Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pakistan demands nuclear papers
Washington Times ^ | Massoud Ansari

Posted on 02/17/2004 7:09:03 AM PST by milestogo

Edited on 07/12/2004 4:13:25 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

KARACHI, Pakistan -- The scientist behind a worldwide black market in nuclear technology is involved in high-stakes brinksmanship over his future, refusing to hand over reportedly incriminating documents demanded by Pakistani authorities.

The documents and a tape-recorded statement, which are said to demonstrate that senior Pakistani army officials -- including President Pervez Musharraf -- were aware of Abdul Qadeer Khan's nuclear proliferation activities, are believed to have been smuggled out of the country for safekeeping by the scientist's daughter Dina.


(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abdulqadeerkhan; khan; krl; loosenukes; nukes; pakistan; proleferation
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

1 posted on 02/17/2004 7:09:04 AM PST by milestogo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: knighthawk; Dog
KARACHI, Pakistan — The scientist behind a worldwide black market in nuclear technology is involved in high-stakes brinksmanship over his future, refusing to hand over reportedly incriminating documents demanded by Pakistani authorities.

The documents and a tape-recorded statement, which are said to demonstrate that senior Pakistani army officials — including President Pervez Musharraf — were aware of Abdul Qadeer Khan's nuclear proliferation activities, are believed to have been smuggled out of the country for safekeeping by the scientist's daughter Dina.

Ping....

2 posted on 02/17/2004 7:10:47 AM PST by milestogo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: prairiebreeze; blam; Cap Huff
FYI.
3 posted on 02/17/2004 7:12:43 AM PST by milestogo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: milestogo
Thanks for the ping.
4 posted on 02/17/2004 7:18:52 AM PST by Cap Huff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cap Huff
Bump.
5 posted on 02/17/2004 7:20:20 AM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: milestogo
See this post for some very interesting info on Khan, Musharref, etc.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1079699/posts

It's an article in today's WSJ
6 posted on 02/17/2004 7:21:50 AM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: milestogo
Time for some of the "boys" to go visit his daughter. Of course, he will probably consider her a martyr to the cause....
7 posted on 02/17/2004 7:24:57 AM PST by SpinyNorman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SpinyNorman
They won't have to visit. Both Kahn and his wife have suffered heart attacks (amazing, isn't it?) and the daughter will return. After some 'questioning', they will find the location of the material they are looking for.
8 posted on 02/17/2004 7:30:31 AM PST by RockChucker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: milestogo; Cap Huff; Boot Hill
Thank you very much for posting this.....it backs up the Rediff articel I posted.

I have to head off to work......ping me if anything else comes up.

9 posted on 02/17/2004 7:38:53 AM PST by Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: milestogo
"evn though he promised." Give me a break. My three year old wouldn't fall for this garbage. Let's see. Your enemy has sworn to murder you as soon as it is possible. Scientist "A" provides your enemy with the means, gets caught doing it , and then promises to come clean. Boy , what a bunch of nitwits.
10 posted on 02/17/2004 7:39:30 AM PST by ping jockey (it only takes $.13 to do the job correctly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RockChucker
There are some very interesting parallels in the Indian movie "The Hero." Good movie if you can find it, don't mind subtitles, and can get past he musical sequences that are integral to all Bollywood flicks.

Oh, by the way, few Bollywood movies are shorter than 3 hours, so make a lot of popcorn!

11 posted on 02/17/2004 7:53:19 AM PST by SpinyNorman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Allan
Ping.
12 posted on 02/17/2004 9:27:52 AM PST by Mitchell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dog
Thanks for the ping, interesting information. It does indeed back up the Rediff article, yet I still have my doubts about the "secret documents smuggled out of the country" aspect of this story. However, that does not mean I have doubts that Mushi, et al, were aware of Kahn's activities.

--Boot Hill

13 posted on 02/17/2004 10:55:30 AM PST by Boot Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: milestogo
Thanks for the ping. Disconcerting read... but with lots of good info from Freepers.

Prairie
14 posted on 02/17/2004 11:04:38 AM PST by prairiebreeze (WMD's in Iraq -- The absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: milestogo; Dog; nuconvert
Okay, this is the first explanation we have seen for the kid-glove handling of AQ Khan: that he is blackmailing Musharraf and others with proof that they were connected to the AQ Khan proliferation network.

So why is this tale being spun? Nobody is revealing the whole truth. It is a limited hangout, required because the winking at AQ Khan will otherwise engender embarrassing questions.

What everyone wants to know, but no one is asking out loud, is whether AQ Khan has a nuclear weapon stashed away somewhere as his personal deterrent.
15 posted on 02/17/2004 12:22:36 PM PST by Khan Noonian Singh (No relation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Khan Noonian Singh
I hadn't thought of that.

But he already has them between a rock and a hard place with the documents. He really doesn't need anymore. I don't think Musharraf is as concerned about a weapon, as he is being "found out". More concerned about himself and his own fututre than anyone's else's.
16 posted on 02/17/2004 2:02:17 PM PST by nuconvert ("Progress was all right. Only it went on too long.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert
<< I don't think Musharraf is as concerned about a weapon, as he is being "found out". >>

Musharraf, yes. That is why Musharraf is going easy on AQ Khan. But why is the US also being so nice to Khan? Just to protect Musharraf? Maybe. The US seems to believe that Musharraf is better for us than anybody who would replace him.

Can we still believe that Musharraf's leadership is in our interest? If Musharraf is selling nuclear weapons to rogue states and to terrorists, he is taking us for a ride. A nasty ride.

Why do you think we are protecting him?

17 posted on 02/17/2004 9:54:52 PM PST by Khan Noonian Singh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Khan Noonian Singh
I think it's because right now he's better than anyone who might replace him. What a sad comment about Pakistan. We want to keep Musharraf, because at least some of the time, he's willing to take our side. Pathetic. As soon as someone else comes along that has one iota more honesty or integrity, he'll be gone. I'd like to see him arrested and put on trial afterward, but I doubt that will happen.
18 posted on 02/18/2004 5:42:17 AM PST by nuconvert ("Progress was all right. Only it went on too long.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert
I understand that that is the US government's position. However:

It looks like Musharraf is involved up to his moustache in selling nuclear weapons to rogue states and to terrorists, and in covering up those sales. In what sense is this better than anyone who might replace him?

Sure, he says the right things much of the time. I'd follow the motto, "Actions speak louder than words." Especially regarding nuclear bombs.

Maybe we'd be better off with somebody who was forthright about his Islamist leanings. At least we could deal with an explicit problem.
19 posted on 02/18/2004 1:09:13 PM PST by Khan Noonian Singh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Khan Noonian Singh
We'd know better what we were dealing with, but we couldn't do anything about it. So, it wouldn't do much good. We'd just be stuck with someone who's Never helpful 100% of the time, rather than someone who's helpful 50% of the time, even though we know both are bad and both are dealing behind our back. If that makes any sense. It's like dealing with Putin. We know he's bad. He makes all kinds of deals with our enemies behind our back, and sometimes in our face. But sometimes, when we really need him, he's there for us.
20 posted on 02/18/2004 2:23:59 PM PST by nuconvert ("Progress was all right. Only it went on too long.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson