At the request of the CIA, which had reason to think the al Qaeda leader was holed up in a high-walled compound in Abbottabad, the doctor had mounted a fake hepatitis-immunization program. Having spearheaded several polio-immunization drives over the years, Afridi knew how to stage the campaign convincingly.
While no polio cases have been detected in India for more than a year, poliovirus transmission is ongoing in the other three endemic countries – Afghanistan, Nigeria, and Pakistan. GPEI’s Independent Monitoring Board considers Nigeria and Pakistan to be the greatest challenges for eradicating polio. ... t is therefore imperative that we make this final push toward eradication one of our highest priorities. As Dr. Frieden has stated, “If we fail to get over the finish line, we will need to continue expensive control measures for the indefinite future…More importantly, without eradication, a resurgence of polio could paralyze more than 200,000 children worldwide every year within a decade.” Now is the time, we must not fail.
wes wrote: » Incredibly mis-leading op, and typical of the West to only tell half the story. While the guy did help find Bin Laden. His methods were nothing short of repugnant, and I am pretty sure he violated the Hippocratic oath in the process. They created a fake vaccination program, where they only gave one of the 3 required doses. So there are kids in Pakistan who think they are vaccinated, and aren't. Those kids are now in danger due to the CIA and this man, and some may very well die, but when the US kills innocent people, apparently its ok. His actions will also increase existing suspicion to such programs, which will again lead to more deaths. This so called Doctor deserves to rot for every single second for what he did, and imho he got of lightly. If all he did was help get Bin Laden, then I wouldn't have any issues with that, but what he did was endanger innocent children, which makes him and the CIA little better than terrorists imho. The Wests version of the events only mentions getting Bin Laden, and when the West does something that results in endangering children, then its ok. The end justifies the means, but when the other guy uses the same logic there evil terrorists. Pretty straight forward hypocrisy. Glen Greenwald of Salon.com wrote an excellent article on this:The Imperial Mind For the most part the Western media pretty much ignores the CIA and there helper endangering civilians and try to paint Pakistan as evil for rightfully tossing this guy in jail. The harm that the CIA and this so called "Doctor" (he no longer deserves this title due to his putting innocent children in danger) is being ignored and entirely one sided fantasy is being presenting, of how the "Good Guys" killed Bin Laden. Don't get me wrong, I could care less about Bin Laden, he brought his death on himself, but the children that the CIA and this "Doctor" put in danger is imho an unforgivable crime, and at least one of the perpetrators is seeing the inside of a prison cell is a good thing.
Ellis Dee wrote: » There are not many countries in the world that look kindly on their citizens helping the intelligence agencies of a foreign state, especially one that violates its sovereignty and kills its military personnel and citizens with its cowboy tactics. Do you seriously think the Americans would just give one of their own who spies for even a friendly country like the UK, Japan or France no more than just a slap on the wrist? Just look at what they are doing to Bradley Manning for doing the world a service by blowing the whistle on a lot of wrongdoing by the USA.:rolleyes::rolleyes: I have little sympathy for that doctor, especially in view of the fact that he set up a bogus vaccination programme. He has thereby done incalculable harm by making all vaccination programmes in many parts of the world suspect and the ones who will pay dearly for it are children and other vulnerable people.:):) Serves him right! Don't drop the soap, Doctor Sahib!:D:D .
Hande hoche! wrote: » Godwinned.
jank wrote: » Very nice morals you have, oh sorry your an atheist!
Happy Monday wrote: » 33 years! First offence.
biko wrote: » Those morals keep atheists from chopping off hands, burning their children at the altar or thinking their infants are born with original sin. Works for me. But that's not what this thread is discussing.
MagicSean wrote: » I would have thought the reason they didn't come back to finish the vaccinations was because they didn't want to be arrested and thrown in jail for 33 years.
wes wrote: » So you making excuses for those putting the lives of children in danger? The reason they didn't come back, is because the program was a fake (very well established fact), and that is one of the reasons this "Doctor" will not rightly rot in jail for 33 years. Its nothing short of disgusting that anyone would make excuses for those who endangered the lives of children like this.
ejmaztec wrote: » Which children were injured?
BattleCorp wrote: » Laws are laws and should be enforced no matter how much bad press they cause
That said, he probably did the world a favour
Augmerson wrote: » Seriously Pakistan, what the **** are you doing?
So yeah that's what they were doing. Bit more helpful than willfully endangering children that's for sure.
Augmerson wrote: » http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0524/pakistan-jails-doctor-who-helped-find-bin-laden.htmlUS officials had urged Pakistan to release the doctor, who ran a vaccination programme for the CIA to collect DNA. The information gathered was used to verify the al-Qaeda leader's presence at the compound in the town of Abbottabad, where US commandos killed him in May 2011 in a unilateral raid. The lengthy sentence for Dr Shakil Afridi will be taken as another sign of Pakistan's defiance of US wishes. It could give more fuel to critics in the US that Pakistan - which has yet to arrest anyone for helping shelter Bin Laden - should no longer be treated as an ally. The verdict came days after a NATO summit in Chicago that was overshadowed by tensions between the two countries. Islamabad was invited in expectation that it would reopen supply lines for NATO and US troops to Afghanistan. It has blocked the lines for nearly six months to protest against US airstrikes that killed 24 Pakistani troops on the Afghan border. However it did not reopen the routes, and instead repeated demands for an apology from Washington for the airstrikes. Pakistan's treatment of Shakil Afridi since his arrest following the Bin Laden raid has in many ways symbolised the gulf between Washington and Islamabad. In the US and other Western nations, Afridi was viewed as a hero who helped eliminate the world's most wanted man. However Pakistan army and spy chiefs were outraged by the raid, which led to international suspicion that they had been harbouring the al-Qaeda chief. In their eyes, Afridi was a traitor who had collaborated with a foreign spy agency in an illegal operation on its soil. Afridi, who is in his 50s, was detained sometime after the raid, but the start of his trial was never publicised. Seriously Pakistan, what the **** are you doing?
Tym wrote: » Is there any proof that anybody was hurt in any way? If you could give a link to prove he gave inadequate vaccines?
You can't let this incident slide lest you create a casus belli for other crimes like this to go unpunished. Like sharing out Pakistani nuclear secrets etc. "oh but you freed him, so you should free me too...."
Tym wrote: » Yup, it would create a dangerous precedent for other acts of treason. Although I think some sort of watch should be kept on him so he's not abused in that prision...
wes wrote: » ejmaztec wrote: » Which children were injured? The ones who didn't get the full vaccine, lives are in danger, as they think they were vaccinated. I posted a link earlier about that. BTW, I never used the word injured, but the fact remains they put the lives of children in danger. Then, there is the damage that has been done to such programs, which will result in more harm to children.
Unavailable for Comment wrote: » Tym wrote: » Is there any proof that anybody was hurt in any way? If you could give a link to prove he gave inadequate vaccines? According to the Washington Post he was traveling door to door offering to administer a hepatitis B vaccination. Although the vaccination was real it takes three doses to be effective. He only administered one meaning that the people he treated are not protected. The dangers from that are straightforward. Added to that and far and away more reprehensible is that there is already an incredible amount of fear and mistrust in Pakistan about NGO vaccination programmes. Many people don't take part in them as they believe they are part of a secret Western agenda. Obviously for the many Western NGO staff in Pakistan and Afghanistan, their work has just become more difficult, perhaps insurmountably so. Who knows how many casualties will arise from the backlash against vaccinations? And for what? These DNA samples that were taken were solely used to identify a body. Could they not have been harvested from his relatives during the assault or even taken voluntarily from one of Bin Laden's many, many blood relatives knocking around Europe? The ends did not quite justify the means. For further reading check out Maryn McKenna's excellent piece in Wired as well as Guardian piece that broke it. Google is your friend here.
MagicSean wrote: » This method was highlighted in a recent NCIS episode. The purpose of the DNA testing was to build up a road map of relatives and persons of interest, not just to search for one person or identify his body afterwards.
MagicSean wrote: » Being vaccinated against hep b doesn't mean you can go around playing with hepatitis. At worst they are in exactly the same place they were before he came along.
MagicSean wrote: » My understanding though is that the vaccinations were real and some people did get properly vaccinated but when the truth behind the program got out then it had to be discontinued so people in the middle of their treatment lost out.
Unavailable for Comment wrote: » While I won't comment on the fictional plot of an NCIS episode, your assertion only makes sense if the Bin Laden family has a genetic predisposition for terrorism. Otherwise why is their familial DNA important? As there are no other Bin Laden family members on the US's watch list we can agree that they don't. Therefore the DNA was collected for some other reason. The only plausible one being to positively identify Osama Bin Laden. As the vaccination program was a failure, as evidenced by the US not rewarding the doctor for his fake immunisation wheeze and yet Bin Laden's compound was still raided we can deduce that the DNA was not necessary pre mortem but rather to identify the body. There were obviously far simpler ways of obtaining the necessary DNA then what they chose. Ones that didn't endanger local vaccination programs for example.
wes wrote: » No, the difference is that some people taught they were vacinated, and it also hurts other such programs. You would be wrong. They never bothered going back. I posted a link earlier in regard to exactly what these idiots did. The program was a fake from the get go. So the CIA and the so called "Doctor" put children in danger, by not giving them the full vaccine and they did it on purpose, and what they did will hurt future programs, as people will now be even more skeptical of such programs. What they did was morally repugnant, and quite frankly indefensible. There is no excuse for what they did. Also, here is Doctors without border condeming the CIA for the damage they have done:CIA's fake vaccination programme criticised by Médecins Sans Frontières
MagicSean wrote: » Yes I don't doubt it damages other programs but I stand by the assertion that not administering a proper vaccine endangers anyone. They were in that danger already. The doctor may not have aided them but neither did he put them in any greater danger.
MagicSean wrote: » Also, if it was fake from the get go does that mean the vacine wasn't real? If they had no intention of going back then I can't see why they would bother to use the proper vacine.
On Thursday night, a senior US government official defended the practice, saying it had been intended as "an actual vaccination campaign conducted by real medical professionals". He said the team was supposed to deliver the full course of three vaccinations to those treated in Abbottabad. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, added: "And it's not as if this kind of campaign is something the CIA runs every day." However, on the ground in Abbottabad the Guardian discovered that while the vaccine doses themselves were genuine, the medical professionals involved were not following procedures. In an area called Nawa Sher, they did not return a month after the first dose to provide the required second batch. Instead, according to local officials and residents, the team moved on, in April this year, to Bilal Town, the suburb where Bin Laden lived.
MagicSean wrote: » You are only focused on Bin Laden. The CIA don't think so small. A DNA database of all the people who lived in and around Bin Laden would be very useful to them, especially if you consider the fact that he likely had sympathisers and other members of Al Queda near him.
MagicSean wrote: » Yes I don't doubt it damages other programs
MagicSean wrote: » but I stand by the assertion that not administering a proper vaccine endangers anyone. They were in that danger already. The doctor may not have aided them but neither did he put them in any greater danger.
wes wrote: » Except that they taught they were vaccinated, and if another proper program came along, they wouldn't go get vaccinated again, as they taught they were vaccinated. So yes, they did potentially harm children. Then there is the morality of getting access to the DNA of children under false pretenses, and various other moral issues.
wes wrote: » Except that it was clearly shown they did not go back, and that there was no actual intention of going back. The article I linked even showed that the US lied about it as well:
wes wrote: » So it very clear, they didn't bother going back, and this unamed US official also lied about the whole thing as well. Clearly you didn't read the link and are just defending this morally repugnant program. What was done was clearly indefensible and getting Bin Laden is no excuse for what CIA and this "Doctor" did. The fact that the US wants this man released, clearly show they have no issues with what they did, which shows that the US really doesn't care what damage it does, in going after terrorists. Which btw isn't all that different to how the terrorists they are after justify there own actions. As I said earlier the lives of Pakistani children have little value for American's, and you can be sure that people in that part of the world will remember what was done to there children. What the CIA did will cause a great deal of damage to future vaccination programs, and may even put medical professionals in danger as well, which is btw what was said by Doctors without Borders.
MagicSean wrote: » There is nothing to suggest they thought they were fully vaccinated. The claim is that the vaccination team did not return to finish the vaccine. I haven't see anything to suggest that they told the population they were fully vaccinated. If you have a quote that shows otherwise then I'll gladly read it.
MagicSean wrote: » So if the population knew they were not treated fully then they would indeed take the vaccine if it came around again.
MagicSean wrote: » But they wouldn't need to anyway. They don't need the full course again. All they need is the countinuation of the old one anyway.
MagicSean wrote: » No it doesn't. It says it was meant as a full course but the team moved on. It doesn't say they weren't coming back.
MagicSean wrote: » The second dose does not have to be administered exactly one month later. It has to be administered at least one month after. But obviously once the story broke about the doctors DNA program it made it impossible for them to return.
MagicSean wrote: » I'm not defending it.
MagicSean wrote: » I don't care enough about it to feel the need to defend it.
MagicSean wrote: » I just dislike people who try to get their point across with exaggeration and bull**** like some Helen Lovejoy personification.
MagicSean wrote: » This "endangering the children" nonsense is exactly that. The children are no worse of than they were before.
Unavailable for Comment wrote: » Really? Well let's think about that. The CIA knew that the compound didn't have a transient population and that the only person who left regularly was al Kuwaiti. They also knew that other people didn't visit the compound. Therefore, if your theory is correct, the CIA were interested enough in the current occupants of the compound to authorise collection of their DNA profiles. Why then were the American seals given amended rules of engagement allowing them to kill anyone who got in their way whether or not they showed a credible threat? Obviously the CIA didn't think the residents were that high value to not even make an attempt to capture them. Five people were killed that night. Only one was armed.
Unavailable for Comment wrote: » Or perhaps you think the DNA collection was to ensure they killed the right Osama? Well, despite what Gibbs and the rest of the NCIS team would have you believe, DNA is useless without something to compare it to. So you have to wonder what DNA evidence the Americans used to positively ID the corpse. Did they do a quick swab of the other residents of the house while holding them at gun point? Nope. They compared his DNA to samples collected from his sister who had died of brain cancer several years beforehand while in Boston and whose remains had been subpoenaed and stored by the American authorities. Really there was no point to such a dangerous operation unless, well I dunno but maybe the CIA loves polio and doesn't want to see it eradicated.
Unavailable for Comment wrote: » You may not doubt it but you don't seem to understand that the damage to other programs is what's dangerous.
Unavailable for Comment wrote: » Obviously if a person believes they are vaccinated to a certain threat they become less aware of that threat. That's just common sense.
Unavailable for Comment wrote: » It takes three genuine doses to become vaccinated. They only administered one. Therefore it doesn't matter if it was genuine or not. It wouldn't work
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w3.vanillicon.com/v2/35a809b40027ce688f88d9ac1714e15f.svg)
