I heard about this on the radio the other day. His treatment by the gov't of Pakistan should give one pause to consider this question. "How much of an ally to the US is Pakistan really?" For all the actions they've taken in the war on terror, many seem mere token efforts at best. The Pakistani gov't, especially that of Gen. Pervez Musharraf, has always strictly controlled access to A.Q.Khan.
The US never really bought into the story that he acted alone. His rhetorical questions "Do they care about our God?" and "Do they care about the prophet?" are clues to his motivations. His past actions show the lengths he's prepared to go to to achieve his Islamist goal...installation of a universal caliphate.
__________________
Days Full Of Clays...
NWTF, DU, SCI
He's a national hero for helping to make Pakistan a nuclear power. On the other hands, many Pakistanis are extremely embarrassed that he would sell them out to make a buck.
I've gone on and on about the value of a close relationship between the US and Pakistan, so I'll spare you. I believe things were better for us when Musharraf was in power. As things stand in Islamabad today, there are several factions competing for control of the government and its various bureaucracies. A little like Washington, in fact.
To close, as I often do with many, many unworldy Americans, I urge you not to look at a foreign country and assume that the entire populace thinks alike and supports the same politicians and political objectives.
To close, as I often do with many, many unworldy Americans, I urge you not to look at a foreign country and assume that the entire populace thinks alike and supports the same politicians and political objectives.
Unworldly, Aught Six? I'll take that as an insult, thank you. [>:] Factionalism aside, the fact remains that he's a very popular figure among the masses in Pakistan, and that is especially so among the more militant crowd. I don't think anyone can doubt the gov't released him solely to tone down the opposition.
Unworldly, Aught Six? I'll take that as an insult, thank you. [>:] Factionalism aside, the fact remains that he's a very popular figure among the masses in Pakistan, and that is especially so among the more militant crowd. I don't think anyone can doubt the gov't released him solely to tone down the opposition.
If my commentstruck a nerve, perhaps you should meditate on that. Do you read Pakistani newspapers from time to time?
The masses can be tricky. Usuallythere is such a disconnect between them and the elites that I find it incredibly naïve to lump to the two groups together. That's all I'm saying. Tenuously heldgovernments will always fear the masses.
On the subject of naivete, riddle me this: Who controls the Pakistani newspapers, the elites or the masses?
There's a pretty good variety over there. The media industry is just that--an industry. There are just as many Pakistani editors looking for a buck as there are Americans here. Well, wehave more, but anyway. Either way,it's pretty obvious that newspapers like The Daily Times are not controlled by Islamabad.
The point of readingnewspapers is not to believe everything you read, regardless of the origin. It's to get a feel for what the people are talking about. To get the tidbits of actual facts that you can delve further into with other sources. That's very important to understanding a strange country, wouldn't you say?
To get the tidbits of actual facts that you can delve further into with other sources.
Don't presume to instruct me on my former trade. As a fresh out of college newbie, I was a newspaper reporter. I know full well how media outlets are slanted by editorial preferences/prejudices. So, I've been saying that for years.
A. Q. Khan Is Free
