The Atlantic magazine, in its article with the title 'The ally from hell carried in the December 2011 issue has attacked Pakistan and its nuclear programme tooth and nail. However, the authors of the article, Jeffrey Goldberg and Marc Ambinder, who claim to have put in six months of research, have apparently never set foot in Pakistan and concocted their fabrication from the comfort of their arm chairs. Neither the leader of the Strategic Plans Division (SPD), the custodians of Pakistans nuclear arsenal and the secretariat of the Nuclear Command Authority, nor its mid-ranking officers have ever heard the names of these scribes, let alone talking to them. It was rather surprising, since the SPD is fairly transparent in interacting with both the national and international media. The fictional scenario of the Pakistan army chief calling up Lieutenant-General Khalid Kidwai (r), the director general of SPD in the aftermath of the May 2 attack in Abbottabad to eliminate Osama, perhaps is meant to lend credence to the 10,000 words fairytale conjured with malicious intent, and malign Pakistan and its nuclear assets. The tirade is so full of holes and contradictions that it is surprising how a journal of the repute of 'Atlantic lent space to it, unless it too is part of a more sinister and macabre propaganda. It commences with the preamble that Pakistan is an unstable and violent country located at the epicentre of global jihadism. That much is correct although we need not go into the discussion that the violence and instability has been caused by the US itself, by interfering in Pakistans domestic politics and its involvement in the war-on-terror at the behest of the US. In the same article, the authors respectfully acknowledge the professionalism of the Pakistan Army as well as the SPD, even quoting erudite scholars, yet they contradict themselves by claiming the SPD moves nuclear warheads on public transport. What could be more ridiculous than that? They claim that the SPD tries to hide the warheads from the US and not the terrorists. If that were true, the US would by now have taken action towards it or the terrorists stolen a nuke or two. Although it is extremely amateurish to imagine that a ragtag militia would be able to put together a sophisticated nuclear device and explode it by simply pilfering a warhead. To provide essence to the flavour of bigotry and deceit, the authors take the instance of the attacks on a bus carrying PAF personnel at Sargodha, another at a naval installation at Karachi and at the gates of Pakistans Ordnance Factory at Wah as targeting nuclear installations. Since neither the authors nor, for that matter, the CIA or State Department know the location of Pakistans nuclear arsenal what to say of the number of warheads it possesses (the authors quote General James Jones, former National Security Adviser to Obama as expressing no knowledge of the location of Pakistans nukes) it is preposterous to imply that the frequent attacks by the terrorist organisations on Pakistans armed forces personnel as retaliation for the successful operations by Pakistan Army to eradicate terrorism, as attacks on nuclear installations. The authors have even taken pains to publish a map indicating the supposed locations of Pakistans nuclear warheads. It must be relief for the custodians of the nukes to see how widely off mark they appear to be. In fact if the Abbottabad incident left any aftereffects, it must have been to analyse and augment security procedures and plug the gaps that were exposed in its aftermath. One swallow does not make a summer; hence the detractors of Pakistans nukes should give up the Walter Mittyish scenario being presented of nabbing and grabbing Pakistans nukes and failing that, maligning their custodians. In fact the authors have presented a factual comment about the US being the ally from hell and in the words of the authors, with a friend like this, who needs enemies?