Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): June 30, 2011

Mahendra · Post by **Mahendra** » 24 Jul 2011 13:39

http://www.ndtv.com/article/world/canad ... nal-121618

Canada said it had arrested a suspected Pakistani war criminal, the second such arrest made since the government listed 30 foreigners actively sought on Canadian soil.

Arshad Muhammad, 42, was arrested thanks to public tips, Public Safety Minister Vic Toews said in a statement yesterday.

The Toronto Sun said that Muhammad, who also goes by Certosa Aranci, was arrested after he was recognised in a store in Mississauga, just west of Toronto.

On Friday, authorities said they had arrested former Honduran soldier Cristobal Gonzalez-Ramirez, who had served in a special army unit in Honduras where he allegedly committed war crimes as a soldier.

Ottawa indicated that Muhammad was also "suspected of complicity in a war crime or a crime against humanity," without providing further details.

"The help that Canadians are providing to Canada Border Services is proving to be beyond what we had expected," said Toews. "Those who have been involved in war crimes or crimes against humanity will find no haven on our shores; they will be located, and they will face the consequences."

Muhammad's arrest came after the government published a list of 30 men accused of crimes against humanity this week - including their photos and birth dates - suspected of hiding on Canadian soil.

Read more at: http://www.ndtv.com/article/world/canad ... -121618&cp

Any idea what war crime this 42 yr old Pawki was responsible for

sum · Post by **sum** » 24 Jul 2011 13:58

No ‘Chaudhry’ needed in region
( Well, Unkil have been Chodrying Poak since 47)

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 24 Jul 2011 14:13

SwamyG wrote:http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers3/paper291.html
A few important points raised in 2001, is this still true? Or have the institutions been compromised in 10 years?

The above article about the Agra Summit shows how Naive US administrations have been about Kashmir, Instead of saying "US pushed Pak and India to talk" it is "Pak that has pushed US to setup this summit", I always used to wonder why ABV initiated Agra summit and the PR disaster which followed (Fortunately it was virtually dynamited by our Foreign Office and BJP)
Methinks Desh also "Hunted with the hound and ran with the Hare"

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 24 Jul 2011 14:30

Mahendra wrote:
Canada said it had arrested a suspected Pakistani war criminal, the second such arrest made since the government listed 30 foreigners actively sought on Canadian soil.
Arshad Muhammad, 42, was arrested thanks to public tips, Public Safety Minister Vic Toews said in a statement yesterday.
Ottawa indicated that Muhammad was also "suspected of complicity in a war crime or a crime against humanity," without providing further details.
Muhammad's arrest came after the government published a list of 30 men accused of crimes against humanity this week - including their photos and birth dates - suspected of hiding on Canadian soil.
Any idea what war crime this 42 yr old Pawki was responsible for

It could be one of many... Killing Kashmiri Civilians, killing Afghan civilian, Balochis, Ahmadiyas or even as a mercenary of any of the dozen mid-eastern despots. you name it Pakees are involved in it.

Gus · Post by **Gus** » 24 Jul 2011 16:25

Pakistan does not need chaudhry's. They need more Qadri's.

Patni · Post by **Patni** » 24 Jul 2011 16:38

Blast in Pak hotel during fashion show

A low intensity explosive device, believed to have been planted by religious extremists, went off at a hotel in Faisalabad city of Pakistan, where a fashion show was taking place, creating panic among the participants.

Members of Islami Jamiat Talaba (IJT), the student wing of the Jamaat-e-Islami (JI), are believed to have been involved in Saturday's incident in Faisalabad in Punjab province, officials said.

The low intensity blast created panic at the hotel and a good number of participants left the venue. The fashion show continued after the incident but concluded an hour ahead of schedule.

The organisers of the show said they had received threats from hardliners and had informed police about the matter. Before the show, some activists of IJT and Jamaat-e-Islami organised a protest at Chenab Club Chowk and demanded that the local administration stop the show. If this was not done, they would besiege the hotel and stop the event by force, the protesters said.

Officials of the police and district administration held talks with office-bearers of the two groups and convinced them to end their protest.

The hotel's marketing manager Zeeshan Ahmed said it had nothing to do with the show as it only provided a venue. A police officer said "a report on the incident" had been sent to superiors and no case had been registered against anyone.

"The JI and IJT had withdrawn their protest and left the place," he claimed.Officials of the police and district administration held talks with office-bearers of the two groups and convinced them to end their protest.

The hotel's marketing manager Zeeshan Ahmed said it had nothing to do with the show as it only provided a venue. A police officer said "a report on the incident" had been sent to superiors and no case had been registered against anyone.

"The JI and IJT had withdrawn their protest and left the place," he claimed.

seems pakis wont even blink for such "fire cracker blasts" anymore!!

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 24 Jul 2011 17:00

Gus wrote:Pakistan does not need chaudhry's. They need more Qadri's.

They also need more Mango Crates and lamp posts for the upcoming Thamashas in Pindi!!!

arun · Post by **arun** » 24 Jul 2011 18:29

Demonstration of the IED Mubarak variant of the IEDology of Pakistan :

Suicide Bomber Kills Pakistani Soldier, Wounds Several Others

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 24 Jul 2011 19:47

Brad Goodman wrote:US House panel backs restrictions on Pak aid

The narrow, party-based Friday vote – 23 for and 20 against – indicated that the bill would have a hard time clearing the Democrat-dominated Senate, although it might clear the Republican-dominated House where it would go next.
It is the overall HR 2583 that passed 23 ayes - 20 noes (scroll to the bottom of
http://www.internationalrelations.house ... _final.htm )

The Rohrabacker amendment was defeated 5-39. 34) "Rep. Rohrabacher offered an amendment, Rohrabacher 33; not agreed to by Roll Call vote 5 ayes – 39 noes." (same page as above).

Also see this:
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/h ... tions-bill

The House Foreign Affairs Committee worked late Wednesday night and into early Thursday morning on the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, and much of the work involved accepting amendments that would significantly limit U.S. foreign aid and improve the transparency of foreign aid programs.

By the time it adjourned at about 2 a.m. Thursday, the committee accepted two amendments that would cut off aid to specific countries. One, from Rep. Connie Mack (R-Fla.), would prohibit the use of funds for any program in Argentina, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Ecuador or Bolivia.

The other, from Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.), would prohibit any foreign assistance to countries that oppose the U.S. in the United Nations.

The committee reconvened at 9:15 a.m. to consider more amendments, including one from Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) that would limit assistance to Pakistan, a response to congressional complaints that the nation failed to fully aid the U.S. in finding Osama bin Laden. However, committee members rejected this amendment 5-39.

Last night, the committee accepted two amendments from Rep. Ted Poe (R-Texas). One would require the State Department to publicly list all foreign aid programs, money spent on these programs and other information. Duncan co-sponsored that amendment.

Poe's other amendment would require an evaluation of the effectiveness of these foreign aid programs.

The committee also approved an amendment from Duncan requiring the government to make public a list of companies and other entities that receive U.S. foreign aid.

The committee accepted language from House Foreign Affairs Committee ranking member Howard Berman (D-Calif.) that would set goals for foreign aid programs, such as ending poverty and supporting human rights and democracy.

On Thursday morning, committee members also considered a Berman amendment to strike the so-called Mexico City language in the bill, which prohibits aid to groups that promote or perform abortions overseas. But they rejected his proposal.

After committee passage, the bill would still need to be approved by the entire House.

Browing through the amendments to the bill (first URL above) one finds things like none of the foreign affairs appropriations may be used for global climate change, and so on. Which is why the overall bill passed 23-20 by party lines.

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 24 Jul 2011 19:56

Apologies if already posted.
http://www.rferl.org/content/whats_real ... 74063.html
"What's Really Behind The Violence In Karachi?
July 22, 2011
By Daud Khattak, Charles Recknagel
At the height of this month's bloodletting in Karachi, when people were dying in the crossfire of warring gunmen, Nawab Khan crouched at home, afraid to venture outside.
When he finally did go out, he found his textile shop had been burned to the ground.
"I've had my fabric store here for 30 years," he said. "When we came here, nothing was left. That was my business and everything is gone with that."
His story is repeated over and over in the port city, where recent fighting killed 120 people and looting reduced thousands of businesses to ruins.
And everywhere, as people sought answers to why the violence broke out on July 5 and lasted for a week, they feared it could happen again.
Without a doubt, the reasons for Karachi's volatility are complex. Just a few are the ethnic, religious, and linguistic differences that divide this port city, as well as the presence of militant groups.
Karachi has always been such a magnet for migrants and refugees that today every possible fault line is present among its 18 million residents.
Political Turf Wars
But the way the week-long bout of violence sbsided may also tell much about what was behind it. And that, perhaps more than anything else, is a power rivalry between the city's three largest political parties -- each with its own armed wing.
Curiously, the street fighting ended just before news came that one of the parties, which had recently left an uneasy alliance with its two rivals, signaled it would now rejoin them in Pakistan's ruling coalition. The reconciliation began early this week on July 18 and since then the guns in Karachi have been silent.
The partner which had broken ranks was the MQM (the Muttahida Quami Movement), a local party whose power base is the native Urdu-speaking Mohajirs. Once refugees who came with the partition of India in 1947, they today are the largest ethnic group in Karachi.
Jilted was the PPP (Pakistani Peoples Party), the national party which leads the ruling coalition but which, in Karachi, is based in the historically indigenous Sindhi-speaking population.
......."
Gautam

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 24 Jul 2011 19:59

The China provisions of the act are worth noting:
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts ... _palestine

On China, Ros-Lehtinen's bill would call for a U.S. consulate in Tibet and a Tibet interest section in the U.S. embassy in Beijing. It would also eliminate the East-West Center in Hawaii, a think tank studying U.S.-China relations, and prohibit funding for the U.S.-China Center of Excellence on Nuclear Security that the two countries agreed to establish in January.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 24 Jul 2011 20:14

Khaleej Times: Notice from where the report emanates - Islamabad, not Washington DC - that is a sign that the reporting is all screwed up.

ISLAMABAD — US House Foreign Affairs Committee approved on Friday a bill that would defund a $7.5 billion aid to Pakistan programme if signed into law, dealing a serious blow to already strained relations between the two allies.

On Thursday, the panel had rejected a far-reaching move proposed by Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican, which sought to block all aid to Pakistan because of its alleged reluctance to combat terrorists.

Incidentally, Ron Paul was absent from this vote (as you can find from the records I've posted previously.

Congressman Ron Paul, the lone Republican dissenter, warned that the US could not afford to isolate Pakistan and that the restrictions would only fan anti-US feelings in that “sensitive region” of the world without achieving much.

Ron Paul, by the way, is against all foreign aid, including foreign aid to Pakistan.
http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-05-05/ron-p ... -pakistan/
Ron Paul doesn't want the US to act like a bully ("we'll pull aid unless you do...) but he doesn't want the US to provide aid at all, to anyone.

Also:
http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-05-16/ron-p ... stan-next/

Dylan Ratigan: Your thoughts on the actual way forward, in other words we know what your opinions are and we know what your values are, we also know the reality is we’re involved in an incredibly conflicted and inconsistent set of relationships that go back decades, where would you begin?

Ron Paul: We had to reverse the trend and you’re right, we’re very much involved to turn a key and the switch and be out of all the mess in one day or two is going to be very difficult. But I think the explanation that we don’t intend to run these countries and occupy these countries and own these countries would be a big change, why is it that we continue to bomb Pakistan and the chaos that’s going on over there, no wonder it’s trouble dealing with their government, cause their government and their people are separated, we in a way are inadvertently and some people claim on purpose is we are causing chaos in Pakistan, I am frightened, I think we’re going to have troops in Pakistan six months or a year from now because they’re going to say “well there’s total chaos in there.”

But how can we deal with a country that we give them both billions of dollars at the same time we’re bombing them, just recently we bombed them and the civilians once again were killed, why wouldn’t they get upset with us? So I think the nature of our foreign policy has to totally change and besides we can afford it, even if people say “I just disagree with Ron Paul completely on foreign policy,” they can’t disagree with the fast that we’re out of money, so if they don’t cut some of that militarism, they got to cut food stamps for the poor and of course I don’t think that’s the right priority.

Ron Paul 2009, on Pakistan:- not using bombs and bribes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZPTRrPg4bY

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics ... 07-20.html

JUDY WOODRUFF: Two other quick things internationally. You said you opposed the U.S. raid into Pakistan that led to the killing of Osama bin Laden. You also are - would do away with, in essence, the CIA. Why do - why did you oppose the raid, and what would you put in the place of the CIA?

REP. RON PAUL: Well the question to me was, could it have been done differently? I was just saying it could be done differently. I mean, all this does was raise questions. And I predicted that this would lead to a lot of resentment. And just think of the chaos in Pakistan and the mess that we have; we both bomb them, and we give them money, and then the people hate their own government because their own government's a puppet of ours.

My frustration with bin Laden was, it took so long.

JUDY WOODRUFF: And the CIA, you would -

REP. RON PAUL: I would - I don't think the CIA should be a military arm of the government dropping bombs secretly. You can't even - you can't even separate the two. You don't even know who is controlling the bombing of this country now.

jash_p · Post by **jash_p** » 24 Jul 2011 20:28

Browing through the amendments to the bill (first URL above) one finds things like none of the foreign affairs appropriations may be used for global climate change, and so on. Which is why the overall bill passed 23-20 by party lines.

It means Democrats in general pro pakis and republican generally anti pakis, there are few exceptions.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 24 Jul 2011 20:40

^^^ whatever. The full text of the legislation HR2583 is here ( http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112h ... 2583ih.pdf ) (PDF file).

The real lesson is - if the byline for news emanating from Washington is Islamabad, then don't believe it. It has passed through the Pakistani filters and is been subjected to Lahori Logic, Madrassa Math, 'Pindi Pinglish and Peshawari perversion, and is no longer reliable.

ranjbe · Post by **ranjbe** » 24 Jul 2011 21:31

^^^^

and add Isloo insanity!

ranjbe · Post by **ranjbe** » 24 Jul 2011 21:51

The so-called Paki war criminal was involved in terrorist acts against Pakiland as part of an Islamist organisation (a bad Taliban, as Pakis say, a miscreant). Canada was after him since 2001, when TSP and the West were good buddies. Strange Canada is sucking up to TSP now by announcing his capture.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2011/07/23 ... 07866.html

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 24 Jul 2011 21:53

jash_p wrote:
Browing through the amendments to the bill (first URL above) one finds things like none of the foreign affairs appropriations may be used for global climate change, and so on. Which is why the overall bill passed 23-20 by party lines.
It means Democrats in general pro pakis and republican generally anti pakis, there are few exceptions.

Which means Indian Americans should weigh their electoral choices more carefully next time wrt both votes and money.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 24 Jul 2011 22:00

jash_p wrote:It means Democrats in general pro pakis and republican generally anti pakis, there are few exceptions.

Or the Republicans in general are unprincipled liars. It was a Republican president who kept giving TSP a pass on the Pressler amendment certification while they built their nukes.

Sriman · Post by **Sriman** » 24 Jul 2011 22:02

jash_p wrote: It means Democrats in general pro pakis and republican generally anti pakis, there are few exceptions.

Somebody must have forgotten to send that memo to Eisenhower,Nixon,Reagan and Bush.

Samudragupta · Post by **Samudragupta** » 24 Jul 2011 22:12

ISI is using both the Mohajirs and the Pustuns to fight out each other????

CC- Karachi (former DG - internal ISI) Zaheer Ul Islam has remained neutral in Karachi & refused to bring on the army into Karachi

krithivas · Post by **krithivas** » 24 Jul 2011 23:13

The psychoanalysis of Pakistan
http://tribune.com.pk/story/213755/the- ... f-pakistan

...... his clothes drenched, his hair wild, his shirt unbuttoned, his hands covered in mud. “This is the last time I see you without an appointment, Pakistan.” The therapist tried not to reward Pakistan by obliging to his unannounced visits and subsequent tantrums, but this time, she knew that there was something terribly wrong.

Brilliant. This article deserves a place in the honor rolls of BR. Admins, please consider adding this to the startup posting of new TSP thread.

RSoami · Post by **RSoami** » 25 Jul 2011 01:23

Orphaned in his infancy with the premature death of his father, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, frequently beaten by his estranged brother (who also took away Pakistan’s favourite cashmere sweater), deeply insecure due to his short stature, and lacking any sort of guiding hand, Pakistan had a tormented upbringing.

Very nice indeed.
Thanks krithivasji

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 25 Jul 2011 03:08

Sriman wrote:
jash_p wrote: It means Democrats in general pro pakis and republican generally anti pakis, there are few exceptions.
Somebody must have forgotten to send that memo to Eisenhower,Nixon,Reagan and Bush.

You for got Gerald Ford. He as a Stand-in President gave so many goodies. Both Bushes were equally bad... the elder one had more cold-war heavies pushing for Pakees...

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 25 Jul 2011 03:30

krithivas wrote:The psychoanalysis of Pakistan http://tribune.com.pk/story/213755/the- ... f-pakistan
Brilliant. This article deserves a place in the honor rolls of BR. Admins, please consider adding this to the startup posting of new TSP thread.

Krithivas, this article is priceless, definitely should be part of the "Startup post" in every TSP thread.

Vivek_A · Post by **Vivek_A** » 25 Jul 2011 03:56

Patni wrote:Blast in Pak hotel during fashion show
A low intensity explosive device, believed to have been planted by religious extremists, went off at a hotel in Faisalabad city of Pakistan, where a fashion show was taking place, creating panic among the participants.

Members of Islami Jamiat Talaba (IJT), the student wing of the Jamaat-e-Islami (JI), are believed to have been involved in Saturday's incident in Faisalabad in Punjab province, officials said.

seems pakis wont even blink for such "fire cracker blasts" anymore!!

Hussain Haqqani, the paki ambassador to the US, was a member of the IJT.

ranjbe · Post by **ranjbe** » 25 Jul 2011 03:57

krithivas wrote:The psychoanalysis of Pakistan
http://tribune.com.pk/story/213755/the- ... f-pakistan
...... his clothes drenched, his hair wild, his shirt unbuttoned, his hands covered in mud. “This is the last time I see you without an appointment, Pakistan.” The therapist tried not to reward Pakistan by obliging to his unannounced visits and subsequent tantrums, but this time, she knew that there was something terribly wrong.
Brilliant. This article deserves a place in the honor rolls of BR. Admins, please consider adding this to the startup posting of new TSP thread.

What is really amusing is a comment by a Paki reader who says:

Simply Brilliant!! ..

Request the author to attempt a similar piece on India…

They have been so brainwashed that a knee-jerk equal-equal is a given

a_kumar · Post by **a_kumar** » 25 Jul 2011 04:54

^^

I wouldn't be too sure. That is how an "==" WKK would sound like as well!!

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 25 Jul 2011 05:17

^^^ Just who do you think the therapist is?

vijayk · Post by **vijayk** » 25 Jul 2011 05:18

http://www.virsanghvi.com/CounterPoint- ... spx?ID=633
Parallax View: Today’s Pakistan has more in common with Afghanistan under the Taliban

The first is the view of most Indians: that Pakistan is the global epicentre of terrorism, a nation that uses terror as an instrument of state policy and must therefore be regarded as a rogue state.

At the other extreme is the view of the Pakistani establishment (which is also the view of Manmohan Singh and other Indian peaceniks): yes, there are terrorists in Pakistan. But they are as much enemies of the Pakistani state as they are of India or the rest of the world. Pakistan is a victim of terror, not an official perpetrator. Pakistani forces have given their lives fighting terrorism and terror has damaged Pakistan itself much more than it has damaged any of the targets of Pakistani terrorists.

In between these two extremes is the view of the US – or at least the view that the US held till about a week ago. According to this position, Pakistan makes a distinction between the targets of terrorism. It knows it needs the US and so it is willing to cooperate with the CIA in hunting down Al Qaeda terrorists and others who threaten the West. On the other hand, it is quite happy to allow terrorists to target India, partly because it has a genuine sympathy with their aims (i.e. India is an evil, infidel power that commits atrocities on helpless Kashmiri Muslims, etc.) and partly because it believes that a covert war keeps India weakened.

But US policy-makers always believed that it was in Pakistan’s interests to cooperate with Washington. Yes, Islamabad needed to keep India weakened. And yes, it needed to sponsor some militant factions in Afghanistan (the Haqqani network, for instance) to ensure that it retained Afghanistan within its sphere of influence and maintained ‘strategic depth’.

But Pakistan had nothing to gain from terrorism aimed at the West. How did it benefit Islamabad if planes crashed into the World Trade Centre? How would Pakistanis gain if a train was bombed in Spain? And so on.

The Osama Bin Laden raid changes all that. It is hard to believe that Bin Laden could have lived in Pakistan for five years, next to a military academy, without evoking some suspicion. Moreover, the Americans now say that he was not the reclusive figurehead they once believed he was. A perusal of the cache of materials recovered from the raid suggests that he was in operational control of Al Qaeda.

I doubt if the Americans ever believed the Pakistani characterization of itself as a helpless victim of terrorism. As I wrote a month or so ago, Washington had become increasingly suspicious of Pakistan’s motives and had learnt not to trust either the Pakistani government or the military. But US policy-makers always believed that it was in Pakistan’s interests to cooperate with Washington. Yes, Islamabad needed to keep India weakened. And yes, it needed to sponsor some militant factions in Afghanistan (the Haqqani network, for instance) to ensure that it retained Afghanistan within its sphere of influence and maintained ‘strategic depth’.

But Pakistan had nothing to gain from terrorism aimed at the West. How did it benefit Islamabad if planes crashed into the World Trade Centre? How would Pakistanis gain if a train was bombed in Spain? And so on.

The Osama Bin Laden raid changes all that. It is hard to believe that Bin Laden could have lived in Pakistan for five years, next to a military academy, without evoking some suspicion. Moreover, the Americans now say that he was not the reclusive figurehead they once believed he was. A perusal of the cache of materials recovered from the raid suggests that he was in operational control of Al Qaeda. He was planning new attacks (including one on the US railroad) to mark the anniversary of the Twin Towers strike and had set up a makeshift TV studio within his compound where he recorded the chilling videos that were distributed throughout the world. He may not have had a phone link or an internet connection but he sure as hell had satellite TV and – as his home videos show – liked watching himself on global news channels.

If the Americans are right, then their theory about how Pakistan had a dual approach to terrorism no longer holds. It is one thing to send terrorists to Bombay on 26/11, quite another to host the world’s leading terrorist mastermind for at least five years while the Americans are desperately looking for him. If Bin Laden was actually in operational control of Al Qaeda and ran its operations less than a mile from a Pakistani military academy then there is no getting around it: Pakistan is the global epicentre of terrorism.
(Funny thing is that most Indians and BRF has been shouting this at the top of their voice for a long time. Just when this is proved and realized by the uncle, the traitors of UPA want to do every thing to bail out Pakis and save Paki shitstan...)

It turns out that the Pakistanis were lying (no big surprise there) and that Washington’s assessment was flawed. It was ordinary Indians (though, perhaps, not our government) that got it right. Pakistan is the global headquarters of Jihad Inc. It was the base from which Al Qaeda was led and directed. It was the safe haven that allowed Bin Laden to evade capture for so many years.

But the troubling question remains: how did it advance Pakistan’s interests to host Bin Laden? How is Pakistan benefitted from becoming the global epicentre of terrorism?

There are only two answers that make any sense and both have terrifying ramifications for India-Pakistan relations and for our security.

The first is that the Pakistani state is entirely incompetent when it comes to fighting terrorism. How can we expect the Pakistanis to crack down on the 26/11 masterminds if Bin Laden could live undetected next to a military academy for five years? There is no state in Pakistan. The system has collapsed. Terrorists can do what they like. Even somebody like Bin Laden, the world’s most wanted man, can flourish in today’s Pakistan.

I don’t personally accept this explanation but it is the logical corollary of Pakistan’s denials and excuses. If there was no complicity then there was a terrifying incompetence.

And that bodes badly for India’s security. We know that Pakistani terror groups treat us as their principal target. And now the Pakistanis are saying, in effect: sorry guys, nothing we can do about this. We looked for Bin Laden and couldn’t find him even though the fellow was living in a military area! So, how do you expect us to do anything about the terrorists who are murdering Indians? We are just so incompetent!

It isn’t that the Pakistani government is necessarily incompetent. It is that powerful sections of the establishment have come to believe in jihad as an ideology. Jihad defies rationale and goes against all logical considerations.

But jihadi terror has no logic and no rationale. It emerges out of fundamentalist fanaticism and seeks to cause death and destruction for no appreciable benefit. The destruction becomes an end in itself.

Osama Bin Laden was sponsored by jihadi elements within the Pakistani state who believed in the destruction of the West and in the destruction of all liberal societies. Their misreading of Islam convinced them that they were doing Allah’s will.

In some ways, this is a more terrifying prospect than the one we have already reckoned with. If Pakistan’s sponsorship of terrorism aimed at India is calculated then it is possible to negotiate or to take effective counter-measures.

But what do you do when your neighbour is increasingly controlled by jihadis who are opposed to every liberal value that you stand for? How can you negotiate with fundamentalist lunatics? How can you talk sense to suicide bombers?

I hesitate to accept this explanation because the Pakistani elite, small though it may be, includes decent and sensible liberals who are as appalled by mindless jihad as you and I are. They know that the cost to Pakistan of this kind of fundamentalism will be incalculable and the damage is already irreversible. (Man! He is too scared to admit Paki shitstan is a gone case and we have to some deal WITH THOSE SCUMS)

The terrifying reality is that Pakistan no longer merely uses terrorism as an instrument of state policy. The state itself has become the terrorist. Jihad is not a means to an end but an end in itself.

Because of the cultural similarities between Punjabis on both sides of the border, we sometimes kid ourselves into believing that Pakistanis are just like us. We think of Pakistan as being India gone wrong: decent people who have the misfortune to be ruled by a ruthless and venal army. There may have been a time when that characterisation made sense but I don’t think the India parallels will hold for much longer.

The Pakistan that is now emerging has less in common with today’s India and much more in common with Afghanistan under the Taliban. That was a lawless state run by fundamentalist fanatics who offered shelter to Osama Bin Laden, allowed Al Qaeda to plan its operations from within its borders and treated jihad as a sacred mission.

arun · Post by **arun** » 25 Jul 2011 07:24

In the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, a country purportedly created as a safe haven for the Mohammaddens of the Indian Sub-Continent, Mohammaddens murder each other for nothing more than the other following a different variant of Mohammaddenism.

The death toll in Karachi of sectarian Shia versus Sunni violence over the past 24 hours reaches 9 as the Shia based Majlis-i-Wahdatul Muslimeen and Sunni based defunct Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan have a go at each other:

Turf wars shatter Karachi peace

By: Mansoor Khan | Published: July 25, 2011

KARACHI – Another 24 people fell prey to the unabated violence in Karachi on Sunday, bringing the three-day toll in the latest wave of bloodshed to 45. ……………..

Shia organisation Majlis-i-Wahdatul Muslimeen confirmed five of their members were gunned down during last 24 hours while four activists of rival group, defunct Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan, were also killed in the clash. …………………………..

The Nation

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 Jul 2011 07:33

wow that psychoanalysis article is truly a work of art. every para was worth a laugh esp the part about wearing his pants (shalwar) up the tummy, learning arab yet still falling short in piety and being punished by God

VenkataS · Post by **VenkataS** » 25 Jul 2011 08:30

Pakistani Hindus' ashes brought to India to be scattered in Ganges

The transfer, reportedly the first on a large scale since the wrenching 1947 partition that created Pakistan out of the collapsing British rule in India, spotlights a community caught in the middle of a political and religious divide in troubled Pakistan. Hindus increasingly have been targeted by mobs, kidnappers and extortionists as Islamic fundamentalism and lawlessness have spread.

Why don't we see more articles on the plight of Hindus in Pakistan?
After the partition Hindu's made up 15% of the population of Pakistan, now they represent less than 2% of the population. What happened to the others? Why isn't the Indian media on this case?

Shrinivasan · Post by **Shrinivasan** » 25 Jul 2011 08:50

VenkataS wrote:After the partition Hindu's made up 15% of the population of Pakistan, now they represent less than 2% of the population. What happened to the others? Why isn't the Indian media on this case?

Because the P-Sec crowd doesn't care, Because nobody is paying them to take-up their cause, Because they cannot Vote in Yindian election, Because they done see Yindian TeeVee channels and thus are not part of their target audience, They can buy yindian products advertized so are not a market to explore & exploit. I can go on but I have to go and retch.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 25 Jul 2011 09:17

what were the reasons why Hindus chose to remain behind in TSP even as news of the bloodbath during 1947 was spreading?

were they too poor to move or were too rich to leave it all behind?

gakakkad · Post by **gakakkad** » 25 Jul 2011 09:18

noobie question - This chap vir sanghvi is pro Indian or just another WKK/Dhoti roy type ?

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 25 Jul 2011 09:28

Singha wrote:what were the reasons why Hindus chose to remain behind in TSP even as news of the bloodbath during 1947 was spreading?

were they too poor to move or were too rich to leave it all behind?

Singha,

It wasn't a question of poor or rich. Both, my paternal and maternal side, had to leave. Some hindus were in far flung places, where the mainstream of partition did not really affect them and so they took the decision to stay on. Thinking that Pakistan would be secular. But the complexion of the social fabric in Pakistan has changed dramatically to the narrow minded religious bigotry and the process started in the '60s. And the shift from a democracy to an all pervasive army had catalysed this.

Verily, the army has been Pakistan's greatest enemy. An army which has a country. A country which they are busy flushing down the tubes. Not to forget that governance is not their prime agenda. They are India obsessed. Hardly a goal which can justify their existence.

Kanishka · Post by **Kanishka** » 25 Jul 2011 09:45

Pakistan-Japan have centuries old links through Buddhism

http://ftpapp.app.com.idiot/en_/index.p ... 0&Itemid=2

(Replace idiot with pk in the url above).

Pakistan is a cradle of civilizations and has centuries-old links with Japan through Buddhism, that have continued to strengthen and flourish over the years, Pakistan’s Ambassador to Japan Noor Muhammad Jadmani said. He was speaking to over a hundred members of NHK culture centers of Aoyama, Kashiwa, Utsunomia and Tochigi prefectures about the rich historical past of Pakistan at Tokyo. The Ambassador said the land that now comprises present day Pakistan was the centre of Buddhism, from where it spread to South East Asian countries including Japan.
He said though Pakistan-Japan diplomatic relations were established in 1952, but culturally the people of the two countries had centuries old strong bonds of friendship and understanding.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 25 Jul 2011 09:49

From that psychoanalysis,

Pakistan and his twin brother, India, had had a tumultuous childhood,. . . Orphaned in his infancy with the premature death of his father, Muhammad Ali Jinnah

The trouble is that India had a different father who was like a cheese to the chalk father of Pakistan.

There is also a misconception that the Arab sheikhs courted and wooed Pakistan. That is not true. In the heady days after Independence, Pakistan was so drunk on being the only Islamic state created on ideology, its success of separating from India and being under the protection of powerful Imperialists that it attempted to fill the Caliphate void. This caused immense hatred for Pakistan among the Egyptians, the then powerful Islamic nation, and a KSA struggling to establish itself as the ummah leader. Besides, Pakistan sided with the imperialists even when it hurt Islamic causes in those days.

It was Pakistan which ran to these arab Sheikhs for support especially with the oil boom.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 25 Jul 2011 09:56

Kanishka wrote:Pakistan-Japan have centuries old links through Buddhism
Pakistan is a cradle of civilizations and has centuries-old links with Japan through Buddhism, that have continued to strengthen and flourish over the years, . . . culturally the people of the two countries had centuries old strong bonds of friendship and understanding.

Depending upon the context and the exigencies of the situation, Pakistan traces its genesis to either Buddhist, or bin Qasim or Moghul or Ghaznavi or British days. When the tyrant tenure of the true blue-blooded Islamists starts in a few years' time, some Pakistanis may attempt to trace it to the Vedic times.

Sridhar · Post by **Sridhar** » 25 Jul 2011 10:00

Repeat. Self deleted.