« #Libya - De Opresso Liber | Main | #Sharia Law is NOT Closer to America than it Appears… »

01 March 2011


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


The Twisted Genius,

There's a saying - "All theories are wrong but some are more useful than others".

I was just saying that the nuke theory is less credible than the jihadi theory.

BTW, the Economist article posted above also talks about Davis pursuing the LeT.

FB Ali

The Davis case on diplomatic immunity may well go to the ICJ. Not so much because the US is desperate to get him back, but because the Pakistan govt is desperate to find a way to hand him over without too much political damage.

The govt had initially hoped that their own courts might uphold his diplomatic immunity, but foreign ministry staff balked at falsifying the record to be presented to the court. Even if they now succeed in having this done, no judge is going to rule in favour of diplomatic immunity (unless they have a pronounced death-wish).

Hence the ICJ. As commented above, there would be many legal problems with the US's standing in such a case, but they are unlikely to be exploited by Pakistan. Nor will they challenge vigorously the US's arguments on diplomatic immunity for Davis. In fact, the two sides are likely to coordinate their submissions beforehand.

Luckily, in 1960 Pakistan accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the ICJ, so the govt can argue that it has no choice but to accept the verdict of the court and repatriate Davis.

FB Ali


No one is saying that Davis was a “lone operative” out to “steal” Pakistan’s nukes. Please re-read the post and some of the comments above. Nor is there any reason why he and his colleagues shouldn’t have been developing intelligence and contacts relating to jihadis in addition to Pakistan’s nuclear weapons. What is being advanced here is that their main mission related to the nukes.

What makes the nuclear scenario more plausible is the reaction the Davis affair caused, especially in the military and the ISI. It is laughable that they would get this worked up over the US getting too close to jihadis, such as the LeT. The latter is a red herring. For the military, it is at best a nuisance, at worst a menace. I do not doubt that some lower level ISI functionaries maintain contacts with some elements of this and other jihadi outfits, but to believe that Kayani & Co would get roiled up about the US finding out about them is, frankly, ludicrous.

robt willmann


The Washington Post was reading SST yesterday! "Quick, get Bellinger on the phone right away!"

But no attribution or hat tip to us ....

(I guess it was published today.)


Funny thing ... no mention in the editorial of the Davis situation. The Wash Post just thought it would randomly choose a subject two or so years old, run an editorial on it, and not connect it to anything in the here and now! A mere coincidence.

More likely, they got a call from Leon Panetta at CIA to start laying the ground work for the setup ....

FB Ali,

Yes. If the U.S. makes this move I think it will be coordinated with and agreed to in advance with the Pakistan government. I have not dug through the enabling documents for the ICJ, but if there is not a provision for a one-time "agreed jurisdiction", the U.S. might make up some argument with a straight face to try to get around Condi's bluntly conclusive letter.

And the Pakistan government is probably figuring that a detailed explanation will not be made to the public there as we have at this site about the U.S. pulling out of the ICJ regarding consular issues, although the Pakistani prosecutors have raised the issue and are trying to torpedo it.

But as you say, the Pakistan government will shrug its shoulders and lament in a resigned tone of voice, "we know the U.S. stiffed the ICJ before, but we cannot control what happens there; it is out of our hands. And if we withdraw from the ICJ jurisdiction, we will put ourselves at risk in other countries". And so on.

William R. Cumming

Thanks the Beaver! No I still think the cold sweats and lack of sleep at night in the US political and military leadership is over the fear that the DRONE strikes ultimately will keep them from visiting DAVOS or its equivalent in the future. Notice that NO repeat NO DOJ or STATE Legal opinions have appeared in any adminstration over the legality of these strikes. You might argue classification but I would argue that it is the principle that smart people often do not ask their lawyers a question just in case it might be the wrong (to them) answer!
What I find appalling is the international legal community failing to take on this issue.
Maybe when the drones are striking DC the interest will be there?

robt willmann

I was unclear in my recent comment (12:58 p.m.) replying to FB Ali, and apologize; the next to the last paragraph should say--

And the Pakistan government is probably figuring that a detailed explanation will not be made to the public there as we have at this site about the U.S. pulling out of the ICJ regarding consular issues, although the Pakistani prosecutors have revealed the issue of removing the matter to the ICJ and are trying to torpedo it.


Twit: Thanks for correcting me. I forgot about Chuckie. And thanks also for the explanation about Taylor the elder.

Beaver: Thank you for the info on Taylor.



"Maybe when the drones are striking DC the interest will be there?"

Oh please! Not DC! 911 was bad enough for political knee jerk reactions and screwing the US Constitution further into the ground. Another even potential strike and I fear more for our Liberty than anything else.

I have nightmares about folk like Peter King calling for Martial Law.....


Charles I,

Can anyone moot how this is done technically, in Pakistan, either militarily, electronically, politically/ or via Stuxnet or Facebook or some kind of intelligence op?. What is physically involved, in country, for such a scheme, aside, apparently, from Mr. Davis?"

I have been out of the loop for sometime now. But no matter which way one chooses you ain't talking no country picnic. I know only three ways to neutralize these weapons systems.

A. Direct Action, which would include targeting ( if you could lase the site or sites)with a nuclear bunker buster or EMP type weapons. This is a very messy way to take nukes out.

B. Electronically. The Pak nukes to the best of my knowledge, are built with what is called an both an "exclusion zone" which envelops the detonation system and physically prevents any electrical energy from setting it off accidentally. They also are reported to have "permissive action links" (PAL) which will "lock" the weapon. One can then scram the PAL codes. Requiring it to be sent back to the ole factory. Some of the weapons also have what is called self-damaging mechanisms that break the weapons components requiring it also to be sent back to the ole factory.

C. Physically. With Safing technology called "pit-stuffing" which would effectively disable the devise and again send it back to the ole factory. Then again you can always deactivate a nuke by injecting liquid fissionable fuel into the warhead until it is rendered stable.....

There are some other ways especially from an insiders point of view, but it all boils down to...

All you got to do is get access to some 60 to 90 nukes. Simple eh?

The best way is not to play the game... Have a good foreign policy with nuclear states.... Remember though, no one wants to go KaBoom mushroom style. The Paks know we got them 5000 to 90 in warheads. Radical extremists, as once did the commies, also know that if someone launches one of these bad boys... Its Nuclear Safety Rule Number 10...

Upon seeing the brilliant flash of a nuclear explosion, immediately assume the safety position, bending down and placing your head between your knees and.....kissing your ass goodbye...

And there ain't that many virgins to go around...

The Twisted Genius

Jake, I think you stated the only effective and sane answer. Anything else is stupid and futile.

"The best way is not to play the game... Have a good foreign policy with nuclear states...."

William R. Cumming

R.W. Thanks so much for you very informed and well researched comments.
Okay this is scuttlebutt! DAVIS will be retained for a long long time in Pakistan since he is a useful device for ISI purposes and US will not be able to assert his diplomatic immunity.
Here is the question I have: What exactly would it take to design a new US-Pakistan relationship since apparently the crude formulation of Deputy Secretary of STATE Richard Armitgae--either you are with US or against US--seems to have broken down in many ways? INTERESTING to me that "sanctuaries" have plagued US armed forces success for many decades. Perhaps no good solution except "Don't play the game"!

Charles I

Thanks Jake. It seems a devilishly complex nut(s) to crack. Looks like Davis is going to trial


Looks like Davis was just released.


 Charles I

Sharia pays off for America!

16 March 2011 Last updated at 11:26 ET

CIA contractor Ray Davis freed over Pakistan killings

A Pakistani court has freed a US CIA contractor after acquitting him of two counts of murder at a hearing held at a prison in Lahore, officials say.

Raymond Davis, 36, was alleged to have shot dead two men in the eastern city of Lahore in January following what he said was an attempted armed robbery.

The acquittal came when relatives of the dead men pardoned him in court.

They confirmed to the judge overseeing the case that they had received compensation - known as "blood money".

Under Pakistani Sharia law, relatives of a murder victim can pardon the killer.


The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad