Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 2011

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
shaardula
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2591
Joined: 17 Apr 2006 20:02

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby shaardula » 12 May 2011 18:46

pakistan is not the only country in the world to have a grievance (real or imagined) with its neighbor nor the only country to have border dispute with its neighbour. how many of such countries behave like pakistan and how many of those have a reputation of pakistan? caught lying, cheating, time and again and again, harboring, nurturing the most retrogressive obscurantist ideologies and people from all across the world and exporting them to all across the world.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby RamaY » 12 May 2011 18:51

CRS garu +1 on Saraswatji's comment.

SaraswatJi that you first demonstrate some capability, and then brag about not using it

jagga
BRFite
Posts: 659
Joined: 22 Mar 2010 02:07
Location: Himalaya Ki God Mein

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby jagga » 12 May 2011 19:15

I can't find the post mentioning the history of Pakjab area that locals never revolted aginst invading armies or something. So not able to quote. Anyways I will reply.

If we go into the history of pre-partitoned punjab and areas surrounding it, we don't see any uprisings of the muslim populations of this area against the invaders, foriegn rulers or rulers of other Indian relegions.
Under Guru Gobind Singh Ji's orders ,Baba Banda singh bahadur led sikh forces attacked punjab to avenge the murder of Sikh Gurus, Guru Gobind Singh Ji's mother & childrens and prosecution of sikhs by mughals.This uprising against the Mughal administration in the Punjab region led to the development of the Dal Khalsa and the Sikh Misls, which eventually led to Ranjit Singh capturing Lahore in 1799 and establishing the Sikh Kindom of the Punjab.Mughal rulers did give some fight, but no uprisings led by local mango muslims have been reported.

Similarly, during the british rule Sikhs and Hindus were leading the revolt against Brits. No uprisings led by mango muslims have been reported.

Now take two famous instances of India History "Battle of Saragarhi" and "Indo-Pak 1971 War."In saragarhi, all 21 sikhs choose to fight to the death. In 1971 war 90000 paki mard decided to surrender. If they are so martial they would have fought to the last man. Both (Sikhs & Pakjabi) are sons of same soil but look at the diffrence.What happened in kargil?

I just ignore whenever I hear mussharaf types and some Indians say there are too many arms own by mango pakistanis and they would give a good fight. Pakis only know how to kill the weaker and unarmed. This is maximum their bravery can go. They are so oppurtunist , If there is a attack from India these mango abduls will be first to hide behind the burka of their sisters.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21161
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Prem » 12 May 2011 19:54

Jagga,
In Poak moment of stress /surrender we can always spread/send the message that we are onlee after Pakjabis and all Non Pakjabis can escape without harm if they want to save their skin from our wrath. Almost 80% Poakjabis are womenfolks, oldpoaks and children. We will have only 20% of these Lahori Poaks to be reformed by applying gentle techiniques like used by America , UQ and China to keep the peace in the region.
To finish the curse of terror, rectify the age old error
in South Asia.

Prasad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7492
Joined: 16 Nov 2007 00:53
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Prasad » 12 May 2011 20:34

Even if groper pushes the nuke button tomorow, Badmash will succeed him, call him a non-state actor and claim victory of demo-crazee onlee and that the state of pukistan never had anything to do with any attacks. Thats the state of their denial. I wonder why anyone still takes their non-state bullshit seriously. Does GoI really have any plan to take on a situation like this? Where official machinery is used to do something dastardly in plain sight and then those who did it are called 'rogue' elements. That way even an armoured offensive or a Kargil type "misadventure" can be blamed on a "rogue" general.

Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Johann » 12 May 2011 20:40

harbans wrote:i'm yet to get a hang of state actor - non-state actor classification, now a new one has come up: rogue elements.

I would use the 'Plausible deniability' terminology, rather than State-Non State or Rogue..if i wanted to present a fair picture. The AQ K episode was again not about State or Non State or Rogue for that matter. AQ K was the State's key person, not some shadowy operative within the state! The States stated policy was 'developing' Nukes, whatever way hook or crook.


AQ Khan absolutely can not be described as 'rogue', but he was no mere tool of the state either. By the early 1990s after Zia and Gulam Ishaq Khan were gone he *was* the state when it came to many nuclear issues.

In the 1988-1999 era Army chiefs of staff rotated out normally, unlike the periods of dictatorship, but civilian power was also unstable with a revolving door of prime ministers and presidents, while people like AQK were fixtures.

AQ Khan was not violating policy, or just following, he was settting it, which is not surprising given that his ego is large enough and gas filled enough to block out the sun on a clear day. The fact that he not only had the relationships and insitutional knowledge, but could bring in revenue rather than just ask for it made him even more powerful in a system where cash is king.

Its not surprising that Musharraf and AQ Khan clashed with each other in a battle of the blimps by 2001. The 2003-04 US exposure was a great way to cut AQK down further and reassert full, direct personal and institutional (army) control.

These kinds of turf wars are endemic in many places, but the extent to which personalities, and personality clashes tower over even the most strategic affairs is one of the defining aspects of Pakistan's mafia like establishment, and why it never gets very far. It is also the reason why the Army tends to be so powerful - even though its degenerated terribly since partition in terms of professionalism, it still shows more internal cohesion and professionalism than just about any other political institution. In the land of the blind the half-eyed goat is king.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby arun » 12 May 2011 22:21

X Posted from the ISI History and Discussions thread.

Anatol Lieven, Professor of war studies at King's College London in the New Statesman via Sonasol. Excepts from a longish article on the ISI in which India figures prominently:

Thursday, May 12, 2011

Inside Pakistan's spy network

Anatol Lieven
Published 12 May 2011

The ISI gorged on US money during the 1980s. Now that Osama Bin Laden is dead, can the west still buy its loyalty?

One reason why there are so many bizarre conspiracy theories in Pakistan is that there are so many conspiracies, as the past few weeks have amply demonstrated.

Many focus on the role of the country's principal spy network, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). Some liberal journalists believe that it exercises a decisive influence over Pakistan's media and politics and even secretly backs the Pakistani Taliban, whose rebellion has cost the lives of more than 3,500 soldiers and police - including 80 officers of the ISI.

These beliefs are often grossly exaggerated, but then again, what we do know of the ISI's activities is enough to give us pause. I find it entirely plausible that, from somewhere inside the ISI's headquarters in Islamabad - whose gleaming grandeur dwarfs any government office I have seen - the service was helping to shelter Osama Bin Laden. To believe otherwise, one would have to think that it was guilty of gross negligence. ………………….

The underfunded and poorly staffed IB loathes the ISI and some of the most vicious stories I have heard about the ISI's involvement in terrorism come from the IB. Needless to say, the lack of co-ordination between the three services has often been the despair of western counterterrorism officers. ……………….

The ISI's growth from a British-model intelligence organisation to a "state within a state" was the result of three processes. The first was the conflict with India, which, in one form or another, has been dragging on since both countries gained independence. This conflict and the acute paranoia it has created have profoundly shaped the Pakistani state and the ethos of its military.

The second was fear of internal revolt in Pakistan, which led the state to give the ISI a vital role in domestic intelligence. ………………

The third factor was the anti-Soviet war in Afghanistan. General Zia-ul-Haq used the ISI to channel US and Arab aid to the Afghan mujahedin. A good deal of this money stuck to the ISI's fingers, giving it secret sources of funding independent of the Pakistani military, let alone the state. ………………………

Fatefully, when the revolt against India broke out in Kashmir in 1989 (initially as a spontaneous protest against Indian misrule), the state and military charged the ISI with the task of directing help to the Kashmiri rebels. It did this by supporting the Pakistani militant groups that it had backed in Afghanistan as they carried out guerrilla and terrorist attacks against Indian targets. These later spread more widely and became more indiscriminate. ……………………….

So, where does this history leave the ISI today, especially in the context of the Bin Laden affair? It goes without saying that the ISI is not under any sort of control by the Pakistani government. When I was asked on US television recently how President Asif Ali Zardari could not have known what his intelligence service might have been up to, I let out a hoot of incredulous laughter. The interviewer had clearly not been following Pakistan very closely. Contempt for civilian politicians and ministers is strong in the military and stronger still among the retired ISI officers to whom I have spoken - in part because they know so much about these politicians' corruption, murders, sexual behaviour and family lives.

A much more difficult question is whether the ISI is even under the full control of the Pakistani military or whether it, and groups within it, are following their own agenda. This is of crucial importance in relation to Bin Laden's death and Pakistan-based terrorism more generally; for not only does it raise the possibility of the ISI's complicity in terrorism against the west (as opposed to the Taliban revolt in Afghanistan), it suggests the possibility of Islamist subversion within the Pakistani military. That points towards the threat of mutiny within the army, the collapse of the state and loss of control over Pakistan's nuclear stockpiles. This possibility still seems pretty remote to me unless Washington were to attack Pakistan directly (for example, following a terrorist attack on the US). …………………….

What mindset has shaped the behaviour of Pakistan's generals, including those of the ISI? By far the most important aspect of a Pakistani senior soldier's identity is that he (or, very occasionally, she) is an officer. The Pakistani military is a profoundly shaping influence. It would be hard to find a more different group of men than the generals Ayub Khan, Yahya Khan, Zia, Mirza Aslam Beg, Asif Nawaz, Jehangir Karamat, Musharraf and Kayani in terms of social origin, character and attitude to religion. Yet all have been first and foremost military men.

This in turn means that their ideology was, or is, rooted primarily in Pakistani Muslim nationalism. As institutions, the military and the ISI are tied to Pakistan, not the universal Muslim caliphate of Islamists' dreams. If it is true, as so many officers have told me, to say that "No army, no Pakistan", it is equally true to say that "No Pakistan, no army". ………………………

Nationalism can be a positive and even indispensable force for the development of a country. Modern Turkey, so often held up to the rest of the world as a model, was founded on an ardent and ruthless nationalism.

The problem is that it may be wrapped up with particular differences and enmities. Pakistan's existential hostility is to India. Just as the US national security state was shaped by the cold war, so the Pakistani national security state (vastly more powerful in its own country) was born chiefly out of fear of, and hostility to, India. This is felt most strongly in the military and, in the ISI, it is a raging monomania.

Asked to describe an average Pakistani officer today, the retired lieutenant general Tanveer Naqvi told me: "He has no doubt in his mind that the adversary is India - and that the raison d'être of the army is to defend [the country] against India. His image of Indians is of an anti-Pakistan, anti-Muslim and treacherous people. So he feels that he must be always ready to fight against India." …………………….

The shelter given by the Pakistani military to the Afghan Taliban and its allies is based on a belief that the US is sure to fail in Afghanistan and that civil war will follow the US's withdrawal. In that civil war, India will use its allies to encircle Pakistan strategically.

Thus, Pakistan, too, must have allies - and the only one available is the Taliban. That stands even though senior officers know very well that, in the 1990s, despite all the help Pakistan had given the Taliban, it repeatedly kicked the country in the teeth.
On the whole, Pakistan has given shelter, not support, to the Taliban. But the ISI - perhaps through a notorious, ultra-secret branch, the "S wing" - has given some direct help to its Haqqani network (in its 2008 and 2009 attacks on the Indian embassy in Kabul, for example).

As for LeT and the other anti-Indian militant groups, the Pakistani military and the ISI insist that they must keep them close in order to restrain them from attacking India, as well as making sure that they do not launch or help in terrorist assaults on the west.

As a result, the Pakistani courts have overturned the ban on LeT's public organisation, Jamaat-ud-Dawa, and refused to convict the LeT leader, Hafiz Saeed, on terrorism charges. There is a fear in the Pakistani establishment that a crackdown on LeT of the kind demanded by Delhi and Washington would result in its members joining the revolt of the Pakistani Taliban and that the revolt would spread to Punjab. It would also remove any constraint on LeT from hatching terror plots against the west.

In seeking to deflect western criticism, the ISI points to its helpfulness in the past in capturing al-Qaeda leaders and helping to identify terrorist plots against Britain and the US. Those arrested with ISI participation include two of the most senior figures apart from Bin Laden: Ramzi Bin al-Shibh and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, both of whom are being held in detention in Guantanamo Bay. ……………………..

In 2009, I had a horrifying conversation with the journalist and analyst Zaid Hamid, who had been recommended to me by a senior ISI officer as an interesting person to meet.

Hamid is a self-described Pakistani neoconservative and, like some neocons of my acquaintance in Washington, his favourite word seemed to be "ruthless".

"We say that if India tries to break up Pakistan by supporting insurgents such as the Baloch nationalists, then our response should be to break up India," he told me. "India is not nearly as strong as it looks. The fault lines of the Indian federation are much deeper than those of Pakistan: Kashmir, the Naxalites, Khalistan, Nagaland, all kinds of conflicts between upper and lower castes, tribals, Hindus and other religions, and so on. If we were to support these insurgencies, India would cease to exist."

Kashmir aside, there is no evidence that the ISI is supporting any of these insurgencies within India. But Hamid's apparent closeness to the ISI makes these views deeply alarming - although, to be fair, they are also quite widely shared in Pakistani society and attract a mass audience to his television programme.

If Hamid's views are representative of elements within the ISI, we must conclude that the service remains determined to strike India again at some point in future, using Islamist militants. And given that the US is increasingly seen in Pakistan as an ally of India, there is a good chance that Americans will be among the victims of any attack on high-profile targets in India. That is what happened in 2008 in Mumbai, when the gunmen searched for those with US and British passports. ……………………..

One thing is clear: the ISI should be brought under much greater state control. This will require a détente between India and Pakistan that would reduce the anti-Indian paranoia in Pakistani society which gives the military and the ISI their legitimacy. But this is not going to happen any time soon and, in the meantime, we are doomed to try to co-operate with the ISI - without trusting it an inch.


From here:

Sonasol Blogspot

saip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3803
Joined: 17 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby saip » 12 May 2011 22:44

Link Please?

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7044
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby JE Menon » 12 May 2011 22:47

Source please.

24.7% true.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby svinayak » 12 May 2011 22:47

http://oshawa.ontario.crwenewswire.ca/? ... 1092209498

India is Supporting Pakistan Taliban Reveals Wikileaks
Dec 9th, 2010

Could be a fake news and these guys are using such false news

Rajdeep
BRFite
Posts: 491
Joined: 23 Aug 2010 20:48

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Rajdeep » 12 May 2011 22:54

Here you go Mulla Acharya , its fake onlee.

Acharya wrote:http://oshawa.ontario.crwenewswire.ca/?p=520&aidref=A1092209498

India is Supporting Pakistan Taliban Reveals Wikileaks
Dec 9th, 2010

Could be a fake news and these guys are using such false news


Pakistani Media Fakes Wikileaks-Cables

http://ojihad.wordpress.com/2010/12/11/pakistani-media-fakes-wikileaks-cables/

on December 9th, “The News”, a major Pakistani newspaper outlet, was boosting its frontpage news. It seems like the Wikileaks diplomatic cables released two weeks ago revealed Pakistan´s arch-rival India was supporting Taliban and al-Qaeda forces in the tribal areas of Waziristan.

“Another cable indicated involvement of top Indian Army leadership in engaging Hindu extremist militants to carry out certain terror operations to keep Indian Muslims on the back foot and to keep pressure on neighbouring Pakistan’s Army and intelligence agencies, particularly the Inter-Services Intelligence.”, the News wrote.


Pakistani media publish fake WikiLeaks cables attacking India

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/09/pakistani-newspaper-fake-leaks-india

If accurate, the disclosures would confirm the worst fears of Pakistani nationalist hawks and threaten relations between Washington and New Delhi. But they are not accurate.

An extensive search of the WikiLeaks database by the Guardian by date, name and keyword failed to locate any of the incendiary allegations. It suggests this is the first case of WikiLeaks being exploited for propaganda purposes.

Mahendra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4411
Joined: 11 Aug 2007 17:20
Location: Chronicling Bakistan's Tryst with Dysentery

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Mahendra » 12 May 2011 22:55

Acharya wrote:http://oshawa.ontario.crwenewswire.ca/?p=520&aidref=A1092209498

India is Supporting Pakistan Taliban Reveals Wikileaks
Dec 9th, 2010

Could be a fake news and these guys are using such false news



The Views and Opinions Expressed by the author are his or her opinions only and do not necessarily reflect those of this Web-Site or its agents, affiliates, officers, directors, staff, or contractors. The author at the time of this article did not own any shares or receive any consideration financial or otherwise from any company or person mentioned or referred to in the article.

Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Johann » 12 May 2011 22:58

Reading Zaid Hamid and the PA/ISI's odd conviction that the Indian Republic is more vulnerable and fragile than Pakistan a few thoughts occurred to me.

Its interesting that someone as anti-Indian as Churchill changed his views on the Republic's viability only five years after independence, while the Pakistani military continues to believe that India is somehow only barely holding together.

Besides prejudice, Churchill's view was based on a conviction that the liberals in India would never have the gumption to stand up to the communists and communalists, and that democracy would collapse and the nation would splinter. Nehru and the Congress Party's success in making democracy work while standing up to internal extremist forces brought about a change in his opinion.

In the Pakistani military's case these views have lasted decades despite living next door. Its much more of the PA's total lack of appreciation for the cohesive power that a political system that provides representation and bargaining can bring. This is the classic mistake that authoritarian systems make when judging the strength and resilience of democratic systems. It is a blind spot - if they realised how powerful democracy was they wouldn't be fighting it so hard both internally and externally.

The Pakistani Army's power and appeal is only a symptom of the biggest problem; a powerful but feckless Muslim landed class that has wanted power and wealth without responsibility. Iran had exactly the same problem (after all look at the ease with which Shia Iranians moved to the Sunni Mughal administration) for centuries until the gradual growth of a new national consciousness. Fear and resentment of external powers and a narrative of victimhood did help cement that consciousness, but larger than that was a commitment to progress and modernity which even the Islamic revolution could not unseat. Until Pakistan has the equivalent of the Shah's 'white revolution' and its literacy corps there's no hope of anything good eventually coming out of Pakistan's fear of India and America. If it ever does happen, then eventually, like Iran, Pakistan can become a normal nation even if it is a violent and dangerously confrontational road to normalcy.

RSoami
BRFite
Posts: 771
Joined: 23 Apr 2010 14:39

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby RSoami » 12 May 2011 23:00

Its very very old news that pakistani media faked wikileaks..
Ouch....Its someone with lots of posts under his belt... :mrgreen: :P
Thanks
Regards

http://ojihad.wordpress.com/2010/12/11/ ... ks-cables/

The British Guardian had an article about Pakistani media´s false report and cited some editors of the newspapers as saying the publication was a mistake due to “”agencies’ copy”. Islamabad-based news agency “Online News” was held responsible for spreading the fake news on the alleged Wikileaks cables.


It suggests this is the first case of WikiLeaks being exploited for propaganda purposes.



This morning's stories disparaging Indian generals – one is said to be "rather a geek", another to be responsible for "genocide" and compared to Slobodan Milosevic – is counterbalanced by accounts of gushing American praise for Pakistan's top generals. :eek:

Last edited by RSoami on 12 May 2011 23:15, edited 3 times in total.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17016
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Rahul M » 12 May 2011 23:02

>> Churchill changed his views on the Republic's viability only five years after independence

OT, details please, in UK thread.

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7044
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby JE Menon » 12 May 2011 23:04

RSoami,

Chill... It appears to be an honest mistake...

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby svinayak » 12 May 2011 23:04

Rahul M wrote:>> Churchill changed his views on the Republic's viability only five years after independence

OT, details please, in UK thread.

As recently even US officials hold the same position that India will not stand viable as one country. So this is still in vogue.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby arun » 12 May 2011 23:05

saip wrote:Link Please?


JE Menon wrote:Source please.

24.7% true.


See here:

arun wrote:Anatol Lieven, Professor of war studies at King's College London in the New Statesman via Sonasol. Excepts from a longish article on the ISI in which India figures prominently {Snipped}:...............................

From here:

Sonasol Blogspot
Last edited by arun on 12 May 2011 23:06, edited 1 time in total.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby svinayak » 12 May 2011 23:06

JE Menon wrote:RSoami,

Chill... It appears to be an honest mistake...

Got some connection with some Indian reporters now and can syndicate a report that Pak creates false news.

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7044
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby JE Menon » 12 May 2011 23:07

Arun, it was not your story we were asking a link to. Acharya had posted a story about Indian involvement in Balochistan, and then deleted it. He posted it later, under mine and saip's requests, with a link....

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby svinayak » 12 May 2011 23:08

JE Menon wrote:Arun, it was not your story we were asking a link to. Acharya had posted a story about Indian involvement in Balochistan, and then deleted it. He posted it later, under mine and saip's requests, with a link....

:D I did not delete it but without my knowledge it got deleted. Amusing.

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7044
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby JE Menon » 12 May 2011 23:10

No doubt.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby arun » 12 May 2011 23:11

JE Menon wrote:Arun, it was not your story we were asking a link to. Acharya had posted a story about Indian involvement in Balochistan, and then deleted it. He posted it later, under mine and saip's requests, with a link....


Thanks for clearing that up JEM, I was flumoxxed.

Venkarl
BRFite
Posts: 962
Joined: 27 Mar 2008 02:50
Location: India
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Venkarl » 12 May 2011 23:22

Johann wrote:...the liberals in India would never have the gumption to stand up to the communists and communalists, and that democracy would collapse and the nation would splinter. Nehru and the Congress Party's success in making democracy work while standing up to internal extremist forces brought about a change in his opinion...


this splintering needs some facilitator/ing/approving person on our side......and last time someone who facilitated and approved the division of Indian subcontinent....he was shot dead....this came as rude warning to wannabe pissful personalities in INC.....so, post-independence....no such facilitation experiments on the lines of Churchil's conviction.... later on...we had Gems like LBS, IG and PVNR....who from time to time protected India from splintering when it actually had all planets in wrong houses...

added later:

sorry for OT

vijayk
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4588
Joined: 22 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby vijayk » 12 May 2011 23:40

arun wrote:X Posted from the ISI History and Discussions thread.

Anatol Lieven, Professor of war studies at King's College London in the New Statesman via Sonasol. Excepts from a longish article on the ISI in which India figures prominently:

Thursday, May 12, 2011

Inside Pakistan's spy network

Anatol Lieven
Published 12 May 2011

The ISI gorged on US money during the 1980s. Now that Osama Bin Laden is dead, can the west still buy its loyalty?

One reason why there are so many bizarre conspiracy theories in Pakistan is that there are so many conspiracies, as the past few weeks have amply demonstrated.

Many focus on the role of the country's principal spy network, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). Some liberal journalists believe that it exercises a decisive influence over Pakistan's media and politics and even secretly backs the Pakistani Taliban, whose rebellion has cost the lives of more than 3,500 soldiers and police - including 80 officers of the ISI.

These beliefs are often grossly exaggerated, but then again, what we do know of the ISI's activities is enough to give us pause. I find it entirely plausible that, from somewhere inside the ISI's headquarters in Islamabad - whose gleaming grandeur dwarfs any government office I have seen - the service was helping to shelter Osama Bin Laden. To believe otherwise, one would have to think that it was guilty of gross negligence. ………………….

The underfunded and poorly staffed IB loathes the ISI and some of the most vicious stories I have heard about the ISI's involvement in terrorism come from the IB. Needless to say, the lack of co-ordination between the three services has often been the despair of western counterterrorism officers. ……………….

The ISI's growth from a British-model intelligence organisation to a "state within a state" was the result of three processes. The first was the conflict with India, which, in one form or another, has been dragging on since both countries gained independence. This conflict and the acute paranoia it has created have profoundly shaped the Pakistani state and the ethos of its military.

The second was fear of internal revolt in Pakistan, which led the state to give the ISI a vital role in domestic intelligence. ………………

The third factor was the anti-Soviet war in Afghanistan. General Zia-ul-Haq used the ISI to channel US and Arab aid to the Afghan mujahedin. A good deal of this money stuck to the ISI's fingers, giving it secret sources of funding independent of the Pakistani military, let alone the state. ………………………

Fatefully, when the revolt against India broke out in Kashmir in 1989 (initially as a spontaneous protest against Indian misrule), the state and military charged the ISI with the task of directing help to the Kashmiri rebels. It did this by supporting the Pakistani militant groups that it had backed in Afghanistan as they carried out guerrilla and terrorist attacks against Indian targets. These later spread more widely and became more indiscriminate. ……………………….

So, where does this history leave the ISI today, especially in the context of the Bin Laden affair? It goes without saying that the ISI is not under any sort of control by the Pakistani government. When I was asked on US television recently how President Asif Ali Zardari could not have known what his intelligence service might have been up to, I let out a hoot of incredulous laughter. The interviewer had clearly not been following Pakistan very closely. Contempt for civilian politicians and ministers is strong in the military and stronger still among the retired ISI officers to whom I have spoken - in part because they know so much about these politicians' corruption, murders, sexual behaviour and family lives.

A much more difficult question is whether the ISI is even under the full control of the Pakistani military or whether it, and groups within it, are following their own agenda. This is of crucial importance in relation to Bin Laden's death and Pakistan-based terrorism more generally; for not only does it raise the possibility of the ISI's complicity in terrorism against the west (as opposed to the Taliban revolt in Afghanistan), it suggests the possibility of Islamist subversion within the Pakistani military. That points towards the threat of mutiny within the army, the collapse of the state and loss of control over Pakistan's nuclear stockpiles. This possibility still seems pretty remote to me unless Washington were to attack Pakistan directly (for example, following a terrorist attack on the US). …………………….

What mindset has shaped the behaviour of Pakistan's generals, including those of the ISI? By far the most important aspect of a Pakistani senior soldier's identity is that he (or, very occasionally, she) is an officer. The Pakistani military is a profoundly shaping influence. It would be hard to find a more different group of men than the generals Ayub Khan, Yahya Khan, Zia, Mirza Aslam Beg, Asif Nawaz, Jehangir Karamat, Musharraf and Kayani in terms of social origin, character and attitude to religion. Yet all have been first and foremost military men.

This in turn means that their ideology was, or is, rooted primarily in Pakistani Muslim nationalism. As institutions, the military and the ISI are tied to Pakistan, not the universal Muslim caliphate of Islamists' dreams. If it is true, as so many officers have told me, to say that "No army, no Pakistan", it is equally true to say that "No Pakistan, no army". ………………………

Nationalism can be a positive and even indispensable force for the development of a country. Modern Turkey, so often held up to the rest of the world as a model, was founded on an ardent and ruthless nationalism.

The problem is that it may be wrapped up with particular differences and enmities. Pakistan's existential hostility is to India. Just as the US national security state was shaped by the cold war, so the Pakistani national security state (vastly more powerful in its own country) was born chiefly out of fear of, and hostility to, India. This is felt most strongly in the military and, in the ISI, it is a raging monomania.

Asked to describe an average Pakistani officer today, the retired lieutenant general Tanveer Naqvi told me: "He has no doubt in his mind that the adversary is India - and that the raison d'être of the army is to defend [the country] against India. His image of Indians is of an anti-Pakistan, anti-Muslim and treacherous people. So he feels that he must be always ready to fight against India." …………………….

The shelter given by the Pakistani military to the Afghan Taliban and its allies is based on a belief that the US is sure to fail in Afghanistan and that civil war will follow the US's withdrawal. In that civil war, India will use its allies to encircle Pakistan strategically.

Thus, Pakistan, too, must have allies - and the only one available is the Taliban. That stands even though senior officers know very well that, in the 1990s, despite all the help Pakistan had given the Taliban, it repeatedly kicked the country in the teeth.
On the whole, Pakistan has given shelter, not support, to the Taliban. But the ISI - perhaps through a notorious, ultra-secret branch, the "S wing" - has given some direct help to its Haqqani network (in its 2008 and 2009 attacks on the Indian embassy in Kabul, for example).

As for LeT and the other anti-Indian militant groups, the Pakistani military and the ISI insist that they must keep them close in order to restrain them from attacking India, as well as making sure that they do not launch or help in terrorist assaults on the west.

As a result, the Pakistani courts have overturned the ban on LeT's public organisation, Jamaat-ud-Dawa, and refused to convict the LeT leader, Hafiz Saeed, on terrorism charges. There is a fear in the Pakistani establishment that a crackdown on LeT of the kind demanded by Delhi and Washington would result in its members joining the revolt of the Pakistani Taliban and that the revolt would spread to Punjab. It would also remove any constraint on LeT from hatching terror plots against the west.

In seeking to deflect western criticism, the ISI points to its helpfulness in the past in capturing al-Qaeda leaders and helping to identify terrorist plots against Britain and the US. Those arrested with ISI participation include two of the most senior figures apart from Bin Laden: Ramzi Bin al-Shibh and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, both of whom are being held in detention in Guantanamo Bay. ……………………..

In 2009, I had a horrifying conversation with the journalist and analyst Zaid Hamid, who had been recommended to me by a senior ISI officer as an interesting person to meet.

Hamid is a self-described Pakistani neoconservative and, like some neocons of my acquaintance in Washington, his favourite word seemed to be "ruthless".

"We say that if India tries to break up Pakistan by supporting insurgents such as the Baloch nationalists, then our response should be to break up India," he told me. "India is not nearly as strong as it looks. The fault lines of the Indian federation are much deeper than those of Pakistan: Kashmir, the Naxalites, Khalistan, Nagaland, all kinds of conflicts between upper and lower castes, tribals, Hindus and other religions, and so on. If we were to support these insurgencies, India would cease to exist."

Kashmir aside, there is no evidence that the ISI is supporting any of these insurgencies within India. But Hamid's apparent closeness to the ISI makes these views deeply alarming - although, to be fair, they are also quite widely shared in Pakistani society and attract a mass audience to his television programme.

If Hamid's views are representative of elements within the ISI, we must conclude that the service remains determined to strike India again at some point in future, using Islamist militants. And given that the US is increasingly seen in Pakistan as an ally of India, there is a good chance that Americans will be among the victims of any attack on high-profile targets in India. That is what happened in 2008 in Mumbai, when the gunmen searched for those with US and British passports. ……………………..

One thing is clear: the ISI should be brought under much greater state control. This will require a détente between India and Pakistan that would reduce the anti-Indian paranoia in Pakistani society which gives the military and the ISI their legitimacy. But this is not going to happen any time soon and, in the meantime, we are doomed to try to co-operate with the ISI - without trusting it an inch.


From here:

Sonasol Blogspot




Pakistan's existential hostility is to India. Just as the US national security state was shaped by the cold war, so the Pakistani national security state (vastly more powerful in its own country) was born chiefly out of fear of, and hostility to, India. This is felt most strongly in the military and, in the ISI, it is a raging monomania.


The sad thing is clueless like Christina Fair or Anatol Lieven keep peddling the same theory: First, it is all about Cashmere. Once you give it to the scared Pukes, they will go away. Now, at least this guys admits that it is existential hostility to India.

the ISI should be brought under much greater state control. This will require a détente between India and Pakistan that would reduce the anti-Indian paranoia in Pakistani society which gives the military and the ISI their legitimacy. But this is not going to happen any time soon and, in the meantime, we are doomed to try to co-operate with the ISI - without trusting it an inch.


How do achieve the detente? India has to cease to exist or Pukestan has to cease to exist. Until then, the scums won't sleep.

Instead of addressing this issue, the clueless all over the world keep giving an excuse after an excuse to the RAPE scums. If they are hunted like nazis and brought over to justice whether it is Mush or Kayani, they can be controlled. If you keep handing them excuses and money, why would the SCUMS change? The SCUMS act like servants in front of white masters, take their money/weapons and stab them in the back. Immediately, Christina Fair types come and bash India and give 10,000 excuse on why the Pukes deserve more weapons, nukes and cash.

Theo_Fidel

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Theo_Fidel » 13 May 2011 00:02

vijayk wrote:
the ISI should be brought under much greater state control. This will require a détente between India and Pakistan that would reduce the anti-Indian paranoia in Pakistani society which gives the military and the ISI their legitimacy. But this is not going to happen any time soon and, in the meantime, we are doomed to try to co-operate with the ISI - without trusting it an inch.


Immediately, Christina Fair types come and bash India and give 10,000 excuse on why the Pukes deserve more weapons, nukes and cash.


Vijay,

This belief permeates American society from tip to toe. I have talked to reasonable educated Americans on both the left and the right and it always ends the same way. We need to put pressure on India to create peace so TSP can progress or some such variant... ..this right after discussing why all attempts to bribe, cajole and threaten TSP to behave have failed...

Its crazy. You and I know TSP is psychotic but for some reason Americans fear TSP more than Indians do. Its almost like they are in a trance...

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17016
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Rahul M » 13 May 2011 00:05

Acharya wrote:
JE Menon wrote:Arun, it was not your story we were asking a link to. Acharya had posted a story about Indian involvement in Balochistan, and then deleted it. He posted it later, under mine and saip's requests, with a link....

:D I did not delete it but without my knowledge it got deleted. Amusing.

I deleted it because a) it did not have a link and b) it has already been thoroughly debunked. (check the date)

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby svinayak » 13 May 2011 00:05

Theo_Fidel wrote:
Immediately, Christina Fair types come and bash India and give 10,000 excuse on why the Pukes deserve more weapons, nukes and cash.

This belief permeates American society from tip to toe. I have talked to reasonable educated Americans on both the left and the right and it always ends the same way. We need to put pressure on India to create peace to Pakistanis can progress or some variant...

Its crazy. You and I know TSP is psychotic but for some reason Americans fear TSP more than Indians do. It almost like they are in a trance...

This is actually due to their view of the religion and the region in particular. It may be OT to discuss this in the forum.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby svinayak » 13 May 2011 00:07

Rahul M wrote:
I deleted it because a) it did not have a link and b) it has already been thoroughly debunked. (check the date)

It was my mistake but my goal is to collect these kind of information and create some mainstream news report on Pak perfidy.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17016
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Rahul M » 13 May 2011 00:07

without proper context that can be misleading.

Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Johann » 13 May 2011 00:18

Theo_Fidel wrote:
This belief permeates American society from tip to toe. I have talked to reasonable educated Americans on both the left and the right and it always ends the same way. We need to put pressure on India to create peace so TSP can progress or some such variant... ..this right after discussing why all attempts to bribe, cajole and threaten TSP to behave have failed...

Its crazy. You and I know TSP is psychotic but for some reason Americans fear TSP more than Indians do. Its almost like they are in a trance...



India fought Pakistan in four wars, either forcing them to a draw or trouncing them outright.

America on the other hand sees Pakistan as a nuclear state and the most second most populous country it has had to face down after China.

Think how much of a pain Iran, with half the population and no nukes has been. Pakistan turning in to something of the sort while they are still struggling to contain Iran and North Korea.....its not an appetizing thought if it seems like there is an alternative.

It will time, but Americans will eventually recognise that Kashmir is a false hope for many reasons, just as it has come to be widely accepted that Pakistan is untrustworthy and incubator for extremism.

surinder
BRFite
Posts: 1421
Joined: 08 Apr 2005 06:57
Location: Badal Ki Chaaon Mein

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby surinder » 13 May 2011 02:04

jagga wrote:I can't find the post mentioning the history of Pakjab area that locals never revolted aginst invading armies or something. So not able to quote. Anyways I will reply.

If we go into the history of pre-partitoned punjab and areas surrounding it, we don't see any uprisings of the muslim populations of this area against the invaders, foriegn rulers or rulers of other Indian relegions.
Under Guru Gobind Singh Ji's orders ,Baba Banda singh bahadur led sikh forces attacked punjab to avenge the murder of Sikh Gurus, Guru Gobind Singh Ji's mother & childrens and prosecution of sikhs by mughals.This uprising against the Mughal administration in the Punjab region led to the development of the Dal Khalsa and the Sikh Misls, which eventually led to Ranjit Singh capturing Lahore in 1799 and establishing the Sikh Kindom of the Punjab.Mughal rulers did give some fight, but no uprisings led by local mango muslims have been reported.

Similarly, during the british rule Sikhs and Hindus were leading the revolt against Brits. No uprisings led by mango muslims have been reported.

Now take two famous instances of India History "Battle of Saragarhi" and "Indo-Pak 1971 War."In saragarhi, all 21 sikhs choose to fight to the death. In 1971 war 90000 paki mard decided to surrender. If they are so martial they would have fought to the last man. Both (Sikhs & Pakjabi) are sons of same soil but look at the diffrence.What happened in kargil?

I just ignore whenever I hear mussharaf types and some Indians say there are too many arms own by mango pakistanis and they would give a good fight. Pakis only know how to kill the weaker and unarmed. This is maximum their bravery can go. They are so oppurtunist , If there is a attack from India these mango abduls will be first to hide behind the burka of their sisters.


Jagga Ji,

Well said!

I have said it before here: in the entire history of Pakjabis (to be more polite, I am referring to Muaselims of Punjab) have never had any war they have won, nor any conflict in which their fight is worth remembering. They have shown eagerness to beat the crap out of a helpless weak sick person, but never any courage that would inspire any praise. They are masters of bluff and bluster, and even bigger masters of elaborate byzantine plots and schemes. But bravery, that is totally foreign to these people.

They themselves acknowledge this indirectly, they have *NO* local hero to name their missiles, tanks, or ships or anything. They have to resort to either Afghan names or Arab names.

It does not get more pathetic than that.

Sudip
BRFite
Posts: 378
Joined: 28 Oct 2008 05:42
Location: Paikhana

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Sudip » 13 May 2011 02:07

What if the U.S. Actually Attempted to Seize Pakistan's Nukes?
I had contacted veteran British reporter Brian Coughley, South Asian defense analyst for Jane's, who also wrote War, Coups and Terror: Pakistan's Army in Years of Turmoil (Skyhorse Publishing, 2009). As recently as April of this year he wrote an article on Pakistan's nuclear security for Jane's Intelligence Review (requires paying a -- steep -- subscription fee). In my ATimes piece I wrote:

Cloughley's extensive experience with the Pakistani military has left him with respect for its professionalism and much less concern for the security of its nuclear weapons :roll: :roll: than Washington expresses.

Besides, British columnist Johann Hari wrote:

Every time the US military has war-gamed sending in troops . . . it has ended in a horrific bloodbath -- and the weapons still eluding their control.

Cloughley agreed.

It would, indeed, be a bloodbath if any attempt were made to insert special forces. How anyone in their right mind could even suggest such a scenario is beyond me.

Nevertheless, at my request, he provided one.

In spite of its being lunacy, the attempt . . . to clandestinely insert special forces teams . . . might well go ahead. This could be done by having them join the embassy in the guise of marine guards, or be accepted as part of a liaison or training mission, then, in civilian vehicles, moving to the various sites to attempt to take them over.

This could be concurrent with heliborne [air assault by helicopters] insertion from Afghanistan or carrier(s). There would have to be a large number of teams, but I'm not prepared to provide an assessment of how many.

The helicopter operation would have to involve complete dominance of Pakistan's airspace, mounted from Afghanistan and carriers from the Arabian Sea/Indian Ocean. This would excite the attention of the Pakistan Air Force which would attempt to deny control. The air war would be intense and end in favor of the USAF/USN, although their casualties would be high.

This would escalate into all-out war, and Pakistan would attempt to involve the UN, which would be vetoed by the US and the UK. China and Russia, for once, would join hands in condemnation. The entire Muslim world would go berserk.

It is possible -- just -- that some weapons could be taken over, but the sites are extremely well-guarded (although their ground-based air defenses are minimal). Fighting would be intense, with already earmarked army units coming to the aid of the guard units. By this time, the US Embassy would be under siege and all foreigners' lives would be at grave risk. There would be chaos on a very large scale indeed.

g.sarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2487
Joined: 09 Jul 2005 12:22
Location: MERCED, California

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby g.sarkar » 13 May 2011 03:56

Two articles from the Economist:
http://www.economist.com/node/18682829? ... d=18682829
Pakistan after bin Laden
Humiliation of the military men
Civilian leaders and the United States put pressure on the beleaguered general
...Pakistanis cannot agree what is more shocking, that bin Laden had skulked in a military town so close to the capital, Islamabad, or that Americans nipped in to kill him without meeting the least resistance. Either way, they know to blame the humiliated men in uniform. Columnists and bloggers even call for army bosses to fall on their swagger sticks.
http://www.economist.com/node/18682839
Pakistan and China
Sweet as can be?
Even an all-weather friendship has limits
....PAKISTAN’S ambassador to Beijing, Masood Kahn, was this week fully armed with metaphors to describe the robust friendship between the two countries. “We say it is higher than the mountains, deeper than the oceans, stronger than steel, dearer than eyesight, sweeter than honey, and so on.”
Enjoy,
Gautam

jrjrao
BRFite
Posts: 869
Joined: 01 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby jrjrao » 13 May 2011 04:01

Ejaz Haider goes all :(( :(( and says that Terroristan should now haul US to the UN to get punishment for violating Paki sovirginity.

As we can see, it is silly season in TSP.

Link

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Gerard » 13 May 2011 04:15

Fatefully, when the revolt against India broke out in Kashmir in 1989 (initially as a spontaneous protest against Indian misrule)


This is untrue.There was nothing spontaneous about it. It was ISI planned and executed. The timing was determined by the wind down of the Afghan war

In his autobiography, JKLF founder Ananullah Khan admits that Pakistan initiated the "revolt".

Pakistan’s then military ruler, General Ziaul Haq, also supported the notion of independence for Kashmir. Khan said the JKLF began bringing young men into Azad Kashmir from the Indian side in 1988, where they received training from the ISI. “The agreement was that we will bring boys from across and indoctrinate our ideology by ourselves. ISI trains them and they are sent back,” he said.


Khan claims that the ISI first established contact with the JKLF in early 1987 through the organisation's senior leader Dr.Farook Haider. Khan had just been deported from England and was in Karachi when he received Haider's message regarding the ISI's proposal.Although Khan initially asked Haider to finalise the deal with theISI ,he himself heald meetings with the Pakistani officials ar a later date.
Apparenntly, the deal was struck following an understanding on the part ofPakistani offiials that the ideological indoctrination of recruites would be an internal matter of the JKLF in which the ISI would not interfere. The JKLF was to rrecruit militantss in Indian administered Kashmir,bring them across the Line of Control(LoC) and deliver them to the ISI for training. Besides trainingthe ISI as also to provide weapons and logistical suppor to faciliate the launch of those militants in Indian administeed Kasmir to spark an insurgency.
Khan says that he went aheafd with the deal because the JKLF was told that General Zia supported an independenty Kashmir. "I remember that Zia had once said he wanted Kashmir to be a member of the Organisation ofIslamic Conference,which clearly meant an independent Kashmir. So I went ahead with the deal," he writes. According to Khan, another reason why the JKLF accepted the ISI's offer was the failure of the group's predecessor, the Jammu Kashmir National Liberation Front(JKNLF) to start an insurgency in Indian-administered Kashmir during the 60s and 70s due to a lack of "external support".

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Gerard » 13 May 2011 04:21

A much more difficult question is whether the ISI is even under the full control of the Pakistani military or whether it, and groups within it, are following their own agenda


AFAIK the ISI does not have a permanent staff. Officers from all three branches of the services (terrorist army, terrorist navy, terrorist air force) serve on rotation to the ISI.

The idea that the ISI is not under military control is absurd.


Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby Johann » 13 May 2011 05:13

If the PA does not exercise full control over the 'Security' Department of the ISI it is because it does not want to. There is a reason it is exempted from counter-intelligence supervision.

My own feeling is that if external pressure ever made it truly necessary the Pakistan Army would disband S department, but keep them on as contractors and outsource the work to them.

The S-department as I understand already has a higher percentage of permanent retired officers compared rotating serving officers.

People like Hamid Gul, Khalid Khwaja and Col. Imam paved the way for that sort of thing. Of course two out of the three took a bullet.

anupmisra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8284
Joined: 12 Nov 2006 04:16
Location: New York

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): May 8, 201

Postby anupmisra » 13 May 2011 05:22

jrjrao wrote:Ejaz Haider goes all :(( :(( and says that Terroristan should now haul US to the UN to get punishment for violating Paki sovirginity. As we can see, it is silly season in TSP. Link


What a dumb idea. To the UN? Haider should know better. Should learn to shut up when the cards are stacked against his country. The pakis never think the whole thing through. Pa'astanis have never tired themselves of wishful thinking (hawaii qilay), which often follows abject public humiliation. Whether its cricket (if only we had not lost those three quick wickets, we would have won that test) or the battlefield (if only the sun had not risen that early, we would have had an element of surprise). Of lately, this so-virginity thing is all about lost (was it ever found?) honor because of the sharp pain in the ass and nothing else gets the paki goat when their rear ends are being roasted over slow fire. Hauling us to the UN or an international court would only backfire on those sorry maroons. As it is the rest of world is peeved off by paki perfidy. Heaven help them if the court or the UN forces us or anyone else to release confidential information on exactly how the pakis came upon such severe humiliation. Then watch their UN representative do "another Bhutto".


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests