February 15, 2010

The capture of Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar.

"It was unclear whether he was talking, but the officials said his capture had provided a window into the Taliban and could lead to other senior officials. Most immediately, they hope he will provide the whereabouts of Mullah Omar, the one-eyed cleric who is the group’s spiritual leader."

Excellent.

(Why do we care about Mullah Omar's eye shortage?)

33 comments:

The Crack Emcee said...

Because, considering the outlook of Al Qaeda, it takes a one-eyed man to see "the big picture".

Florida said...

The real question is why the New York Times is so uninterested in the Obama Administration's allowing Pakistan to torture Baradar.

He's being tortured.

And Obama is aware of it.

But the New York Times refuses to ask Obama why he's allowing torture to be used on this guy.

Lem said...

In the land of blindes the one eyed man is king.

ricpic said...

One eyed cleric, huh? Does he have a hook? Does he have a parrot? Can he say "Aaaargh?" Thought not. No style. The whole bloody crew.

Skeptical said...

I will henceforth refer to my johnson as 'the one-eyed cleric.'

dick said...

Just don't tell AG Holder or he will be on the next plane there to Mirandize Baradar and read him his rights to a lawyer and a civilian trial.

E.M. Davis said...

"He's being tortured.

And Obama is aware of it."


Maybe Barack has learned his lesson.


wv: squall. A real word? Seriously?

Mark said...

CIA to Pakistan ISI as they grill Baradar: "Don't. Stop. Don't. Stop." Ah, moral superiority.

Chip Ahoy said...

(Why do we care about Mullah Omar's eye shortage?)

Because it affects adversely his depth perception, that's why! What? Have you no heart?

Also the condition renders him unable to fully appreciate Avatar and that's a sorrowful shame.

edutcher said...

The only reason we care about his eye is that when some SF or Ranger nails him, we want it to be in the eye that conspired to pull off 9/11.

ricpic said...

One eyed cleric, huh? Does he have a hook? Does he have a parrot? Can he say "Aaaargh?" Thought not. No style. The whole bloody crew.

Pirates don't say, "Aaaargh". Guys in war comics do. Pirates say, "Arrr", like Robert Newton (now there was a pirate). I'll take him over the bunch of cutthroats we're fighting any day.

JAL said...

The New York Times learned of the operation on Thursday, but delayed reporting it at the request of White House officials, who contended that making it public would end a hugely successful intelligence-gathering effort.

When did the NY Times ever care (in recent memory) about what the White House wanted concerning waging an effective war?

How come this was worth sitting on, but other information which put American and coalition troops [under BUSH!] was considered necessary to publish?

Irene said...

Why do we care about Mullah Omar's eye shortage?

Because eyes are the windows to the soul.

(Putin excepted.)

Peter V. Bella said...

Have they Mirandized him yet? Did anyone call Eric Holder? What city will he be tried in? Has Joe Biden made an asinine statement on this yet?

AlphaLiberal said...

No, but you have, Peter Bella.

Julius Ray Hoffman said...

Damn... So he was tortured in Pakistan, was he?

This sucks.

I wanna see it, watch it, live it.

And he shouldn't be talking!

He should simply be tortured for our enjoyment in HD (especially now since the series "Lost" is coming to an end), and part of that torture should be his terrorist-snuff expiration!

When Sarah Palin becomes Emperor she will remedy this problem. When she dons the purple, she will make sure that all terrorist suspects are tortured TO THE DEATH before they can say a fucking word, and that it is all broadcast to each and every good American who wants to watch!

I understand that right now the Imperial Court-in-Waiting is also considering the possibility of crucifying illegal Mexicans. Glenn Beck is all for it, but the rest of 'em think it might be a little much.

TORTURE! TORTURE! YAY! YAY! YAY!

SARAH PALIN FOR EMPEROR!

AlphaLiberal said...

News out today showed that Republicans were full of shit re: the panty bomber:

The 23-year-old Nigerian man accused of attempting to blow up Northwest Airlines Flight 253 on Christmas Day was read his Miranda rights nine hours after his arrest, .

"It makes no sense to get a guy off an airplane who just tried to blow up the airplane and read him his rights within 50 minutes," Graham said in an interview on Fox News. .

Wow, he's full of crap. And look!

U.S. and allied counterterrorism authorities have launched a global manhunt for English-speaking terrorists trained in Yemen who are planning attacks on the United States, based on intelligence provided by the suspect in the attempted Christmas Day bombing after he began cooperating.


U.S. officials told The Washington Times that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, facing charges as a would-be suicide bomber, revealed during recent cooperation with the FBI that he met with other English speakers at a terrorist training camp in Yemen. Three U.S. intelligence officials, including one senior official, disclosed on the condition of anonymity some details of the additional bomb plots.
.

More reality for the wingnuts to try to ignore or brush aside. Their torture and police state tactics are ineffective.

Peter V. Bella said...

How come this was worth sitting on, but other information which put American and coalition troops [under BUSH!] was considered necessary to publish?

Because the NYT, like the current administration, is Anti-American. It is fashionable again to be UnAmerican.

Peter V. Bella said...

Their torture and police state tactics are ineffective.

Which is why the rest of the world, including France, Italy, Great Britain, Germany, Israel, Japan, India, Spain, Portugal, Greece, and others use it to great effect.

They just deny it and laugh at us for showing the world out dirty laundry.

LoafingOaf said...

Typical of Althouse's right-wing commenters, they are more interested in finding their ways to spin this into an attack on Obama.

Well, maybe the Obama administration deserves a round of applause here. After all, one of Obama's central foreign policy arguments during his campaign was that we needed to improve Pakistan policy and ensure that Pakistan is truly helping us in the war.

From the article Althouse links:

The participation of Pakistan’s spy service could suggest a new level of cooperation from Pakistan’s leaders, who have been ambivalent about American efforts to crush the Taliban.

Increasingly, the Americans say, senior leaders in Pakistan, including the chief of its army, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, have gradually come around to the view that they can no longer support the Taliban in Afghanistan — as they have quietly done for years — without endangering themselves.

Indeed, American officials have speculated that Pakistani security officials could have picked up Mullah Baradar long ago.

And:

Mr. Riedel, the former C.I.A. official, said that he had not heard about Mullah Baradar’s capture before being contacted by The Times, but that the raid constituted a “sea change in Pakistani behavior.”

In recent weeks, American officials have said they have seen indications that the Pakistani military and spy services may finally have begun to distance themselves from the Taliban. One Obama administration official said Monday that the White House had “no reason to think that anybody was double-dealing at all” in aiding in the capture of Mullah Baradar.

A parade of American officials traveling to the Pakistani capital have made the case that the Afghan Taliban are now aligned with groups — like the Pakistani Taliban — that threaten the stability of the Pakistani government.

a sea change in Pakistani behavior. Sounds like a victory for Obama's Pakistan foreign policy to me. You know, those policy ideas that Althouse and her commenters laughed at during the campaign.

Methadras said...

Oh noes!!! He's being tortured. What shall we do? I'll tell you what shall we do, give me the fucking tools, I'll do this motherfucker for free.

LoafingOaf said...

We have no idea if Baradar is being tortured or not, so far. What we do know for sure is that the right-wing commenters of Althouse have an obsessive love for torture and are hoping that he is being tortured as we speak.

bob said...

I hope the Obama administration had Baradar mirandized and has sent him a criminal defense attorney since they believe this is the best way to get intelligence from a captured terrorist.

Monkeyboy said...

Sounds like a victory for Obama's Pakistan foreign policy to me.

What's Obama's Pakistani policy? How is different than Bush's?

Hoosier Daddy said...

We have no idea if Baradar is being tortured or not, so far.

LOL! He's in the custody of the Pakistani ISI you tool What do you think they're doing to him?

MadisonMan said...

I am glad he was captured. I hope he provides information.

Fred4Pres said...

I am glad we got him. But does Pakistand just let us have one when we pout?

Ironclad said...

I think it is far more likely that the ISI is making sure that this guy does NOT talk than anything else. Considering how tight that group in Pakistan is with the Taliban, they certainly would not want this guy to sing about their activities and support. Since Mullah Omar is supposed to living in Quetta since he got tossed out of Afghanistan, it would hardly be good press if it got out that the ISI had been taking care of their "buddies" all this time.

If Baradar sings, you can bet it will be carefully edited. "But I thought you were my friends!"

Paul Zrimsek said...

Isn't Richard Kimble still looking for that one-eyed cleric?

Maguro said...

We have no idea if Baradar is being tortured or not, so far.

Yes, this has to win the award for most naive comment of the year. Too funny.

AlphaLiberal said...

Remember when conservatives shrieked at us all that the Commander-in-Chief must not be criticized during wartime?

Hypocrites!

MadisonMan said...

No quote from Dick Cheney in the article? Why not?

Nomilk said...

Baradar? Is that like gaydar for jihadis?

jeff said...

Remember when conservatives shrieked at us all that the Commander-in-Chief must not be criticized during wartime?"
No. Neither do you.