesn't have a legal case at all, only an emotional one.

Or are you saying justice is some sort of popularity contest?

So, he was not betraying his state by doing work for CIA in exchange for money and other profits?

You explicitly state the above, that he didn't betray the state and country, or else it means that you acknowledge it.
 
So, he was not betraying his state by doing work for CIA in exchange for money and other profits?
He didn't swear an oath to the State, so it's not up to the State to judge, but the people. Otherwise Pakistanis are mere subjects of the State, not sovereign themselves. They must be born, live, and die according to the orders of bureaucrats, burdens they must bear by birth, not by choice.
 
Back
Top Bottom