Martin Bashir on Aid to Pakistan [To the President:]
So before he is tempted to cut all forms of funding, I would like to remind him of the wise words that he wrote back in 2006 in his book "The Audacity of Hope." Speaking about the circumstances in which terrorism can flourish, he highlighted failed states and poverty as the two most important factors.
Not to
raise any suspicions** but the mission has not been so clearly defined in original reports.
CIA Chief Leon Panetta, later Tuesday told NBC News, "The authorities(sic*) we have on Bin Laden are to kill him. And that was made clear. But it was also, as part of their rules of engagement, if he suddenly put up his hands and offered to be captured, then they would have the opportunity, obviously, to capture him. But that opportunity never developed."
But back to the issue of aid. See
raise link.
Using stringent language, a statement by the Pakistani Foreign Office said, "Such an event shall not serve as a future precedent for any state, including the United States."
This is clearly a nuanced not "stringent language". But if,(and I mean A BIG IF) Osama bin Laden has been hiding in this compound for six years, it is difficult for the Bush administration to take much credit for the success of this mission, (let alone waterboarding). And while President Obama has been clear on the issues of failed states and poverty being part of the security equation, it is hard to expect Pakistan to be totally free of corruption or political and intelligence intrigue,
let alone competence***. It is much easier to speculate and develop tin foil conspiracies that may actually be based on some evidence, and to use them to destabilize, than it is to change things at home let alone for another country. As the right seems to paint themselves into the corner of hypocrisy, the President has the responsibility of being the cherry picker and decider-in-chief. And in connecting the dots of the likes of the latest Right, (remember A BIG IF) then there must be some logic that the Bush administration must be further scrutinized for their part in a $1.4 trillion escapade of terror. How can we hold other countries responsible for competentencies when ours (and
often rightly so) are so political?
* my (sic)inserted maybe "authorizations"?
** it is not the "fog of war" it is the fog of understanding and journalism
*** there is some irony in this linkage given prior asterisks
[Apologies for the nuance and dynamics of this threading, it is tricky to deal with the likes of some thinking, let alone journalism. And it was not my intent to necessarily minimize
incitefulness or
skirt a tin-foil issue or
weave Teflon administrations
.][While I may have great peripheral vision, I link the link
weave last, but it was embedded in
any above(3rd link).]
[Breaking news (which might be broken), apparently they will not release the photo of bin Laden, the argument is that there may be no pleasing some.][
Further Embed Meant:
Pakistan and speaking of timing. The
death of
A BIG IF?]
[
Back to My TetraHeDron?
Not Exactly!]
[Post Post
In-
put]
[Pre-Post er us in - put?]Thursday, May 05, 2011No Photos"
cathartic moment"
Now* to
America's Future*actually see not so Pre-
Post er us reference to in-put(above). Also on
Rumsfeld. On
Stiglitz. Doing
Justice?
[Important flip-flop or fair and balanced rearrangement regards the perspectives of Samuel P. Huntington and Francis Fukuyama. From
Clash of Civilizations I may have
cherry picked or
perspectivized my analysis
via tangential influences. While Francis Fukuyama has corrected his alignment from The New American Century, from renouncing the Bush administration to supporting and influencing the Obama Doctrine, it is
not just ironic that the tag line for the issue of release of the bin Laden photos is, "It is not who we are" nor that the
likes of the right see almost everything as a culture war. Or that both Bush and I were
opti-
mystic,(yeah right, he was) and
why we now have
hope.
