What's new

Pakistan snubs US over Osama informer

fd24

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Jun 23, 2011
Messages
5,864
Reaction score
0
ISLAMABAD - Pakistan has turned down a demand by United States Defense Secretary Leon Panetta to release a Pakistani physician who faces treason charges for helping the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in the operation to kill Osama bin Laden.

Pakistan's political and military leaders discussed at length Panetta's demand and decided the alleged informer, Dr Shakil Afridi, should not be given leeway, according to highly placed Foreign Office sources in Islamabad. The snub was made in light of a recommendation from the Abbottabad Judicial Commission to register a treason case against him. The commission is investigating the raid on Bin Laden's hide-out in the Abbottabad by US Special Forces, who killed the al-Qaeda leader on May 2, 2011.

Afridi, who the commission has declared a "national criminal", has been charged with conspiring against the state by collaborating with a foreign spy agency, but not yet with treason - a charge that would carry the death penalty. The doctor was arrested by Pakistani security agencies at his house in Hayatabad, Peshawar, 20 days after Bin Laden's death. In his appearance before the commission, Afridi confessed to having set up a vaccination campaign in Abbottabad aimed at collecting DNA samples to establish the whereabouts of Bin Laden and his family.

In a January 28 interview with CBS, Panetta, who headed the CIA when Afridi worked for the agency, urged the Pakistani authorities to release the doctor immediately. However, sources in the security agencies rule out any such possibility, saying he will be tried in accordance with the orders of the commission, tasked with probing the covert American raid in Abbottabad in which the most wanted al-Qaeda chief was shot dead along with his son and two aides.

Afridi confessed to conducting a fake polio vaccination drive in the Bilal Town area of Abbottabad from March 15-18 and April 21-23, 2011 to try and get DNA samples from the residents of the compound in which Bin Laden was hiding. The four-member Abbottabad Judicial Commission, led by Led by Justice (retired) Javed Iqbal and set up through a resolution passed unanimously by a joint session of parliament 11 days after the raid, is putting the final touches to its report, though it has already directed the government not to hand over Afridi to the Americans and to proceed with the treason charges.

Panetta's statement comes as US lawmakers push for a bill that would give US citizenship to Afridi, who is in his late 40s and has an American wife of Pakistani origin.

Well-informed diplomats in Islamabad believe the orders to initiate a treason trial against Afridi must have something to do with the apparent refusal of the CIA to provide any information to the commission after it had been sent a detailed questionnaire last year through the Pakistani Foreign Office. Pakistani security agencies continue to interrogate Afridi in a bid to ascertain how the CIA recruited him and several other civilians who have been under interrogation since the Abbottabad raid. This would help them expose the American's recruitment network in Pakistan.

Coming from a humble background, Afridi graduated from the Khyber Medical College in Peshawar in 1990 and was working as the doctor in-charge of Khyber Agency of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas of Pakistan. The doctor's close aides say the whereabouts of his family remains unknown.

Defense Secretary Panetta admitted in his January 28 interview that the doctor had been working for the Americans and had provided information to the CIA about the fugitive al-Qaeda chief. Based on this information, US Navy Seals raided his hideout, killed him and then buried him at sea.

In the interview, Panetta was asked: "There is a Pakistani doctor who, as we understand, was helping our efforts there, a man named Shakil Afridi, who is now being charged with high treason in Pakistan and I wonder what you think of that?"

Panetta replied: "I am very concerned about what the Pakistanis did with this individual. This was an individual who, in fact, had helped provide intelligence that was very helpful with regard to this operation. And he was not in any way treasonous towards Pakistan. He was not in any way doing anything that would have undermined Pakistan. As a matter of fact, Pakistan and the United States have a common cause here against terrorism, have a common cause against al-Qaeda, and have a common cause against those who will attack not only our country but their country. And for them to take this kind of action against somebody who was helping to go after terrorism, I just think it is a real mistake on their part."

"Should they free him?" the CBS interviewer asked. "They can take whatever steps they want to do to discipline him, but ultimately he ought to be released," Panetta replied.

Afridi's arrest has become a thorn in the already tense relations between Islamabad and Washington.

United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton telephoned President Asif Ali Zardari in July last year to seek his help in securing Afridi's release, but her request was reportedly turned down. Clinton was told that the matter was sub judice and only the Judicial Commission could decide his fate.

In a related development, a group of US congressmen has introduced legislation in the House of Representatives seeking citizenship for Afridi. "Today, I have introduced legislation to grant American citizenship to Shakeel Afridi, the Pakistan medical doctor who risked his life to identify Osama bin Laden and help US military forces bring him to justice. If convicted, he could be executed," said congressman from California Dana Rohrabacher on February 4.

"My bill would grant him US citizenship and send a direct and powerful message to those in the Pakistani government and military who protected the mastermind of 9/11 for all those years and who are now seeking retribution on those who helped to execute Osama bin Laden," Rohrabacher said in the House.

The citizenship bill has been endorsed by more than a dozen top congressmen, including Bill Posey and Roscoe Bartlett. "This bill shows the world that America does not abandon its friends," Rohrabacher said.

The physician used a team of nurses and health workers to administer hepatitis B vaccinations in Abbottabad, without even informing the proper authorities. US officials have already stated that the doctor did manage to gain access to Bin Laden's compound, but he was unsuccessful in getting DNA samples from any of his family members.

As things stand, Afridi's fate seems to have already been sealed by the commission, though it is not yet clear whether he will be tried under Article 6 of the 1973 constitution (on treason charges), or whether he is to be prosecuted for indulging in espionage activities for a foreign country. Article 6 of the constitution that deals with sedition chiefly dictates that high treason is determined by a criminal spying on the country's military, its diplomats or its secret services for a foreign power.

There remains among senior diplomats in Islamabad some skepticism of the commission's directives to the Pakistani authorities; the million-dollar question raised by them is how Afridi harmed the national interest by helping locate the world's most sought-after terrorist who was responsible for the deaths of over 3,000 civilians in the 9/11 attack on the United States.

Who is Panetta to interfere with internal matters involving Pakistan? He carried out an act of espionage and expects leniency? He should have informed his nation what he was doing. His act is gross misconduct of his nations trust. We are not questioning the outcome and resu;t of his actions - we are questioning his deception and his non compliance with his first port of call and that was to his nation and its people.


Asia Times Online :: Pakistan snubs US over Osama informer
 
.............................. And for them to take this kind of action against somebody who was helping to go after terrorism, I just think it is a real mistake on their part."

"Should they free him?" the CBS interviewer asked. "They can take whatever steps they want to do to discipline him, but ultimately he ought to be released," Panetta replied.

........................We are not questioning the outcome and resu;t of his actions - we are questioning his deception and his non compliance with his first port of call and that was to his nation and its people.............

Pakistan has the right to present its case against him in a court of law, and let the law decide based on whatever evidence is presented against him. To hold him without a trial is a travesty, and will cause more problems for Pakistan than it solves.
 
He is a Pakistani. The offence he is deemed to have committed was committed on Pakistani soil. He has to be tried as per Pakistani law. Where is the confusion? If they wanted to reward him for his efforts, they should have taken him out while they had the time. Anyway, all upto the Pakistani government. He may manage to still get away like that CIA guy who went on a shooting spree and then someone paid off the family.
 
He is a Pakistani. The offence he is deemed to have committed was committed on Pakistani soil. He has to be tried as per Pakistani law. Where is the confusion? ..............

There is no confusion; I agree with the above. Delaying the trial and not presenting the charges and the evidence is the issue. Let the case proceed per Pakistan law.
 
dont release that bastard, he is a traitor, hang him then we will be more happy.

The correct way is to take him to court, have a fair trial and implement the verdict, whatever it is under Pakistani law.
 
traitors are hanged no thinking on it let the supreme court decide and hang him most probably a cia operative that america is trying to get back
 
traitors are hanged no thinking on it let the supreme court decide and hang him most probably a cia operative that america is trying to get back

Of course. Letting the courts decide is the correct way. So why has Dr. Afridi not been formally charged yet?
 
He is a Pakistani. The offence he is deemed to have committed was committed on Pakistani soil. He has to be tried as per Pakistani law. Where is the confusion? If they wanted to reward him for his efforts, they should have taken him out while they had the time. Anyway, all upto the Pakistani government. He may manage to still get away like that CIA guy who went on a shooting spree and then someone paid off the family.

agree every single word you say and seems like you read my mind
they should have taken him away before conducting the operation and there is a chance that like Raymond he will get away with it. And will be a willing mouth peace to vent propaganda against Pakistan from his new home.

but here is a thing,

I am not sure if he is of any use to Americans now. they got OBL and the doctor has done his job (condemned the people of that part of the country but they be damned as far as Panetta is concerned)

if all conspiracy charges are dropped against this doctor, the one that should stand out is the betrayal to his profession. the people of that part of the country are already a hard sell when it comes to vaccinations and medical treatment. his actions have just strengthened the hands of those people who violently confront the medical staff and have killed doctors, nurses and medics in the past accusing them of spying and injecting the youth "impotency" medicines to control the population.
 
Of course. Letting the courts decide is the correct way. So why has Dr. Afridi not been formally charged yet?
our courts have a seamless record of releasing all accused that are found to be working against the security forces.


the well known self confessed mass killers are freed with full honor and are greeted with floors and supporting chants and led away with grand processions. in his case too I think the judges will decide against the agency just out of habit.

so the "poor" doctor will have to rot somewhere for the rest of the foreseeable future unless Mr Panetta stops eating until Afridi is released and makes a big fuss about having McDonnalds family meal with the doctor next Sunday.
 
................... the one that should stand out is the betrayal to his profession. the people of that part of the country are already a hard sell when it comes to vaccinations and medical treatment. his actions have just strengthened the hands of those people who violently confront the medical staff and have killed doctors, nurses and medics in the past accusing them of spying and injecting the youth "impotency" medicines to control the population.

You assume that Dr. Afridi knew the real purpose of what he was doing; that has to be proven in a court first before you can accuse him of betraying his profession, but not before.

However, your point about his actions making vaccinations more difficult for an already deprived population is valid, and one that I have already made many times.

---------- Post added at 09:50 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:48 AM ----------

our courts have a seamless record of releasing all accused that are found to be working against the security forces.


the well known self confessed mass killers are freed with full honor and are greeted with floors and supporting chants and led away with grand processions. in his case too I think the judges will decide against the agency just out of habit.

so the "poor" doctor will have to rot somewhere for the rest of the foreseeable future unless Mr Panetta stops eating until Afridi is released and makes a big fuss about having McDonnalds family meal with the doctor next Sunday.

The two points in bold are telling. The solution is not to deny Dr. Afridi his day in court, but to ensure he gets a fair trial. That will improve the system, and it should be an important goal Ithink.
 
You assume that Dr. Afridi knew the real purpose of what he was doing; that has to be proven in a court first before you can accuse him of betraying his profession, but not before.

However, your point about his actions making vaccinations more difficult for an already deprived population is valid, and one that I have already made many times.

---------- Post added at 09:50 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:48 AM ----------



The two points in bold are telling. The solution is not to deny Dr. Afridi his day in court, but to ensure he gets a fair trial. That will improve the system, and it should be an important goal Ithink.


ref your comments about the first part

point taken. yes indeed I am prejudging although under normal circumstances I shouldn't.


re second part,
again I agree with your suggestion. but I am not sure if we are on the same page about the "telling" part
but indeed they are telling. so in principle I agree there too
 
ref your comments about the first part

point taken. yes indeed I am prejudging although under normal circumstances I shouldn't.


re second part,
again I agree with your suggestion. but I am not sure if we are on the same page about the "telling" part
but indeed they are telling. so in principle I agree there too

Thank you for taking my points on board.

Whatever perceived wrongs Dr. Afridi has done has to be judged by a court. Keeping him in legal limbo would only serve to tarnish Pakistan's reputation as a civilized country where rule of law is supported, and not undermined, but its deeper institutions. A speedy and fair trial, followed by whatever punishment is passed by the court would be best, I still maintain.
 
He is a Pakistani. The offence he is deemed to have committed was committed on Pakistani soil. He has to be tried as per Pakistani law. Where is the confusion? If they wanted to reward him for his efforts, they should have taken him out while they had the time. Anyway, all upto the Pakistani government. He may manage to still get away like that CIA guy who went on a shooting spree and then someone paid off the family.

Exactly - Pakistani committing (if found guilty) a crime on Pakistan soil should be trialed via the Pakistani judiciary system in Pakistan. Absolutely ridiculous to assume anything else. If he was so special they should have removed him before they used the info he supplied. To cry now over the issue is futile and frivolous.
 
did anyone get to know Dr Afridi's side of the story? is he justifying his actions?
may be he wanted to get the bounty? or he thought that the Pakistani establishment was involved in protecting the OBL- so if he informs them - that would make his life in danger?
just a wild guess.
 
Back
Top Bottom