First I've heard of this, to be honest. Not finding anything on Google.

Sorry, I apologise, you are right-- Burt works for Barbour, Griffith, and Rogers. I mistakenly equated that with the Burston-Marsteller--which was hired by the PPP last year.

Barbour actually lobbies for India. Burston is run by Hillary's disgraced campaign manager, Mark Penn.

On Burt:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Richard_Burt

On PPP:
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007%5C10%5C29%5Cstory_29-10-2007_pg7_2

On Barbour's lobby shop
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/29/washington/29blackwill.html

Ambassador Richard Burt moderated the discussion and noted that Haqqani had lived “three lives,” first as a “prominent journalist,” then as a “distinguished academic,” currently on leave from Boston University, and now a public servant and adviser to two Pakistani prime ministers. He observed that Pakistan “could not have a more articulate spokesman.”

You might also bring up the fact that Haqqani's patrons in the PPP have hired Burt to lobby Congress.

And I agree - my 1st thought reading the post was that any plans vs. the Taliban we share with Pakistan, its intel folks will immediately forward.

One condition of any closer understanding would have to be stronger civilian control over the military, ISI included.

But "Pakistan" is something of an illusion and I think there's strong reason to question the loyalty of people who have access to the intelligence.

It's the only country I know of whose name is based on an acronym. I don't see that Pakistan speaks with one voice (in a much more significant sense in which we don't speak with one voice). I sometimes wonder if Pakistan isn't actually a loose federation of city-states, looser even than the U. S. under the Articles of Confederation.

I have no doubt that Pakistan has shared valuable intelligence with the U. S. I'm not nearly as convinced that they haven't shared intelligence with Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

Therein lies the problem. I'm pretty sure that the Pakistani government hasn't done that, as those forces are at least as harmful to Pak interests as to the US. But "Pakistan" is something of an illusion and I think there's strong reason to question the loyalty of people who have access to the intelligence.