Amal al Sadah, the youngest widow of Osama bin Laden, has denied information included in a confidential Pakistani document, listing details of her life with her late husband. The three-page document, obtained by NBC News, is divided into nine sections -- each one paraphrasing a statement or statements made by Amal to investigators while in Pakistani custody.

The contents of the document were first reported on Thursday by correspondent Azaz Syed of Pakistan's Dawn newspaper.

According to her brother, Zakaria al Sadah -- who spoke with her after the first report was published and asked her about its contents -- Amal denies ever having given any such statements to investigators, adding that most of the information included in the document is factually incorrect. The family's lawyer in Pakistan, Atif Ali Khan, clarified that while Amal might have spoken to various investigators during her time in custody, she denies having provided the level of detail in the document. Neither he nor Zakaria al Sadah would go into detail about which specific pieces of information were incorrect.

---

The document offers the most detailed narrative yet of where and when bin Laden and his family managed to move through Pakistan, ultimately landing in their final hideaway, just two and a half hours north of the country's capital of Islamabad. According to the document, Amal entered Pakistan legally in July 2000, arriving on a visa issued for seeking medical treatment from the Pakistan Embassy in Sana'a, Yemen. After crossing the border into Kandahar, Afghanistan, she was married to bin Laden and stayed with him there, along with his three other wives.

After the attacks on 9/11, the family "scattered," according to the document. Amal moved with her eldest daughter to Karachi, then reunited with her husband in Peshawar, moving with him to Swat, Haripur, and finally Abbottabad. Amal and bin Laden had five children together, whose ages now range between two and 12. The youngest daughter and son -- Zainab and Hussain, respectively -- were born in Abbottabad, but her older son, Ibrahim, and second daughter, Aasia, are listed as having been born in hospitals in Pakistan.

Amal and her children have been in Pakistani custody for 11 months, since the night of the U.S. forces' raid in Abbottabad that killed her husband. Her brother, Zakaria, is currently in Pakistan working to secure their release so he can take them back home, to Yemen.

Zakaria Al Sadah says he has been able to see his sister, nieces, and nephews nearly a dozen times over the last year during brief, supervised visits. In an interview with NBC News, al Sadah said he takes toys and books for the children each time he visits and avoids talking about the night of the raid, but ultimately just wants for them to be able to start a new life back home.

His mission has been complicated by the ongoing work of a special Pakistani commission, which needed to interview Amal and other family members as part of their investigation into Osama bin Laden's presence in Pakistan, and by the government's recent decision to charge the women for illegally entering and remaining in the country.

Listed in the document is a legal justification for those formal charges against Amal, which reads "she stayed in Pakistan after the expiry of her valid visa, hence, her stay in Pakistan was illegal, which is an offense under section 14 of the Foreigners Act of 1946." The government, according to this argument, has the power to deport her back to Yemen.

Zakaria al Sadah told NBC News he is now putting his faith in the Pakistani judicial system, which he trusts to do the right thing. The family is to be formally charged on Monday.

 

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan – Zakaria al-Sadah, Osama bin Laden's brother-in-law, said he is worried for the health of his sister, who was shot in the raid that killed the al-Qaida leader.  

Speaking to NBC News in Islamabad on Tuesday in his first interview with an American television network, al-Sadah talked about his fight to free his sister, Amal al-Sadah, who has been held, along with her five children, by the Pakistan government since the May 2011 raid by U.S. Navy SEALs.

"I want to get them out as soon as possible," al-Sadah said, "because kids, they can forget the past in the right environment. They will carry on."

---

Favorite wife
Twenty-nine year old Amal al-Sadah, originally from Yemen, had an arranged marriage with bin Laden when she was 17 or 18, in 1999 or 2000. She lived with him and their five children, now between three and 12 years old, in the Abbottabad compound made notorious by the U.S. forces' nighttime raid in which her husband was killed.

Al-Sadah said he was at home in Yemen when he got the news of the American raid and that his sister's presence at the compound shocked him and his family. 

"We didn't know that our sister was with him at the time," he said. "My mother, my father, my whole family was surprised that this had happened and she was actually there."

He explained that his family had been largely estranged from Amal after her marriage to bin Laden. Any communication between them was infrequent, and usually came through couriers. He didn't even know she or bin Laden were living in Abbottabad.

Bin Laden is believed to have been married six times, but divorced two of his wives. Amal was the last to marry him, his youngest wife, and reportedly also his favorite. Bin Laden reportedly spent the last years of his life mostly with Amal, with whom he lived and slept in the top portion of the compound.
Amal was shot in the leg during the U.S. operation, and her brother believes her physical condition may be worsening. 

"I've seen them eight times, each visit for an hour, maybe an hour and a half," he said. "But the last visit was two and a half months ago."  

Al-Sadah said the last time he saw his sister, she had lost the use of her injured leg. He is concerned authorities are deliberately keeping him from visiting to hide her deteriorating health.

Long list of charges
For al-Sadah, the process has been a long and drawn out one. He said that after questioning by the special government commission investigating bin Laden's presence here, Amal’s return to Yemen seemed imminent.

But he said that with each step forward has come with two steps back. In the latest twist to the widows' story, Pakistan recently announced that all three women are being charged with illegally entering and staying in Pakistan and would continue to be confined to a house in Islamabad.

Al-Sadah, who has retained a lawyer to help secure his sister's freedom, says he's written to Pakistan's chief justice for permission for his sister, nieces and nephews to return with him to Yemen.

"Everyone knows that women and children – they're innocent," he said. "[Bin Laden] made them busy with the kids, taking care of the kids' needs. They were not included, none of them were included, in any of his agendas."

But the Pakistani government says it has its reasons for holding the women.

“The widows are facing charges of illegal entry, harboring an offender, impersonation and abetment,” said a senior official in Pakistan’s Ministry of the Interior, explaining the charges against Amal and the other widows. He spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the case. “The punishments carry different kinds of sentences, so it is now up to courts proceedings. How much time it will take, no one can say.”

Another Pakistani intelligence official, who also spoke on the condition of anonymity, explained another reason why the women’s case may be moving so slowly. “Since the Saudi and Yemeni governments have not made up their minds to take them back, the legal process could take a long time to keep them away from public scene.”

However, Aamir Khalil, the lawyer for Al-Sadah working on Amal’s case, of course sees things differently. “The case was filed after 10 months which is illegal; already we have filed a petition to quash the case and acquittal.”
 
He added that Islamabad’s High Court has directed the Director General of Pakistan’s ISI, Pakistan’s premiere intelligence agency, and the Ministries of Interior and Defense to arrange a meeting between Amal and her brother as soon as possible. 

‘Next time’
For now, al-Sadah said all he can do is try to provide some sense of hope for his nieces and nephews, most of whom can only remember life inside the compound walls in which their father was killed.

Al-Sadah said he had taken them toys when he was allowed to see them – soccer balls, balloons, and books – and that at the end of each visit, the children would beg him not to go.

"I always lied to them, whenever they asked me to stay," he said. "I would lie and say, 'Next time we'll go to the park,' 'Next time we'll go outside.' I keep telling them they're going to come back home soon."

NBC News' Fakhar Rehman contributed to this report.

It's being called "Pakistan's Oscar," but 33-year-old filmmaker Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy will be the one bringing the award home.

The Karachi native's latest film, "Saving Face," which chronicles the lives of acid attacks victims in Pakistan and the doctor working to help them, made history Sunday night at the 84th Academy Awards by winning Pakistan's first Oscar ever. The film was co-directed by American filmmaker Daniel Junge, and will air on HBO on March 8th.

Obaid-Chinoy accepted the award for Documentary Short Subject on stage and dedicated it to "all the women in Pakistan who are working for change – don't give up on your dreams."

---

Award for all Pakistanis
In an interview with NBC News in Karachi before leaving for the awards in Los Angeles, Obaid-Chinoy said she felt the support of the entire nation, and hoped she could make Pakistan proud by bringing home an Oscar. Some of her fans' reactions confirm she's done just that.

Immediately following her win, proud Pakistanis – watching early-morning satellite feeds of the awards ceremony halfway across the world – took to the web to share their glee and congratulate their fellow countryman. For a brief moment, "Saving Face" became one of the top ten trends, worldwide, on Twitter.

"I walk a prouder #Pakistani today coz of you @sharmeenochinoy and your #Oscar win!!" tweeted @samrammuslim.

"Pakistan wins 1st #Oscar r hero @sharmeenochinoy," tweeted @asmiather.

Networks across Pakistan broadcast breaking news alerts to announce Obaid-Chinoy's win. Pakistan's Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani announced the nation would confer the filmmaker with the highest civilian award upon her return.

'The Artist' rules Academy Awards

In a statement released after the Oscars, Obaid-Chinoy said she was "deeply humbled and blown away by the outpouring of support and well wishes."

She also posted a Facebook message, dedicating the award "to the men in my life who have shaped the person I am today! My father & my husband I love you both!" Her husband, Fahad, and she were high school sweethearts, and are the proud parents of a daughter – Amelia – now a toddler.

Obaid-Chinoy's father died suddenly in 2008 as the filmmaker was en route to the Emmy Award ceremony in New York, to accept the award for her film investigating the Taliban's recruitment of child suicide bombers in Pakistan. She called that win, "bittersweet," but said she knew her father was watching down on her at the Oscars.

"My parents have been very supportive from the very beginning," she told NBC News. "We're five sisters and a brother. My father brought us up as sons, not as his daughters. Had my father and mother not given us that platform or those opportunities, I don't know if I would be sitting here in front of you today."

Dedicated to telling Pakistan’s story
While she admits she considers the Oscar to be "THE award," Obaid-Chinoy said she remains focused on the problems in her home country and the issues she hopes to highlight through her work.

"There are so many stories in this country," she told NBC News. "We have close to 40 news channels, and most of them are talking about terrorism and the impact of terrorism. If you watch that, you begin to think there's nothing else in this country."

She is currently developing a television series to air in Pakistan highlighting the efforts of "real heroes" working to bring change in their communities.

"That," she said, "is how you inspire hope."

On the Oscars' "Thank You Cam," Obaid-Chinoy, clutching her gold statue, again thanked her family for their support, but quickly turned her comments back to her hopes for her country's future.

"To everyone in Pakistan, who fights against terrorism every single day," she said, "this, is for you."

NBC's Fakhar Rehman in Islamabad contributed to this report.

Click here for complete coverage of the Academy Awards

Vote for your favorite Oscar look

  
PESHAWAR, Pakistan – The ring road in Peshawar is a rough ride: navigating certain stretches means dodging enormous potholes, steering clear of steep ditches and swerving to avoid the occasional brave soul who darts from one side of the road to the other.

Yet this has been, for the last decade, one of the main arteries on which convoys of trucks carrying supplies for U.S. and NATO forces have made their way into Afghanistan. Those ground lines of communication that run from Karachi's ports to two border crossings in Pakistan have been a fundamental part of the U.S.-Pakistan relationship, as has the air line of communication.

When the U.S.-Pakistan alliance was tested once again in late November after a U.S. cross-border air strike that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers, Pakistan reacted by shutting down the ground supply routes – a step they've taken before in protest to U.S. actions. The air lines of communication remain open.

But access to those crucial land routes has never been denied to the U.S. for this long, and the two accounts from the U.S. and the Pakistan military of the cross-border strike that prompted their closure are so starkly different that it's hard to see how they can be reconciled.

---

Even though the Americans have reduced their dependence on Pakistan's roads over the last few years by using alternative routes running through Russia and Central Asia, the cost of moving goods via air and on that northern route is much greater – reportedly six times more a month – than using Pakistan's routes.

It now costs about $104 million per month to send supplies through the longer northern route, according to Pentagon figures shown to the Associated Press. That is $87 million more than when the cargo was shipped through Pakistan.

Pakistan's government is conducting its own internal review of the alliance with the U.S., and officials here say no decision will be made about the supply lines until that review is complete and recommendations have been discussed by the government. Already, however, there are forces at work within Pakistan's religious and political parties to prevent the government from reopening those lines and re-engaging on the same level with the U.S.

Issue of nationalism
At a recent rally in Rawalpindi for the Pakistan Defense Council, made up of dozens of religious and political parties, leaders mentioned the NATO supply lines with the same fervor as they did deeply nationalistic issues such as divided Kashmir and the country’s nuclear weapons. The crowd of thousands cheered as speaker after speaker threatened that there could be countrywide protests should the government decide to reopen the supply lines.

"The NATO supply lines should not be restored at any cost," said Mohammad Abdullah Gul, chairman of the National Youth Conference and a member of the Pakistan Defense Council.

"Even if the government restores (them), we are not going to accept it. The people of Pakistan, we are going to mobilize. From Khyber to Karachi, they will be mobilized and they will stop the NATO supply lines," he said.

Retired Col. Nazir Ahmed is the spokesman for Jamaat-ud-Dawa, an organization which he describes as having a "purely Islamic platform."

He said that the NATO supply lines were "rightly" blocked, and should stay blocked "forever," unless the U.S. "comes to us on the basis of equality."

He was particularly outraged by the recent cross-border attack.

"After the aggression that the Americans committed on the Pakistan Army?  They slaughtered and killed so many Muslim soldiers," said Nazir. "Every country has the right to defend its borders and its ideology."

For this segment of the population – frustrated by what they see as a decade of subservience to American policy in a deeply unpopular war here – a decision to reopen the supply lines is tantamount to a decision to put U.S. interests ahead of Pakistan's.

That sentiment felt by a growing number of Pakistanis who think the relationship with the U.S. has not benefitted their own country will make it difficult for Pakistan's leaders to publicly re-engage with the U.S., and reopen the supply lines in the same manner and under the same conditions as before.

Both U.S. and Pakistani officials say they remain committed to their alliance. How the NATO supply routes will fit into that alliance, however, is yet to be seen.

 

PESHAWAR, Pakistan – According to his family,  Mukarram Khan Aatif, 47, knew the risks he faced, but still decided to continue reporting.

As a journalist in Pakistan's northwest and tribal regions, Aatif worked for the U.S.-government funded Voice of America Pashto-language radio service Deewa, and for a local Pakistani Urdu-language network called Dunya. He covered his own communities in the tribal regions which are ravaged by militancy and terrorism.

Aatif told the stories of those who had been displaced after military operations forced them from their homes. His colleagues say he tried to balance the stories about violence and terror with the underreported, but vital stories about education and health.

---

"He used to find a news story in everything," said colleague Hameedullah Khan.

But his reporting upset the Taliban, who say Aatif refused to cover them the way they wanted, and dared to criticize their actions - which is why, they say, two gunmen armed with AK-47's entered the mosque where Aatif was praying last week, and shot him dead. 

"He was on our hit list," Taliban spokesman Ihsannullah Ihsan told NBC News. "And now we will target other journalists who have become a party against the Taliban."

Aatif became the 38th Pakistani journalist to be killed since 2002, and the first to be assassinated in 2012.

The Committee to Protect Journalists named Pakistan the deadliest country to report from for the second consecutive year in 2011. Of the 46 journalists killed as a result of their work across the world last year, seven died in Pakistan. In 2010, out of 44 journalists killed worldwide, eight were from Pakistan. Local journalists, typically working in and around their home communities, are often at greater risk. 

Aatif was no exception. He narrowly escaped a twin suicide attack while reporting from the Mohmand tribal region in December 2010. Two other journalists were killed in that attack. His colleagues say he often talked about the horror he witnessed that day, as he watched the blasts from less than 100 yards away. 
 
Three years ago, when the Taliban decided they were unhappy with his reporting and passed along a death threat through the local journalists’ association, Aatif chose to move his family from the tribal regions to an area just outside of Peshawar, rather than stop working.

"We left our native village in Mohmand and shifted our family to Shabqadar because of threats from the Taliban militants, but they chased us even here," said Haji Yaqoob Khan, Aatif's older brother. "He was a journalist, and well-known to everybody, but to me, he was still a child. I was always worried for his security, but I couldn't save his life."

Colleagues and family members remember Aatif as an honest, hospitable, and hard-working man. Hundreds attended his funeral prayers in Mohmand last week, and dozens of his colleagues called for justice outside the Peshawar Press Club, as they protested the murder of the man they had all come to know and respect over the years.

Colleague Hameedullah Khan remembers Aatif as a man who was shy with strangers, but was the life of the party among friends; a man who loved to share jokes and laugh.

"He used to buy chocolates from the village shop, just to hand them out to the local children," said his brother.

Voice of America Director David Ensor said that Aatif  “risked his life on a daily basis to provide his audience with fair and balanced news from this critical region."

"We mourn the loss of our colleague," said Ensor. "We call on authorities in Pakistan to do more to protect journalists working there and bring his killers to justice."

Safdar Hayat Dawar, president of the Tribal Union of Journalists, knew Aatif as a "thoroughly professional" journalist who remained committed to his reporting, despite the threats. Dawar worries for the dozens of journalists who continue to work in the region.

"How are they supposed to work, when they're suspected of spying for the U.S. or for Pakistan's armed forces?" said Dawar. "Twelve journalists have been gunned down in the tribal areas since 2005, and we don't know what will happen next."

NBC News’ Amna Nawaz contributed to this report from Islamabad.

RAWALPINDI, Pakistan - Beer. Vodka. Whiskey.

These are not words you hear often in Pakistan, where it's illegal for the majority of the population to buy or drink alcohol.

---

But once you walk inside the gates of the Murree Brewery Company, it's all anyone wants to talk about.

We're greeted by the company's CEO, Isphanyar Bhandara - a man in constant motion - who is the third generation in his family to run the 150-year old company. In his office is an impressive display of bottles - lagers, flavored gins, matured whiskeys - the full product line of Murree Brewery, including non-alcoholic beers, fruit juices, and the latest addition - an energy drink called "Blitz."

"We're very proud of the fact that we're working in Pakistan," he says with a smile. "But you must remember, this brand - Murree Brewery - is much older than it's host."

A brewery that the British established in 1860 to ensure their soldiers were never without their favorite drink is now an unlikely institution in Pakistan, where Muslims are prohibited from purchasing or consuming alcohol. Legally, the company's only potential market is limited to Pakistan's non-Muslims - just three percent of the 180 million population.

And even for them, the actual process of legally buying alcohol is involved and tedious, with business conducted out of sight of the general public. The country's Christians, Hindus, and Zorastrians can obtain an alcohol license from the government. That license comes with a monthly quota. To buy a case of beer, or a bottle of vodka, they must stand in line at distribution points hidden behind hotels or other establishments, license in hand to prove they are not Muslim.

Murree Brewery is doing business with one hand tied behind its back. It's illegal for them to advertise their alcohol. It's illegal for them to export their alcohol. Still, it is alcohol sales that bring in 60 per cent of their revenues, which totaled just under $100 million dollars last year.

Running a successful business in Pakistan these days in hard enough. A lack of basic utilities, corruption within the law and order system, and the volatility of the Pakistani rupee are enough to keep any CEO awake at night. Bhandara shoulders the additional burden of running the only legal alcohol producer in a majority-Muslim country, where the conservative segment has grown more vocal and more influential with time.

"There are more heinous crimes going on, like honor killing, and throwing acid on people's faces, burying people alive," Bhandara says. "These things are considered in a lighter mode, that they are forgivable crimes. But having a beer is considered a non-forgivable crime!"

The truth in Pakistan that few will admit on the record, is that many Muslims do, in fact, regularly commit this "crime." The black market for alcohol is booming business, and the porous border makes for easy smuggling. The Pakistani elite serve wine at dinner parties in their homes. Pakistani men will end a long day at the office with a glass of whiskey. A bar table, hidden behind a curtain, is set up at weddings so that guests can enjoy a drink as they celebrate. But few are willing to do so openly, and potentially incur the wrath of the country's conservatives, whose power, Bhandara says "is increasing by the day."

"We like to keep a low profile," he says. "I think that's the best security."

ISLAMABAD - After a decade of diplomatic crises, see-sawing tensions, and increasing frustration on both sides, 2012 promises to mark the re-defining moment for the alliance between the U.S. and Pakistan.

The last decade has seen a growing sense of dissatisfaction in American circles at Pakistan's unwillingness or inability to tackle its extremist elements in the way the U.S. wishes, combined with deepening resentment in Pakistan about what's seen as America's "imperial" attitude.

---

"We are blamed for U.S. failures, all that happens in Afghanistan is attributed to Pakistan," said one Pakistani military official. "We have had enough. The U.S. should take their business elsewhere."

To that end, Pakistan recently kicked a leg out from under the American mission in neighboring Afghanistan, shutting down the NATO supply routes after a deadly cross-border attack in late November in which 24 Pakistani soldiers were killed at two border posts. After a year of diplomatic clashes and public tongue-lashings, it is this incident that seems to have caused the most severe rupture in relations and made the alliance much more difficult to mend.

• STORY: Pentagon admits errors in deadly Pakistan air strike

The U.S. military investigation into the episode found that Pakistani troops had fired first, but laid blame with both sides for an inherent mistrust and subsequent miscommunications that led to the exchange of fire. The Pakistan military, which declined to participate in the American investigation, has yet to release its own detailed findings, but did issue a terse statement in response to the initial U.S. release, calling their inquiry "short on facts." 

Documents shared with NBC News from the Pakistan military's internal incident briefing show a significant divergence of narratives that could prove problematic for the two countries to ultimately reconcile. 

The U.S. report, based on an unclassified version released publicly last week, stated the Pakistan military "did not provide information identifying" the locations of the border posts that were attacked. In contrast, the Pakistani military's incident briefing concluded: "It is not possible that ISAF/NATO did not know these to be our posts." A Pakistani military official told NBC News in early December that the posts had been established "almost three months ago," and "soon after" they were established, "ISAF forces are notified through Liaison Officer at BCC [Border Coordination Center] and were provided with all necessary information."

The timeline established in the U.S. report includes the determination that the first shots were fired from Pakistan's side of the border, stating that "Machine gun and mortar fire…from the border ridge line was the catalyst for engagement." Subsequent firing by Coalition forces, the investigation found, "was executed in self defense." Pakistani officials have maintained, both in public statements and in internal military documents, that the attack "was an unprovoked act of blatant aggression."

• STORY: Air strike tension could hurt war on terror

Though cross border attacks have occurred before, the reaction by Pakistan's establishment to this latest attack has been much more fierce than in years past -- a function, some analysts say, of the higher death toll, as well as the country's current state of affairs. 

Defense analyst Ayesha Siddiqa, author of "Military Inc.", believes Pakistan's own evolution over the last decade contributed to its response.

"It no longer sees itself as this tiny, timid country, always on the defensive," said Siddiqa. "It's a country which has a medium-sized military power, nuclear weapons, and the vanity which comes with having this non-conventional defense. So it wants to be taken more seriously. And it doesn't want to compromise on that."

The U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan, Cameron Munter, insists that despite the tensions, the lines of communication "at the highest civilian and military levels" remain open. 

"General Dempsey has spoken with General Kayani. General Mattis has spoken with Kayani. I have met with Foreign Minister Khar," said Munter. "We are committed to our relationship." 

That relationship, according to Pakistani military and government officials, will have to take on a different form in the year ahead.

"The arrangement will now be formalized and reduced to writing," said a Pakistani government official. "Even if the Government was to restore some concessions, the Army will not forget the spilling of blood."

Pakistan's Parliamentary Committee on National Security is said to be reviewing the US-Pakistan relationship and is preparing recommendations to present to the government. Back-channel negotiations are reportedly ongoing at all levels, but so far, the supply lines remain closed and the public sentiment remains strongly anti-American. 

Siddiqa believes the longer this continues, the more difficult it will be to bring on board the general population with any attempt to reconcile political and military relations. 

"There is this narrative that's been built, vis-a-vis the U.S. in the past four or five years," said Siddiqa. "It's been so negative, that socially, it will be difficult to build back up that relationship."

In these early days of the new year, there is not yet a clear indication of how and when that rebuilding will occur. 

"We could not be good allies," said one Pakistani military official. "At least let us be better strangers."

American gunships launch a strike across the Afghan border into Pakistan, hitting a Pakistani check post and killing 11 soldiers. U.S. officials say the attack was in response to insurgent firing. Pakistan calls the attacks "unprovoked and cowardly."  That was in June of 2008.

Three Pakistani soldiers are killed at their border post as a result of an American helicopter strike. U.S. officials say they were targeting insurgents who were launching mortar rounds into Afghanistan. Pakistan protests by blocking the supply route for U.S. and NATO convoys. That was in September of 2010.

The details of exactly what happened during Saturday's early morning hours in Pakistan's Mohmand tribal agency, on the border with Afghanistan, are still unclear, but the story line is familiar.

This time, U.S. officials say they took fire from across the border in Pakistan and called in air support, reportedly checking with their Pakistani counterparts before authorizing a strike. Pakistani officials say they were never consulted, that their pleas to NATO to stop the attack once it had started were ignored, and responded by again shutting down the supply routes.

One thing that is certainly different this time is the death toll: 24 Pakistani soldiers were killed in this latest incident, including two officers, making it the deadliest incident of its kind since Pakistan and the U.S. declared an alliance in 2001. The higher death toll, according to analysts, means more pressure on Pakistan's military and civilian leaders to react strongly.

There is no debating that U.S.-Pakistan relations have taken a beating over the last year. But have they hit rock bottom? Or is this just the new "all-time low?"

---

Last straw in a tough year
The condemnation from Pakistan over the latest attack has been swift and unrelenting.

Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, Pakistan's Army Chief, called the attack "unacceptable." Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani said it was "an assault on the sovereignty of Pakistan," and pledged to conduct a complete review of all diplomatic, political, military and intelligence cooperation with the U.S. In addition Pakistan announced it would boycott next month's Bonn Conference on Afghanistan.

Amid the rising anger, Pakistan's military released a set of images Wednesday which it says shows the remote border posts attacked by NATO helicopters and fighter jets on Saturday.

"They're taking a tougher line than they have before," said Hasan Askari Rizvi, a Lahore-based defense analyst. "They're staking out a strong position to demonstrate within a domestic context that they can protect Pakistan's interests."

That, according to Rizvi, is even more important to the government and military establishments now, in a year when they've both lost credibility following a series of humiliating actions by the U.S.

Back in March, U.S. pressure to release CIA contractor Raymond Davis, who shot and killed two Pakistanis, forced Pakistan to take the domestically unpopular action of negotiating his exit in the face of intense public anger.

Then came the unilateral, American operation in May to capture and kill Osama Bin Laden within miles of Pakistan's premier military academy which forced Islamabad to choose between confessing involvement or admitting incompetence.

Former U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen's September accusation that Pakistan's largest intelligence agency uses the militant Haqqani network as a "veritable arm" to launch attacks on U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan left the relationship even further strained, and Pakistan's Army brass feeling "betrayed," according to military sources.

This latest incident, according to multiple Pakistani officials, has forced the country to rethink its engagement with the U.S. "We cannot be just a subject of abuse and attack," said one military official, speaking on condition of anonymity.

"Both of these entities – the government and military – have been discredited," said Rizvi. "Within Pakistan they are discredited because of U.S. actions across their borders. Outside, they are discredited because the U.S. is saying they are helping the Taliban."

Public relations problem
But according to some, the government and military's credibility problem may be partly their own making.

"The problem is that there's not really a source of information that's geared to inform," said Dr. Christine Fair, who focuses on South Asian political and military affairs at Georgetown University. "They're geared to massage perceptions of events, and the Pakistani government love taking their citizens for a ride on the victim bus."

A growing sense of anti-Americanism in Pakistan over the last decade has been fanned by a dominant, conservative Islamic, public discourse, said Rizvi – a sentiment the establishment has tapped into from time to time to pursue its own national interests. That's how a discussion about a potential U.S. aid package devolves into talk-show debates about America respecting Pakistan's sovereignty. Or the discovery of al Qaida's leader hiding in Pakistan turns into national outrage that the borders were breached by the U.S.

"In Pakistan, there are only two entities that publicly support good relations with the U.S.: One is the military, the second is the federal government," said Rizvi. "You don't find any other political party or major society group openly supporting the ‘War on Terror’ or relations with the U.S."

What about the billions in U.S. aid?
One question many Americans ask is: “Why do Pakistanis hate us so much if we give them so much money? “
Despite the fact that billions of dollars in U.S. aid and reimbursements have gone to Pakistan in the last decade, anti-U.S. feelings within the population are running higher than ever.

Opposition leader Imran Khan has capitalized on those frustrations, channeling them into a groundswell of political support in recent months and a 68 percent approval rating, according to one recent poll. Separately, a poll conducted exclusively in Pakistan's tribal regions last year found almost 80 percent opposed the “war on terror.” The Pew Research Center's 2010 Global Attitudes project showed a mere 17 percent of all Pakistanis polled held a favorable view of the U.S. and nearly 60 percent described the U.S. as an enemy.
 
American money has been used to fund everything from education projects to agricultural development, but money has been slow to hit the ground and has not been used in ways that directly affect most Pakistanis.

According to the Congressional Research Service, of the $20.7 billion allocated for Pakistan between FY2002 and FY2012, only $6.5 billion was "economic-related." The vast majority, $14.1 billion, was "security-related," and the lion's share of that, $8.8 billion, was military reimbursement for operations supporting the US/NATO mission across the border in Afghanistan, known as "Coalition Support Funds," or CSF.

Rizvi said that most Pakistanis fail to benefit from U.S.-funded projects, and very little is known among the everyday citizenry about just how American money is being used on the ground – a problem, he says, that is one of "public relations."

"Over the last few years, a lot of funding has gone to state educational facilities, to improve facilities, enable professors to go to other countries for conferences, but very few people know that its American money," said Rizvi. "The [Pakistani] government doesn't tell them it’s American money, they create the impression that the government is making this possible for them."

That same "public relations" strategy has meant that the establishment has failed to mobilize domestic support for the war on terror, despite the fact that 30,000 Pakistanis have died in terror-related incidents since 2001. Losses in that war – accidental or deliberate – are therefore met with greater public anger, by a population that believes its military is fighting an American war.

Treading lightly
In the days since the latest tragic border clash, there has been a flurry of high-level efforts made by U.S. diplomatic, military, and intelligence officials to reach out to their Pakistani counterparts.

The U.S. and NATO are using careful language. NATO called the incident "tragic and unintended." A joint statement by the U.S. Departments of Defense and State expressed "deepest condolences" and "sympathies" from Secretaries Leon Panetta and Hillary Clinton. Officials have pledged to fully investigate what actually transpired on the ground. 

Following the incidents in 2008 and 2010, the U.S. and Pakistan found enough common ground to continue working together. The strong language being used and decisions being taken by Pakistani officials suggest it won’t be as easy this time around.

Prime Minister Gilani has already made clear that "business as usual will not be there." But U.S. officials and analysts express confidence that, with enough time and enough concessions, the two sides will ultimately be forced to find a way forward once again.

Pakistan relies on U.S. money and international support to bolster its economy, said Rizvi, and the U.S. relies on Pakistan's cooperation to stabilize Afghanistan.

"They will both realize that they need each other. They will have to tolerate each other," he said.

That may come at a price. Some believe the U.S. will have to take steps to pacify elements that have supported it in the past – issuing a public apology, or agreeing to not publicly rebuke Pakistan any longer, among other possibilities.

Despite ongoing investigations, Georgetown’s Fair believes both sides' dependence on one another means the focus will be on moving forward, not definitively determining the facts.

"There is no answer to this that's going to be helpful," says Fair. "I don't believe we're ever going to get to the bottom of what actually happened."

See a Photo Blog: Pakistan releases first images of border posts attacked by NATO

By Amna Nawaz, NBC News Correspondent

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan –  Last week, a flyer was slipped under my door.

Advertising “Eid Services,” it offered “joint sacrifices” available during the upcoming Eid al-Adha celebration, and encouraged people to organize their neighbors and family into groups to purchase animals together for sacrifice.

It was new to me, but a reflection of the economic hardship facing Pakistan today. 

I spent my summers growing up in Pakistan. When our family visit coincided with one of the two Eid holidays each year, we observed the occasion in the same way millions of Muslims do across the world – by buying and having an animal sacrificed. 

---

My grandmother would have a goat brought to the house and tied up in the yard, and my sisters and I would marvel at the new “pet.” We would name it, feed it, and even take pictures with it. And then, sometime before dinner, we would be called back into the house and the goat would mysteriously disappear. We would go on to learn later in life that our Eid meals came courtesy of that goat, and that a certain portion every year was also donated to the needy, as is custom.

The practice of animal sacrifice, of course, is derived from the story of Abraham (Ibrahim, in Islam) and his willingness to sacrifice his son as a sign of obedience to God.  And though it’s not a requirement in Islam, those who can afford to purchase an animal for sacrifice – a goat, sheep, cow, or camel – are encouraged to do so.

But this year in Pakistan, that practice has been become more difficult for many to observe.

Major inflation
Inflation here currently sits at 11.5 percent. The price of transportation and goods has risen dramatically in the last few years, and so has the price of animals – nearly double in parts of the country, according to some reports.

Vendors in an animal market on the outskirts of Islamabad told us a goat they could sell last year for 6,000 rupees ($70), they now must sell for 12,000 ($140) to make a profit. And that’s the low end of the scale. Larger goats this year sell for anywhere from 20,000 to 25,000 rupees ($230 to $290). The starting price for cows in this market is 100,000 rupees (over $1,100).

That flyer slipped under my door is a sign of the times here in Pakistan. To balance their financial burdens with their religious duties, more and more families are now engaging in the newly-developed market and increasingly popular practice of cost-sharing their sacrificial animals.

Religious organizations, NGOs, local religious leaders, and enterprising teams like the one distributing flyers in my neighborhood are offering packages in which people book in advance a certain percentage of an animal. The middlemen are then responsible for selecting the animal, buying the animal, butchering the animal, and distributing the meat to the purchaser and the needy.

One such operation we visited in Islamabad had dozens of people filing in and out all day to pick up their pre-paid meat all of which was blessed and sacrificed in strict adherence to Islamic tradition by a team of butchers on site. The local religious leader in charge said he had 28 cows and over a dozen goats to get through that day. 

For Pakistanis already struggling to afford everyday items like food and gas, in a country currently ranked fourth from the bottom in a recent prosperity study by a London-based research group, celebrating this Eid holiday has been difficult.

One father at the animal market, who brought his 10 and 8-year-old sons for the first time to help him select their purchase, shrugged his shoulders when I asked if he could afford to spend the 8,000 rupees ($93) he had allocated for this Eid, nearly double from last year.

“I spent money coming here,” he said. “I will spend money getting home. I will spend money on food. I will spend money on new clothes for my children. And I have to spend money on this. What can I do? It is Eid. It is my duty.”

 By Amna Nawaz, NBC News Correspondent

ISLAMABAD — Nusrat Bhutto — the  widow of one of Pakistan’s former prime ministers and the mother of another –  died  Sunday in a Dubai hospital at the age of 82 after a long illness, according to a family spokesman.

The Bhuttos – because of their political clout, generations of influence, and personal tragedies – have often been called the Kennedys of Pakistan. Nusrat Bhutto, who was born in Iran but settled in Pakistan's southern city of Karachi, was this country's strong and statuesque equivalent to Jackie O.

News channels ran "breaking news" alerts to announce her death this weekend. Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani declared Monday a national holiday in Pakistan, with 10 days of mourning to follow. And pictures of Bhutto from throughout her life, stylishly clad and perfectly coifed, have been playing across the networks. She appears in these images as most Pakistanis will remember her – poised and confident. She smiles warmly and gracefully greets heads of state beside her husband. She claps primly to music, seated at a flawlessly-laid table at a state event. She sits with head held high, elegantly enveloped in an evening sari, and flanked by both daughters for a family portrait.

As the matriarch of Pakistan's most powerful political clan, Nusrat Bhutto was more than a witness to history. She was, herself, a force and a player in the country's churning system of governance.

---

Her husband, former Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, founded the Pakistan's People Party (PPP), which controls the government today. When he was overthrown in a military coup and hanged in 1979, she stepped into a leadership role, assuming the chairmanship of the PPP for the next four years until her daughter Benazir – who went on to twice serve as prime minister herself – assumed control. Bhutto later twice won elected seats in Pakistan's parliament.

But Nusrat Bhutto's family was known as much for their personal misfortune as they were for their political muscle. Her younger son, Shahnawaz, died in Paris in mysterious circumstances in 1985. Her elder son, Murtaza, was gunned down in Karachi in 1996. And her elder daughter Benazir, the first female elected to lead a Muslim country, was killed in a 2007 suicide attack after returning to Pakistan from exile in Dubai. Of Nusrat Bhutto's four children, only one – daughter, Sanam – is still alive.

According to a Pakistan's People Party spokesman, Nusrat Bhutto's body is being transported from Dubai to Pakistan today, for burial in the Bhutto family graveyard in the southern province of Sindh.