Clinton exonerates Pakistan over Osama Bin Laden

alp227

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri May-27-11 06:39 PM
Original message

Clinton exonerates Pakistan over Osama Bin Laden

Source: BBC News

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said there is no evidence senior people in Pakistan knew that Osama Bin Laden lived so close to Islamabad.

But she said that the US and Pakistan needed to do more to battle Islamist militancy and that bilateral relations had reached a turning point.

Mrs Clinton said any peace deal in Afghanistan would not succeed unless Pakistan was part of the process.

She expressed Washington's "strong commitment" to relations with Pakistan.

Read more: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-13570803

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

juajen

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri May-27-11 08:15 PM
Response to Original message

1. No evidence? How about common sense. I hope this one doesn't

bite Hill in the ass later.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

2Design

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri May-27-11 08:29 PM
Response to Original message

2. see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil from the evil doers - ya can't make this stuff up

this is so bs

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

cosmicone

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri May-27-11 08:35 PM
Response to Original message

3. Cowtowing to terrorists, extortionists and bullshit artists

Shows American impotence and lack of creativity.

Pakistan should be stopped or China will get a corridor to the Persian Gulf and American interests will be threatened for decades.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Arctic Dave

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat May-28-11 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #3

5. Someone must have given her the memo about those convoys going up in flames.

As long as we are in Afghanistan, Pakistan is in charge.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Zhade

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-29-11 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #3

7. So when are you signing up?

NT!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

coalition_unwilling

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-29-11 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #3

10. This was Norman Mailer's explanation for why we really invaded Iraq. We

Edited on Sun May-29-11 12:59 PM by coalition_unwilling

did not need Iraq's oil for our own use, but we did want a strategic hammer to hold over the BRIC nations of India and China and, with our finger on the spigot of Iraqi oil reserves, we could bend them to our will. Idea may have been, following Mailer's line of thinking, to invade and occupy Iraq as a precursor to invading and occupying Iran.

Makes as much sense as any other explanation I've seen for the real reason we invaded Iraq.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

iemitsu

(524 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri May-27-11 09:38 PM
Response to Original message

4. hilary practicing statecraft.

she had no real choice but to make such a public statement, regardless of any evidence.
not if we want to continue thinking that they are somehow playing the game by our rules.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

grahamhgreen

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-29-11 12:56 AM
Response to Original message

6. This whole war on terror thing is filled with lies at the highest levels.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

24601

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-29-11 12:37 PM
Response to Original message

8. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence n/t

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

coalition_unwilling

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-29-11 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #8

9. That sounds positively Rumsfeldian of you. Not being snarky, just

enjoying the Zen Koa qualities of that statement :)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

24601

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-29-11 08:48 PM
Response to Reply #9

11. It cuts to the heart of having to prove a negative. Just because

you have no proof should not be accepted as proving the negative. The fact that US SECSTATE has no evidence of Pakistani involvement isn't proof of their innocence. It proves only that she has no evidence, not that it doesn't exist.

This is why in criminal cases that the burden of proof is on the prosecutor - proving a negative can be beyond reason.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Wed May 08th 2024, 02:03 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.