Well, let's suppose on the morning of 14 June, 1981, I'd picked up a copy of
The New York Times and began reading an article titled "
Lahore, A Survivor With a Bittersweet History." I might be intrigued, but, considering all the instability in the region, I might be unsure whether or not I, as a U S citizen, could actually go to Pakistan on my USA passport. But then the article answers my uncertainties: "[t]ourists can obtain a free, 30-day visa (necessary for Americans) at border crossings and airports" (
NYT). Ah, so I
can visit Pakistan? But let's make sure. Let's say I head down to the passport office just to double check, and sure enough, there is a travel advisory for American citizens wanting to travel to Pakistan on USA passports! It says:
Before traveling to Pakistan, American citizens should be aware of the following updated visa requirements: 30 day visas are available at Pakistani airports for tourists only (Department of State).
So in 1981, I
could travel to Pakistan, legally and everything. I certainly wouldn't need to travel under a foreign, let's say (for the heck of it) an
Indonesian passport--a simple USA passport would do nicely, thank you.
But seriously, I can't believe that this particular Obama rumor--that in 1981 he couldn't have possibly traveled to Pakistan on a US passport--is
still around when it's so easily disproven.
3 comments:
I think that one of the reasons that this urban legend persists is because of so-called news organizations like WorldNetDaily who post these things, and never go back to retract or correct when they are proven to be lies.
If I had ever made a mistake like that I would scour my web site and visibly correct every instance and it would be done before anything else I do.
It's called integrity.
I agree with your thoughts on integrity and that the WND article should have been amended.
Even so, the evidence provided by the DOS TA isn't enough for some; I've received two emails suggesting that the linked TA might be a forgery because of it's scanned rather wonkily.
I asked my correspondents if they'd noticed that the linked TA is at the DOS ARCHIVE at UIC, and it's located on a page last modified in 2002. No response.
Oddly, neither of the emails' writers even acknowledged the NYT article.
Thanks for stopping by and for commenting.
Well, you are exactly right i m agree with you about the integrity and you can visit Pakistan now condition is also better.
Post a Comment