"I think even the US realizes that musharaff is not indisposable but it does NOT want to have an UNPLEASANT pakistani inspired "surprise" if and when musharaff loses power."

This kind of thinking is short sighted and could lead to another tragic events like 9/11. This excuse has been used since Ayyob khan, then Zia and now Musharraf. It culminated into tragedy of 9/11. All of the above named thugs were supported by USA.

"Remember, the country of pakistan came about as a homeland for muslims in the region.. as in the Indian region. There is nothing more to the identity of pakistan other than its religion. And that is the root of the perennial self identity problem that many pakistanis grapple with."

In India, word Muslim was used more like a nationality rather then religion, to distinguish from Hindu majority. It did not mean that Muslims in India, later Pakistan, were fundamentalists like Saudis. Don't forget, in Pakistan, when ever people were given chance, they voted moderates into the power. Islamists, despite their efforts, never got even 10% of the votes from Pakistani public, who are so unfairly labeled fundamentalists and extremists. It is the environment like the current which is created by Musharraf after taking over the power by force where Islamists in small minority sound like a majority. As long as army generals are in power in Pakistan, to prolong their illegal regime, they will misinform USA government about the majority of moderate people in Pakistan. If fair elections are held today and Nawaz, Bhutto and Altaf are given chance to campaign, the Islamists will be defeated without a bullet being fired. It is guaranteed!!

Musharraf tells a different story to its US allies thoug. He scares them about the Islamists win (like Hamas in Palestine) and their control over the nuclear weapons. If Americans were only capable of listening to the public, not to the thugs, the world would have been a much safer place.

I am quoting Jinnah's speech which he gave one day after Pakistan was created.

"The creation of the new state has placed a tremendous responsibility on the citizens of Pakistan. It gives them an opportunity to demonstrate to the world how a nation containing many elements can live in peace and amity and work for the betterment of all its citizens irrespective of caste or creed. Our object should be peace within, and peace without. We want to live peacefully and maintain cordial friendly relations with our immediate neighbors and with the world at large."

It is a simple message which Pakistan and the rest of the world needs to listen.

About the blowing up the airliners over Atlantic, I felt a little relaxed when I heard that the plot was discovered by ISI. Why? Because I know ISI is a liar institute and fabricates stories without any conscious. This time I am glad if they have lied.

Yes, Sherzad, this plot was indeed made in pakistan, just not the way you see it.

By the way, did you hear that the plotters were tipped off by a Muslim who was suspicious himself of their activities?

Wake up and smell the cofee, Sherzad. How many conspiracy theories are you going to play out in your mind before you come to understand the harsh but glaring truth - there is a radical section of islamists who will use the cover of religion to create terror and "teach the West" a lesson at every available opportunity.

It was heartening to hear that a Muslim helped the UK police zero in on the suspects - at least some people in the Muslim community in the UK are starting to act in true Muslim faith.

The plot to blow up the U.K airline was not made by terrorist and al Qaeda it was made by U.K and U.S together with Pakistan in order to reflect the people attention as nowadays the hatred spread over U.K for Blair supporting President Bush foreign policy toward Israel attack on Lebanon.
The people surprised that how the inelegance service of Pakistan is stronger than U.K and U.S as the Pakistan helped U.K to stop the plot.
I think this plot was made in Pakistan by present Musharaf and proposed it to Blair and Bush to deceive people and reflect their attention and won the deceitful war against Muslim .

I'm sorry, this guy is a complete dipwad. I love the "experts" who pronounce their guesses in such certain terms. Was this Al Queada? Better make sure fuzz-face3 or your likely to spend a lot of time and energy on the wrong thing. What a horses patoot this "expert" is. WP, you should be ashamed. What's next, Goofy discussing Social Security measures?

I appreciate the comments of USA and Paki nukes. They make excellent points. I don't know or even pretend to know the roots of Pakistan's Islamists roles in "worldwide' terrorism, but it cannot ever be ignored. The ISI (thanks for the correction) has shown a deftness so far as working multiple angles simultaneously. I am not sure, but the latest terror plots that have worked and not worked against the UK seem to have developed with a fair amount of simplicity, but effectiveness. The Tube attacks seemed simple but effective. It seems that they managed to stay ahead of MI-5 and 6, as well as Scotland Yard. That requires some training for a selected core in tradecraft. That implies someone who has been very well trained and actually survived, perhaps in intelligence or counter intelligence operations. I do not doubt that if Pakistan didn't have nuclear weapons, it would be of little significance to the U.S. As an established Muslim state, it wouldn't matter much were it not in possession of serious nuclear weapons. Whether Islamists control the electorate may not be as important as how seriously they inhabit the ISI. It seems evident to me that they have been shown "their place" so far as how important they are in U.S. geopolitics. The way the U.S. favors just about any action the State of Israel wants is clear evidence that no Muslim nation will have, in the near term, the same consideration given it by the U.S. So, Pakistan is going to do what it has to do to protect itself and that appears to me, a new nuclear plant capable of producing nuclear weapons. I don't know if they have missiles capable of taking Israel out, but it's clear to me that among Muslim states, the question might be: does anyone speak for Muslims in a world where Israel matters more? Who has that power? Who could have serious influence and prestige by demonstrating a willingness to go to the brink with Israel? I hate to think of that, but the notion that Muslims aren't valued by a majority of Americans seems clearer and clearer to me as an American. It is a shame.
The argument that I feel is important is that Pakistan's ISI had to have had some involvement in the latest terror plot. Perhaps not a direct hand, but at least one which was aware of the activities, but did not independently stop them. That's dangerous for the future, but it's a reflection that Pakistan ISI officials are wearing thin on Musharraf's cooperation with the US. And if that is really an accurate trend, then Bush has squandered, once again, a wonderful chance to forge a sincere alliance with a very Muslim state and begin a new era in American political relations.

Interesting comments here. Especially the one about how zia was a pet for the US - he was useful in the fight against the soviets in afghanistan and for that he did receive unstinting support. Interestingly there is a movie coming out in 08 about how Texas congressman in the 80's,Charlie Wilson (played by Tom Hanks)funneled money to the CIA to help Zia to help the afghan mujahideen.

Of course, the unintended consequence of this support was what directly led to the horror of 9/11. Something that the US was wise enough to recognize while dealing with pakistan post 9/11. There was a comment out here about how pakistan's nuclear weapons maintained the balance of power in the region. It was precisely reasoning of this kind which allowed pakistan to get away with developing nuclear weapons in the first place with active help from China and a wink wink from the US.

If pakistan had no nuclear weapons today, the US would not hesitate to deal with ISI (pakistan's inter services intelligence)sponsored terrorism. So, i think the pakis are not going to face any serious pressure to crack down on terrorism in the near foreseeable future. I think even the US realizes that musharaff is not indisposable but it does NOT want to have an UNPLEASANT pakistani inspired "surprise" if and when musharaff loses power. Besides, it may still not be done getting to the bottom of the AQ Khan smuggling ring and it would need pakistans help to do this. The US would rather prefer to deal with mush rather than any other unknown until it is satisfied that the proliferation scandal perpetuated by ISI/AQ Khan cannot harm its security in any way. musharaff should "know" a thing or two as to how this scandal happened.

Plus lets not forget abt aghanistan. the US has to lean on the pakis to make sure that the taliban never rises up again, but hey even that isnt working either, is it?

There is a root cause to the pakistani connection to jihadi terrorism today that our politically correct types dont want to talk about. Remember, the country of pakistan came about as a homeland for muslims in the region.. as in the Indian region. There is nothing more to the identity of pakistan other than its religion. And that is the root of the perennial self identity problem that many pakistanis grapple with. What are we? Muslim first or pakistani first? In fact what does it mean to be a pakistani muslim? how different is it from being say a saudi arabian muslim?

pakistani people who see their religious identity dominate their national identity try to get into "religious" causes.. and this is exactly why there is an intense hatred in these people for "Christian" America and Jewish Israel. and a prediliction to "help" fellow muslims through out the world.

Reform has to come from within the Islamic community worldwide. There is no other solution. No amount of US sponsored "democracy experiments" will succeed until people in the Islamic world themselves move away from the radical version of their religion. That requires very strong leadership - unfortunately, their leaders are from hezbollah, hamas, bin laden.... you get the picture.

Jerry said: "As much of a "thug" as Musharraf is, I suspect the Islamists within IIS are much more radical and dangerous. If they conduct a coup d'etat, they'll put the United States in an devastating situation: the difficult choice would be to sever ties with Pakistan, or declare it an unfriendly nation in the "War On Terrorism," if Musharraf is out, or replaced by someone more "Islamist" in orientation."

ISI was strengthen during the rule of Gen. Zia (another close ally of USA against democratic forces in Pakistan) and continues to flourish under Musarraf, who is also supported by US. Whenever elections were held in Pakistan, Islamists had less then 10% of the votes every time. Even now if Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif are allowed to participate, they will have majority. Only non democratic governments in Pakistan, supported by US, give rise to islamists and Musharraf is trying to make it look like without him, "Hamas" might take over in Pakistan. Unfortunately, US is tricked by him to belive it to be true.

"WHO WAS THE MAN WHO NOT ONLY INSPIRED BIN LADEN, BUT TRAINED HIM?
The answer seemed to point to someone in Pakistan, to a highly influential man, but also, a superb intelligence operative. Someone who showed bin Laden, and others in al-Qaeda, the difficult skills of intelligence and counter intelligence operations."

I would guess that "some one" might be the former chief of ISI, Gen. Hmaid Gul, who was right hand man of Gen. Zia. Zia was a pet of USA. I don't know how to say it but as far creating mess of terrorism in Pakistan, all roads leads us to USA . Pakistan is a terror hub because of USA policies. Unless US withdraws its support from Musharraf and help moderate democratic forces to play in an even play field against Musharraf, there will be a constant terrorism problem in Pakistan. It is unfair to blame only Pakistan while US has such a big role in the situation in Pakistan.

Some people say that Nawaz and Bhutto failed twice. How ignorant of the democratic process!!
Political leaders fail and they are held accountable in subsequent elections by public. Public bring another set of leaders who they think can help them. This process which should continue and not interrupted by army with the help of USA. Majority of Pakistanis are moderate and like to express themselves using no vilolant means. It is the army rule, supported by USA, which has and is creating terrorism in Pakistn

Pakistan will continue to be epicenter of terrorism as it works in the interest of Mushraf. Without US ultimatum, he is unlikely to curb terrorist camps in Pakistan. Unfortunately, Pakistan will continue to be in dire straits in forseeable future, as there are no viable alternatives to Mushraf. The potential candidates are Bhutto and Sharif who have failed, twice each, to bring any meaningful developmet to Pakistan. The third alternative, having religious parties in power is a nightmare. US therefore should continue to work with Mushraf, however, should stop treating him as an ally and exert extreme pressure on him to bring desirable results. It's time once again, to tell him that 'you're with us or against us'.

I use a book -- "Bin Laden: The Man Who Declared War On America," by Josef Bodansky, as a guide to the concentration of Islamist beliefs inside Pakistan's Intelligence Services. It was clear that prior to September 11, Pakistan's support for terrorism by Islamists was critical to the expertise of al-Qaeda. I don't know of any formal Intelligence Services of any other country which were inextricably connected with al-Qaeda as Pakistan's.
Musharraf initially did move rapidly to weed out some of those IIS officals who were linked with al-Qaeda. But when Bush lost his focus, and moved on to attack Iraq, Musharraf was likely told, in more ways than one ... you're here on borrowed time.
As much of a "thug" as Musharraf is, I suspect the Islamists within IIS are much more radical and dangerous. If they conduct a coup d'etat, they'll put the United States in an devastating situation: the difficult choice would be to sever ties with Pakistan, or declare it an unfriendly nation in the "War On Terrorism," if Musharraf is out, or replaced by someone more "Islamist" in orientation.
The slap in the face to Pakistan by the proposed India nuclear deal with the U.S. brought about, I think, more openings for al-Qaeda types with connections to England to operate. The end product: successful operations against the London Tube and Bus .. was the result.
When Pakistan allows any proficient terrorists to operate and train willing participants in suicide operations, somewhere in Pakistan, they're inevitably technically astute. I recall that some "specialist" at the time, on al-Qaeda, stated that one question that was never answered was:
WHO WAS THE MAN WHO NOT ONLY INSPIRED BIN LADEN, BUT TRAINED HIM?
The answer seemed to point to someone in Pakistan, to a highly influential man, but also, a superb intelligence operative. Someone who showed bin Laden, and others in al-Qaeda, the difficult skills of intelligence and counter intelligence operations.
In the Cold War, the Soviet GRU and KGB trained many intelligence services. My guess was, they trained IIS and this man who, in turn, inspired and trained bin Laden.
The most successful terrorist groups are those with impeccable counter intelligence practices. They have iron clad procedures ("tradecraft") which allow them to operate in small, insular groups, acutely aware, at all times, of being monitored, and successfully avoiding such monitoring.
Also, being able to work suspected infiltrators, and use them, or even "double them." That, in addition to skillful intelligence gathering ("casing" proposed terror targets) in ways that minimize detection.
When the U.S. failed to get bin Laden, that sent a signal to the IIS folks in Pakistan.
When the U.S. further denied the same nuclear deal that was proposed to India ... and that, on a trip to Southwest Asia that included Pakistan and India ... that was a slap in the face to Pakistan.
Musharraf must have seen that as a kiss of death. The implications were: you're not playing ball, Pervez, and we aren't going to give you niceties if you don't. In the competition with India, Pakistan, in spite of all it's done for the U.S. vis a vis the Taliban and al-Qaeda, was snubbed.
The Islamists said, enough is enough: Pakistan's answer was to start a new reactor which will supply enough weappons grade uranium to make "40 to 50 nuclear bombs a year." I see the volatile Pakistani population in the U.K., and the Magreb Muslim population in France and Spain, as very promising groups for al-Qaeda to recruit from. And there, is the deep worry: connections to an ever disgruntled IIS will also become more operative. I think that's already happened.
The bottom line is: Bush, and Blair, have not followed through with a meaningful relationship with Pakistan. The nation is insecure, against India, and also, breeds severe Islamist followers. They are the strategic blunders of all time, so far as how Bush "squandered" an opportunity of a life time to really open a new relationship with an Islamic nation -- that does NOT have oil. When oil is taken out of the equation, Bush doesn't give a crap about any Muslim nation.
The latest operation could, just as easily, be a complete "give away."
Divert attention onto a very large scale terror operation:
in the meantime, set in motion a much more skillful group who are planning another operation elsewhere, coming in to the U.S., let's say, from a less obvious starting point. Mexico, for instance. Or, Brazil or Argentina.
The key to another successful operation against the U.S. will have Bush hatred at it's core. Bush hatred by Pakistani Intelligence Service operatives must be rampant. A successful terror attack from Pakistan, or with suggested Pakistan connections, will weaken Musharraf and might allow the ascendance of someone more pliable to IIS, not, the U.S. No one more friendly to the U.S. will replace Musharraf.
The Pakistanis might be seen as keen in tactical operations, but I see them, more critically, as strategic players. Once the IIS itself finds more gain with bin Laden and Islamists, the U.S. has lost THE most important "supporter" in Asia in the WOT.
Musharraf is living on borrowed time; whether he's a thug and dictator means nothing. Not between Intelligence Agencies. And the Muslims of the world know, full well, by what has happened to the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, and the Shi'ites, in Lebanon, that they simply do NOT matter as much as Americans and Israelis, Christians and Jews.
Muslims do NOT count in the Evangelical world of George Bush and the Evangelical dominated Republican Party.
Muslims are NOT valuable as human beings to Americans, either. If they were, the polls would not show max support for Israel's barbaric dealings with Lebanon and the Palestinians.
Lebanese now know they, too, don't matter a BIT, to George Bush. In fact, they are meaningless to George Bush.
Muslims have no better examples of their worth, as human beings, compared to Christians and Jews, than what has happened in the last two months so far as how Israel has been allowed to destroy their opposition. Bush is a tactical and strategic squanderer.
An opportunity for the U.S. to make true, sincere, relationships with the Muslim world has been lost. Only a remarkable man, or woman, will ever be able to heal these wounds gouged out by Bush.
Once Pakistan becomes unfriendly, and allows the most extreme forms of Islamism to emerge, the world had best pucker up for a really frightening roller coaster ride.
It didn't have to be that way.
But, the true face of majority America favors Israel, and disfavors Muslims. That's the coldest, hardest truth there is.

"So - all, act now and put pressure on Musharraf to lock up up the terrorist thugs (forever) in Pakistan."

Musharraf is thug himself. He has no legal autority to be the president of Pakistan. He does not have any support from Pakistan people. His only support is USA and he is manipulating terrorism to keep that support. He has forced Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif out of the country but he can't force Lashkare Jhangive and Lashkare Tayyaba out of comission? Terrorism is working for him. Why should he destroy the terror structure in Pakistan?

As long as the world (read USA) fails to grasp: that Pakistan is the epicentre of terrorism; that terrorism has no boundaries; that terrorist acts in the USA, UK, Spain and India are inter-linked; that Al Qaida Lashkar e Jhangvi, Laskhar e Toiba are all different names for the same manifestation, i.e. Islamic terror; that all such groups are active in Pakistan; that Pakistani rulers and dictators pay scant heed to world attention - till that time I am afraid to say that we will not be able to beat the terrorist beast. Hopefully, politicians in the west (read USA) shall see light that allowing terrorist activity in the east (read India) and pretending that it is not linked to terrorist activity in their own countries is not going to help them or their citizens. So - all, act now and put pressure on Musharraf to lock up up the terrorist thugs (forever) in Pakistan.

To Rav:

I agree with most what you wrote. However, the fact is that Afghanistan was abandoned by USA in a chaotic state after Russians were defeated.That was creating problems for Pakistan.Taliban was supported initially by Bhutto to bring stability to Afghanistan. But unintended consequence of helping Taliban was that it was highjaked by former US allies, Alqaeda. So USA is not so innocent what is happening in Pakistan. It has to shoulder its part of the blame. I also don't agree with dismantling Pakistan's nuclear structure. Pakistan's nuclear poster is necessary agaisnt india. Balance of power will be destroyed with out it and there will be wars in the region.

In my view to fix the problems in Pakistan is to let Musharraf know that democracy is the way to go. USA must stop supporting Musharraf whodoes not have any base of support in the country except USA and manipulating terrorism to become indispensable. As long as he is in power, Pakistan regime will not let terrorism card go away from its hand.

Almost all major terrorist attacks, whether it's 9/11, 7/7, 93 WTC bombing, numerous terror attcks in India including the 1999 hijacking of Indian plane etc.. have roots in Pakistan or significant links to Pak terror camps. Both Khalid Sheik Mohammad and Ramzi Youssef are of Pak descent. Benazir Bhutto proudly called herself the 'mother of Taliban'. Pak terror camps live and operate freely often with encouragement from ISI (Pakistan's sinister secret service). And, oh! they have been caught red handed with nuclear proliferation (AQ Khan is just a scape goat). If this is not the embodiment of a rogue state, what is? Pakistani regime can teach Iraq, Iran and North Korea about evil.

While the media and the state departments right now are keen to single out Pakistan's help in foiling the recent terror plot, one has to seriously question Pakistan's effort to curb terrorism. There cooperation often comes only after the US/UK (though not India) provides them with unrefutable evidence of their involvement and it generally involves the capture of a few miscreants in a land that breeds them with impunity. Musharraf is NOT serious about dismantling the terror infrastructure despite the few attempts on his life. The camps are openly being used to wage a proxy war with India and a byproduct of this is the 9/11, 7/7, 7/11's ....

The 'war' against terrorism will never be won until the US (particluarly, the state department) and its allies stop treating Pakistan with kid gloves. It is farcical to call Pakistan an ally in this war. This war needs to be fought within Pak and not in Iraq or elsewhere. Diplomacy has only produced limited and selective results and it's unlikely to get much better. An ultimatum should be issued to Pak to dismantle forever its various terrorist camps or face significant punitive actions including the destruction of its nuclear plants. Without a real threat to its very existence, Pakistan will never root out the evil of terrorism that grows in its soil.

Terrorist have NOT been defeated by thwarting their plans to destroy American airliners in flight. Former Secretary of State Colin Powell said: "no threat is more serious to aviation than the man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS)"
They are relatively inexpensive, available on the black market world wide and easy to operate. Any commercial aircraft approaching or departing a major airport in the US is a "sitting duck" for the American Stinger or Russian Inga SA16 shoulder fired, ground to air missile. One man in a van at night parked in the approach or departure path from an active runway can pick and choose his targets. There is virtually no way to defend such a strike.
You would be well advised NOT to print this threat in the hopes the terrorists don't pick up the idea. However, we CANNOT ASSUME stupidity by the terrorist.

I think Pakistan connection to most terror plots is due to rule of an army General, Musharraf. The general has expelled main stream moderate politicians like Bhutto and Nawaz shrif from the country which allowed MMA, the religious group, to fill the vacuum. USA is supporting Musharraf and helping him to discourage the moderate democratic political parties to grow stronger in the country. If there was a transparent political system in Pakistan, the extremists will disappear like bates during the day light.

I am not justifying terrorism but USA has to shoulder its part of the blame to be a cause of terrorism in Pakistan (and may be elsewhere too). Stop supporting Musharraf now!!