This conclusion seems true to me. I actually had mentioned it earlier myself. It also answers the question different people are asking about the motive of this deliberate attack by NATO. Well, it was deliberately done by some disgruntled Afghan, a la Ahmad Chalabi, who usually hate Pakistan.
Absolutely agree with Pakistan army’s conclusion. But what’s with that final sentence in this report where ISPR calls it “rubbish”?!
**KARACHI: According to a BBC report, Pakistan’s military officials on Monday blamed an Afghan commander for the November 26 Nato strike on Salala check post in Mohmand agency, DawnNews reported.**The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) reported that the accused Afghan commander conspired on the instructions of Indian and Afghan intelligence to dismantle Pakistan’s ties with US and Nato.According to the published report, Pakistani military officials were probing the incident on their own and also handed few details of the investigative report to their Nato counterparts across the border on Monday.Pakistani officials demanded action against the accused Afghan National Army commander by Nato officials in Afghanistan.Pakistan’s investigative report did not indicate involvement of any American officials in the attack.According to the report Afghani troops, without any prior notice, were patrolling an area at Pak-Afghan border which required 72 hours prior notice to Pakistani forces.The troops deployed at Salala check post opened fire on Afghan patrol team considering them militants and subsequently Nato air defence helicopters, came to afghan team’s rescue, attacked the Pakistani post.According to Pakistan officials, Afghans knew exact location of the post hence calling Nato for help was a pre-planned scheme.However the ISPR rebuffed the BBC report calling it inaccurate.
Re: Pakistan blames “Afghan commander” for Nato attack: BBC
Pakistan Army has rubbished this report, anyways I think there would be pressure on them to bail out the Americans. If they stick to this version now, how will they explain the numerous statements of various stake holders from the army that it was a deliberate attack on the post.
Re: Pakistan blames “Afghan commander” for Nato attack: BBC
Strategy session # 13246....Pasha, Kiyani, Gilani, Zaid Hamid, Hamid Gul (or his look alike)
G: so guys, I think we've made the point and washington will be more careful about kicking us around; sonow how do we get them back with us?
ZH: r u crazy? the public will skewer us if we ask for that...and that is one sure way to handover all power to IK!
K: anyone got a light? ran out of damned yankee lighter fluid...
HG: Haqqani sahb!...why don't you send a bunch of guns tonight across and take care of.....oops! wrong meeting! bye guys, gottago
Pasha: it's these damned kabuli commanders....gotta fix those runts
ZH: so why don't we just do that! call it a Afghan conspiracy, I will do my usual RAW Mossad thing and let's see... if public buy it, we can then go to the yanks and get the money released
G: Great idea...
P: Great idea
ZH: Great idea! can't believe I came up with that!
ZH: Great idea
K; alright guys, let's do it!I'm sick of using match boxes
Re: Pakistan blames “Afghan commander” for Nato attack: BBC
its "BBC blames"
not Pakistan, the later has refuted this already
your conclusion doesn't make sense.
in this case, BBC is not claiming something about the NATO attacks while pakistan is rejecting it. BBC is only claiming that pakistani investigators are claiming something about the NATO attacks.
obviously these are two entirely different scenarios.
Re: Pakistan blames “Afghan commander” for Nato attack: BBC
your conclusion doesn't make sense.
in this case, BBC is not claiming something about the NATO attacks while pakistan is rejecting it. BBC is only claiming that pakistani investigators are claiming something about the NATO attacks.
obviously these are two entirely different scenarios.
and your "conclusion" does make sense? ok keep dreaming. Pakistan rejected this claim.
Re: Pakistan blames “Afghan commander” for Nato attack: BBC
“the pakistan military” and “one particular officer within the pakistan military” are not the same thing.
do you alternatively suggest that the BBC fabricated and concocted this for fun?
again, let us be clear that believing the BBC does not mean believing the ludicrous RAW-Afghan conspiracy theory itself. it just means the BBC isn’t lying about someone telling it to them.
Re: Pakistan blames “Afghan commander” for Nato attack: BBC
.....
again, let us be clear that believing the BBC does not mean believing the ludicrous RAW-Afghan conspiracy theory itself. it just means the BBC isn't lying about someone telling it to them.
Re: Pakistan blames “Afghan commander” for Nato attack: BBC
BBC has lied before. Its posted pictures that supported the Iran leadership and stated that it was a pro-democracy rally. Its not the first time or nor will it be the last time that news outlets under take actions that support governments.
Re: Pakistan blames “Afghan commander” for Nato attack: BBC
BBC has lied before. Its posted pictures that supported the Iran leadership and stated that it was a pro-democracy rally. Its not the first time or nor will it be the last time that news outlets under take actions that support governments.
lol wow. i hope you are just trying to be humorous.
your example is a time when the BBC made a simple error while captioning a photo - one which they promptly acknowledged and corrected. and you call that "lying" to support governments? and you equate that to deliberately fabricating and concocting entire reports filled with in-depth, detailed lies about the pakistan military due to some sinister motives.
Re: Pakistan blames “Afghan commander” for Nato attack: BBC
Captioning a photo their guys took is a mistake? Posting that photo for 2 weeks before an NGO took action via the web is just a mistake. Hardly.
actually it was a Getty photo that the BBC simply added a caption to.
in any case, your insinuation makes no sense whatsoever. you do realize that authentic pro-mousavi rally pictures do exist right? not only that, but they also show MUCH larger numbers of people than in the pro-govt picture that was captioned wrongly. so if the BBC's intention was to promote an anti-ahmadinejad agenda, then it would have actually been better to simply use an authentic pro-mousavi rally picture showing a greater number of protesters.
