- Oct 10, 2000
- 25,696
- 1
- 0
I suspect we'd do the same if the roles were reversed.
For example, what if a citizen aided Venezuela in an armed raid to capture or kill the man who blew up an airliner who we were allowing to live here, refusing extradition?
However 'justified' the citizen's support for the raid, we wouldn't call it a crime?
We should have pulled him out of the country (or at least offered it to him).
A morally bankrupt move by a morally bankrupt country. At best we can hope that Western diplomats quietly lobby for him to disappear into their arms and is transplanted to Britain, Canada or the United States.
It's not illegal in the US to tell foreign entities where a particular person lives.I suspect we'd do the same if the roles were reversed.
For example, what if a citizen aided Venezuela in an armed raid to capture or kill the man who blew up an airliner who we were allowing to live here, refusing extradition?
However 'justified' the citizen's support for the raid, we wouldn't call it a crime?
It's not illegal in the US to tell foreign entities where a particular person lives.
It's not illegal in the US to tell foreign entities where a particular person lives.
It can be, depending on the situation.
This situation is obviously horrible, but it's not exactly surprising. The government of Pakistan generally wants to be helpful to the US so we don't do awful things to them. The population of Pakistan wants nothing of the sort. Therefore the government toes a very fine line.
It's not illegal in the US to tell foreign entities where a particular person lives.
Hafiz Saeed
The head of a banned charity widely believed to be a front for the international terrorist group Lashkar-e-Taiba is wanted by both India and the United States for his alleged role in orchestrated the 2008 Mumbai attacks. The Lahore High Court dropped all charges against Saeed in 2009. Last month, the U.S. offered a $10 million reward for information leading to Saeed's arrest, which raised some eyebrows since he's not in hiding. Saeed held a press conference inviting U.S. authorities to come and get him.
Abdul Qadeer Khan
Despite having admitted to selling nuclear secrets to North Korea, Iran, and Libya, A.Q. Khan was freed from house arrest in 2009. The father of Pakistan's nuclear program has been officially pardoned and is now immune from further prosecution.
Dawood Ibrahim
The boss of the organized crime syndicate D-Company is believed to be one of the world's richest criminals. He is suspected of ties to both al Qaeda and Lashkar-e-Taiba and to have masterminded a series of bombings in Mumbai in 1993. Accodring to some accounts, he lives in a palatial mansion in Karachi, though the Pakistani government has always denied that he is in the country.
Qari Saifullah Akhtar
Akhtar, who is believed to have run an al Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan before 9/11, was arrested in 2004 in the United Arab Emirates and turned over to Pakistan custody, then released a few months later. He was later detained in connection with an attempted assasination attempt on former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto in October 2007 in Kharachi and then a successful one in December but released both times. Bhutto herself accused Akhtar of involvement in the Karachi attack. He was last released after four months under house arrest in late 2010.
Malik Ishaq
The founder of the al Qaeda-affiliated militant group Lashkar-e-Jhangvi was released after 14 years in jail earlier this year. Ishaq has been accused in at least 70 murders and faced 44 criminal cases -- including allegeldy masterminding the 2009 massacre of the Sri Lankan cricket team, but no conviction has ever stuck.
I suspect we'd do the same if the roles were reversed.
For example, what if a citizen aided Venezuela in an armed raid to capture or kill the man who blew up an airliner who we were allowing to live here, refusing extradition?
However 'justified' the citizen's support for the raid, we wouldn't call it a crime?
Ok I see what you have, but what is your point? That Pakistan hasn't the interests of the US? That they aren't friendly to us? Pakistan is pretty transparent. It has groups which are anti-West which have considerable influence in the government which has waxed while the more secular military influence has waned. That being the case it's hardly surprising that what we see is what we see.