Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 2011

Nandu · Post by **Nandu** » 04 Dec 2011 09:21

Shaashtanga, tactically brilliant! Carry on.

abhijitm · Post by **abhijitm** » 04 Dec 2011 09:41

posting in full.
Communications breakdown prevented PAF response: ISPR

A spokesman of ISPR said on Friday that remarks of the Chief of the Army Staff (COAS) about PAF had been misquoted in a section of the press. In this context, the exact quote of the COAS was, “The response could have been more effective if PAF had also joined in. However, it was no fault of PAF. A timely decision could not be taken due to a breakdown of communication with the affected posts and, therefore, a lack of clarity of the situation, at various levels, including the Corps Headquarters and GHQ”, the spokesman said.

The November 26 strike near the Afghan border sparked fury in Pakistan and further complicated US-led efforts to ease a crisis in relations with Islamabad and stabilise the region before foreign combat troops leave Afghanistan in 2014.

The military, in a statement, said that its response to the NATO strike could have been more effective had it been able to scramble its aircraft in time. Exactly what happened at the Pakistani posts along an unruly and poorly defined border is still unclear. Pakistan said the attack was unprovoked, with officials calling it an act of blatant aggression. US officials, quoted in the Wall Street Journal on Friday, claimed Pakistani officials cleared the air strike without realising they had troops in the area. agencies

Next time they should call paki navy for help.

Guddu · Post by **Guddu** » 04 Dec 2011 09:44

I think one explanation re: the news, ie "Pakistan: Military Chief Suspends Chain Of Command
December 1, 2011 1836 GMT
Pakistani military chief Gen. Ashfaq Kayani suspended the chain of command system to allow senior officers on the ground to take immediate action if troops are attacked, Dunya News reported Dec. 1. Kayani ordered troops to respond to aggression with full force. Sources said the decision would apply to encounters with NATO troops if they occur."

Might be that when the US attacked, they jammed all radars and communications on the paki side. As a result pakis could not get their PAF up. Rather than admit, that paki radars can be jammed by unkil, Kiya-nahi is asking his troops to retaliate, since no communications from GHQ will be forthcoming. This may also explain why the pakis thought that the attack continued for 2 hrs, perhaps they were forced into radio silence as an additional attack on their H&D. Infact, I remember reading somewhere that the US jammed paki communications.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 04 Dec 2011 09:52

Shaashtanga wrote: if the porkis try to throw a reverse pisko at me by saying how come i being a hindu have pork on my plate then i am gonna tell them that although i am a kaafir hindu but i am highly inspired & motivated by the godless commie chinis and i plan to become awesome like the chini therefore i decided to start eating pork.

LOL good thinking.

I would also love to spread via multiple internet channels that really funny statement by the Han Chinese guy in Xinjiang "Muslims don't eat pork because pigs are their ancestors and one must not eat one's ancestors"

The video you speak of is here - for a few who may have missed it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWiwy_iRTwA

shaardula · Post by **shaardula** » 04 Dec 2011 09:57

shiv wrote:
shaardula wrote: something happened to kumari gori(Ms. Fair)!! I think she has signed up on the khan's plan to pass the buck to india and let india sort it out. the theme seems to be that. i really dont like it.
With respect shaardula this is a disingenuous comment that makes no sense. Your post suggests that up until now India has not had to handle Pakistan by itself and that unkil was somehow involved in keeping Pakistan at bay. You know that is nonsense. If unkil stops helping Pakistan it can only help India. Now why are you so uncomfortable with that?

no that is not what i meant saar. i'm concerned about the rapid change in her position and how she has swung to the other extreme now. if it has to happen, it should happen on india's term. after all we are the one's who are going to face the full consequences of it. for her india is a stick that she is threatening tsp with. for us it is the real thing.

the the fighting forces of US have had problems with TSP since long. for nearly 4 years now there have been reports of this anger of the soldiers. it then started tricking into even 10'oclock town news streams. all the while ku.go was spouting theoretical nonsense. she earned her credo doing so. and now when it is convenient from them they are threatening tsp with india?

shaardula · Post by **shaardula** » 04 Dec 2011 10:01

shaastanga, afaik all the meat eating hindu communities do eat pork. atleast in all the parts of KA I know they do. and as far i know there is no taboo associated with it.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 04 Dec 2011 10:04

A_Gupta wrote:What is "reverse Kargil"?
http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDe ... 685&Cat=13
(last paragraph - if Russia also cuts the supply routes NATO will face reverse Kargil)

Good catch.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 04 Dec 2011 10:04

shaardula wrote:shaastanga, afaik all the meat eating hindu communities do eat pork. atleast in all the parts of KA I know they do. and as far i know there is no taboo associated with it.

Particularly popular in Kodagu dist of Karnataka.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 04 Dec 2011 10:07

Shaashtanga wrote:
I fully agree with Shiv saars point that this "pork" issue should be highlighted as much as possible in both international and porki media so that some PLA troops or chini engineers are qadrified for being swine eaters. Muslims of Sinkiang province should be instigated by the porki apduls to rise against the swine eating Han.

Who says Pakistanis don't eat pork. Their founding father Jinnah used to love pork and wine. And he was a devout muslim.

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 04 Dec 2011 10:14

There is a growing sense of hate against pakis among goras. Even in forums where there was certain racist element against Indians couple of years back,is now totally against Pakis. The feeling is now totally for "bomb da crap outta pakis". This hatred for pakis is going viral. More and more number of average joe's know about paki double dealings and their perverted sexual preferences.
It is difficult to accept that "Osama" operation can accomplish all this. I am at a loss to explain a complete turnaround in Americans. Perhaps gurus can explain.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 04 Dec 2011 10:19

saar no need to ask gurus,

Look at your location onlee.......

PS you cannot fool all the people all the time onlee.....

Truth has set the Khans free. It is only the foggy otton that has not been set free..........

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 04 Dec 2011 10:25

Altair wrote:There is a growing sense of hate against pakis among goras. Even in forums where there was certain racist element against Indians couple of years back,is now totally against Pakis. The feeling is now totally for "bomb da crap outta pakis". This hatred for pakis is going viral. More and more number of average joe's know about paki double dealings and their perverted sexual preferences.
It is difficult to accept that "Osama" operation can accomplish all this. I am at a loss to explain a complete turnaround in Americans. Perhaps gurus can explain.

Is it not the rule of war that first make the enemy friendless? In the end only Lizard will be left holding the hand of Leaporstan but actually fearing to get contaminated.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 04 Dec 2011 10:30

Plea to review Bonn meeting boycott turned down
http://www.dawn.com/2011/12/04/plea-to- ... -down.html
WASHINGTON/ ISLAMABAD:

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton telephoned Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani on Saturday, urging him to reconsider Pakistan’s decision to stay out of the Bonn conference on Afghanistan, diplomatic sources told Dawn. The conference is scheduled to begin on Monday.
But Mr Gilani told Mrs Clinton that a review of the decision was not feasible at this stage since the Parliamentary Committee on National Security had supported the move when it met three days ago, according to a press release from the prime minister’s office.The Parliament has taken up the terms of cooperation with the US. This will ensure national ownership and clarity about the relationship, the prime minister told the secretary of State.The Secretary of State conveyed her personal condolences on the deaths of Pakistani soldiers. She added that the attack was not intentional and that we must wait for the outcome of the investigation. “The US has the highest regard for Pakistan’s sovereignty . This incident should not be allowed to jeopardise the bilateral relationship,” Hillary Clinton said in her conversation with the prime minister.On Wednesday, Afghan President Hamid Karzai also called Prime Minister Gilani, asking him to reconsider the boycott decision, but Mr Gilani politely turned down his request.In Washington, three key pillars of the US administration — the White House, the State Department and the Pentagon — have not only stressed their desire to see Pakistan in Bonn but have also expressed hopes that tensions caused by the Nato air strikes would not derail the bilateral relationship.On Friday, the State Department said it hoped that “Pakistan will be a part of this process going forward, no matter what”.“We think it would be regrettable if Pakistan were not to attend this conference. We think it’s important for the region, it’s important for the neighbourhood, it’s important that we all work to put Afghanistan on a square and solid footing. Our engagement continues,” the department’s spokesman Mark Toner told a briefing in Washington.At the White House, Press Secretary Jay Carney emphasised the importance of Pakistan’s role in resolving the Afghan crisis and said: “We urge them to attend the conference in Bonn.”At the Pentagon, spokesman George Little noted that the relationship with Pakistan remained very important to the United States.We think that cooperation with Pakistan on a variety of fronts, to include counterterrorism, is essential,” he said. “We realise the bumps in the road that we’ve experienced over the past several months, but we’re going to work very hard with our Pakistani counterparts to get over this latest bump in the road

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 04 Dec 2011 10:38

Aisa Mauka Phir Ayega Naa Dwara, Hafiz Khuda Zardaara
Zardari, Haqqani knew about OBL raid

NEW YORK - The man behind Pakistan’s ‘memogate’ scandal now claims that former Pakistan ambassador to the United States Husain Haqqani and President Asif Ali Zardari both had advance knowledge of the US operation to kill Osama bin Laden and to use the situation resulting from it to the Zardari regime’s advantage.
“ ... Zardari and Haqqani both knew the US was going to launch a stealth mission to eliminate bin Laden that would violate Pakistan’s sovereignty,” wrote Mansoor Ijaz in a detailed article posted Friday night on the website of The Daily Beast-Newsweek.
“They may have even given advance consent after CIA operations on the ground in Pakistan pinpointed the Saudi fugitive’s location,” Ijaz, a Pakistani-American businessman, said in the article in which he again alleged that Haqqani was the author of the memorandum seeking US help in May to prevent a military coup against the civilian government. The businessman said he used his contacts to deliver the memo to the then Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen.
Ijaz wrote, “The unilateral US action, they might have surmised, would result in a nation blaming its armed forces and intelligence services for culpability in harbouring bin Laden for so many years. They planned to use the Pakistani public’s hue and cry to force the resignations of Army Chief Gen Ashfaq Kayani and intelligence chief Gen Shuja Pasha. Pliable replacements would have been appointed...
“Haqqani is now trying to deflect attention, and possible culpability, away from Zardari. But why would he fall on his sword for the man he once dubbed “Mr 10 Percent”? ...,
“If it all went wrong, the Pakistanis could unite in their hatred of America for violating their nation’s sovereignty, with Zardari leading the chorus aimed at Washington. If it went to plan, the long-sought aim of putting civilians (ie, Zardari & Co) in charge of the Army would be complete. Washington would have bin Laden’s scalp; Zardari would have Kayani’s and Pasha’s. And US taxpayer-funded aid would flow unabated under the Kerry-Lugar bill in which Haqqani had pushed so hard to include civilian-supremacy language as a sine qua non.
“Not a bad plan. Really, not a bad plan.

shaardula · Post by **shaardula** » 04 Dec 2011 10:45

in that AEI talk she says, in the event of a sufficiently long war, indian will be badly hurt but they will survive, but tsp will be wiped out. but that is not the bargain we are looking for. how does that help us? if X indians must be wiped out to wipe out the tsp state, the indian answer to X is zero. heck i doubt if we even want to wipe out any pakistani, if tsp can be rationalized at that cost. we want the tsp state wiped out. what do we gain by the death of a god-fearing peasant in some hinterland that side of sindhu?

she has no understanding of who we are. we dont exist to negate tsp. we exist for ourselves.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 04 Dec 2011 10:58

Prem wrote:Zardari, Haqqani knew about OBL raid

M. Ijaz is confirming yet again that he is an ISI/PA agent.

Firstly, the US knows that Zardari/Gilan's consent amounts to nothing. Secondly, they also know that any hint of an imminent raid would have resulted in OBL being relocated and the US would have ended up like in Iran in April 1980. The 1998 tomahawk missile attack on OBL and various other double dealings by the Pakistanis mean that the US no longer trusts the Pakistanis, though it has taken this long to understand or act against the perfidy.

abhijitm · Post by **abhijitm** » 04 Dec 2011 11:06

shaardula wrote:shaastanga, afaik all the meat eating hindu communities do eat pork. atleast in all the parts of KA I know they do. and as far i know there is no taboo associated with it.

correct, eating pork is not against hindu religion. Traditionally - and today also - hunting wild boar and eating is a sport. People don't eat because it disgusts them or have a false feeling of anti-religiousness, otherwise nowhere in the hindu religion it is prohibited.

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 04 Dec 2011 11:10

shaardula wrote:shaastanga, afaik all the meat eating hindu communities do eat pork. atleast in all the parts of KA I know they do. and as far i know there is no taboo associated with it.

Actually there is. Hindus were forbidden to eat domesticated chicken and domesticated pigs, as they eat filth. Their wild cousins were allowed to be hunted and eaten. At least this was the custom in 19th century Bengal.
Gautam
PS in the US I am often asked if I eat pork (the natives think I am Muslim). My answer is "only if it is from a happy pig!"

shaardula · Post by **shaardula** » 04 Dec 2011 11:16

in our village there were only domesticated pigs. the wild boars were considered a rare feast. kodagu where there are hills and forests it is a staple. but in the plains of the plateau domesticated ones were the staple.

PrasadZ · Post by **PrasadZ** » 04 Dec 2011 11:19

Shaashtanga wrote:Shiv saar & Suppaiahji, thanks for responding to my question.

I have decided that in my office Christmas party this year (in which many chinis & porkis will be participating), i shall make my piskological dick move i.e. i will have some pork ribs on my plate and walk over to wherever i see a few chinis and porkis together (along-with some goras) and ask them (2 scenarios) -

Scenario 1 (if few chinis have pork ribs or any other pork items on their plate too) -

I will say to them, Chinese love pork and the chini will snicker and say yeah dude we do, then i will throw my googly that PLA has many troops in porkistan, how are they living without pork (coz pork is banned in porkistan), it will be interesting to see if the chinis get defensive first or porkis or they altogether deny PLA presence in porkland.

J
Scenario 2 (if no chini has any pork ribs or any other pork items on their plate) -

Then I am gonna say, mann these pork ribs are dope, how come you guys aren't having any.

In either case i plan to get their chaddis in a twist in front of goras, and if the porkis try to throw a reverse pisko at me by saying how come i being a hindu have pork on my plate then i am gonna tell them that although i am a kaafir hindu but i am highly inspired & motivated by the godless commie chinis and i plan to become awesome like the chini therefore i decided to start eating pork. I am quiet sure the chinis will not get my sarcasm and if the porkis say anything after that to counter me the chinis might take offense. Jai ho.

I fully agree with Shiv saars point that this "pork" issue should be highlighted as much as possible in both international and porki media so that some PLA troops or chini engineers are qadrified for being swine eaters. Muslims of Sinkiang province should be instigated by the porki apduls to rise against the swine eating Han.

I know quite a few chinese in singapore and thailand who dont eat beef at all. There is an old research paper that google serves up about a beef taboo in china though it may not be as operational today
Cheng-chung Lai, (2000) "Beef taboo in Chinese society", International Journal of Social Economics, Vol. 27 Iss: 4, pp.286 - 290

abhijitm · Post by **abhijitm** » 04 Dec 2011 11:21

last post on OT - As we know Hindu religion is basically culture and tradition. So whichever practice, if widely accepted and is part of culture/tradition, then easily becomes part of Hindu religion. This explains why many consider eating pork is against the religion. The same reason why - strangely - not eating any meat is part of religion, and eating meat also part of religion. Both are considered equal hindus. A beauty of hinduism!

Yogi_G · Post by **Yogi_G** » 04 Dec 2011 11:23

Not sure if already posted but I just ran into this video in youtube. shows typical Paki mentality of viewing ruffian like behaviour as bravery. any parent wud be shamed to see their son do such acts,but no,not the pakis, they see this as the off battle field bravery of their martial race.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 04 Dec 2011 11:24

Non violence against all living beings is a central dogma to Dharmic faiths. Krishna urges Arjuna too on the same on many occasions. Large scale vegetarianism in India is prevalent simply because of a belief in that. Exceptions to the rule may exist as 'HInduism' integrated many communities into it's folds. But these are largely only exceptions to the rule. Anyways plain OT for this topic.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 04 Dec 2011 11:27

Nothing Like Baked Ham with Mustard and Port wine in cold winter days . PigPuttars dont know what they missing and what they are providing for Kufar taste.
BTW American makes the best Pork Ribs in Texas and Chinii makes the best shredded Mooshee (Mushy) Pork Yand no wonder both have shown preference for Poaqs.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 04 Dec 2011 11:34

Very simple takes from the 28 Paki getting 72 Incident:

1. Pakistan confirms it sides more with the Taliban than with eliminating it.
2. Contradictions in the WOT coming to the fore.
3. Purity increasing in Porkiland as Paki top Generals clearly fear Quadrification.
4. Pandering to the Puritan version will continue. NO force inside Pakistan can now undo it.

As detoxification is no longer possible or desired by the Paki Elite, they will play for time. Moving their assets abroad, family movements will get really busy abroad an indicator of the same. A few terrorist incidents in India to take the anti-American pressure away so they may safely move out.

The Strategic Depth for Paki Elite is not in Afghanistan. It is in US, UK, Dubai and they are trying to make it in India under a Naive GOI. I think the fog on that is getting to be come clearer.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 04 Dec 2011 11:38

chaanakya wrote:
Shaashtanga wrote:
I fully agree with Shiv saars point that this "pork" issue should be highlighted as much as possible in both international and porki media so that some PLA troops or chini engineers are qadrified for being swine eaters. Muslims of Sinkiang province should be instigated by the porki apduls to rise against the swine eating Han.
Who says Pakistanis don't eat pork. Their founding father Jinnah used to love pork and wine. And he was a devout muslim.

Psyops wise this is he wrong way to say it.

This is what a Pakistani "liberal. moderate" might say to show Pakhana's liberal and moderate side. Jinnah was not a good Muslim. He used to eat pork, drink alcohol and keep dogs. The idea is to make the Abduls of Pakistan angry with the Pork eaters and alcohol drinkers and encourage Qadris.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 04 Dec 2011 11:41

Altair wrote:There is a growing sense of hate against pakis among goras.

Some of the more jingoistic ones need to see this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epwvxaSNAfo

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 04 Dec 2011 13:33

Shaashtanga wrote:So here is what happened, today while doing some grocery shopping at our local Walmart super-center, in the meat & poultry aisle, my wife asked, what's the difference between halal & regular meat and why don't the Muslims eat pork. First of all i gave her a dirty look coz that wasn't the time or the place to discuss such matters and moreover our boys were troubling us too much (elder one for toys and the younger was just crying and being fussy for no reason) so i wanted to finish the ordeal and get back home ASAP. In any case i hastily tried to explain to her the basic criteria by which meat is known as halal and the reason behind Muslims not eating pork is because quran says that the pig is filthy animal therefore it shouldn't be consumed. I also told her that when we reach home she can check Wikipedia to get further understanding of this matter if she wants. After that i asked her how come she suddenly wanted to know these details, then she started telling me an interesting incident that she recently found about which caused her to ask those questions, what had happened was my wife's friend (Muslim from Gujarat) told her about another playgroup that she was part of recently had a potluck (each lady in the play group would prepare a dish and they would gather in our building rec room where their kids could play and the ladies would eat the food and chat around) and in that group there mostly Muslim ladies (from India) and Pakistan plus a black christian lady. When they started eating, one of the Pakistani ladies (who recently came to Toronto from LaWhore) asked the black christian lady about the dish she had brought i.e. beef meatballs on spaghetti, the paki lady bluntly asked the black christian lady whether the beef was halal and did she ever cook pork in the same utensil. Black christian lady probably didn't realize that the paki lady was fresh off boat (or she may have experienced similar holier then though attitude incident from a paki) that she snapped back and told her that "this is your first potluck but we have such potlucks every month and the since most other participants are Muslims she gets halal meat from a store where all local Muslims shop for halal meat and only uses the utensil for halal cooking and all her pork cooking utensils were separate". Based on the somewhat angry snapping response from the black christian female, the paki lady took offense and refused to eat what she had cooked, this caused a major outburst and almost a fight like situation in the group, the new paki lady appealed to the other paki (and even Indian Gujarati Muslim ladies) to not eat the black christian lady's spaghetti meatballs. Now my wife's friend tried to calm the situation by telling the paki lady that they have been eating food prepared by black christian lady since long so they trust her but the new paki lady was adamant to not eat it and tried to coax the other paki ladies as well (almost trying to imply to the Indian Muslim women that the paki Muslims were purer etc.) , so now even my wife's friend was infuriated and the situation became very volatile to the extent that they abandoned the potluck and i think the group is now split i.e. the paki ladies will have their potlucks separately and the black christian ladies will have the potluck with the Indian Muslim ladies. Now the other paki ladies (who were part of the group since long didn't want to stop a good social thing that was going but this new jihadi paki lady took all of them down along with her). When my wife's friend was telling the incident to her, she also mentioned that majority of the paki ladies who were from Lawhore tried to show holier then thou attitude in the mosque and other social events i.e. going to parent-teacher meetings with burqa's on , she also mentioned that the shia's from Karachi were more open minded and assimilating into the contemporary culture of participating in Diwali celebrations and even sending their kids for trick or treating during Halloween.

I believe there is some misunderstanding about Islam and Pork. I'll try to explain this as best I can. There is however a post I wrote earlier on this.

RajeshA wrote:If a Muslim drinks but says no to pork or salami, it is simply because being Muslim means being brave, brave enough to even flout Islamic injunctions, but by refusing to eat pork, he wants to make a conscious display of his Muslim identity and to admonish others for not acknowledging it, knowing that through admonishing he again shows strength. In fact, it could just be the other way round, and it would still be okay.

If a Muslim can show that his contributions to the glory of Islam have been quite substantial, he may claim an opt-out from all the compulsions as a Muslim - no alcohol, no pork, no dogs, only four wives, etc. OBL's father married 22 times and fathered 54 children. Similarly Jinnah drank alcohol, ate pork, had dogs! And he is still the father of Pakistan. His contributions to Islam's cause were of such caliber, that his "faults" don't matter. Similarly the RAPE class tries to spit such vitriol on India in their own way, that they think they too can buy themselves an opt-out!

The Jihadis on the other hand think differently about it. It is in their interest to show that the contributions of RAPE have been pitiful and they do not deserve an opt-out! The Taliban have increased the bar for opt-outs, and the RAPE do not seem to be able to measure up to that bar. Also one can argue that a certain Muslim, say Jinnah, didn't really do much for the Muslims and thus diminish the impression of his contributions to the Glory of Islam. In this case, he would be seen as one who did not abide by the tenets of Islam and thus a bad Muslim. That one can do!

This means that the mango abduls, who cannot contribute much to the glory of Islam anyway, which includes beating the crap out of Kafirs, they have to show themselves as extremely pious and submitting to and abiding by all the prohibitions of Islam.

So the new Paki woman from Lahore was simply trying to show that she is pious, and any opportunity that one can find, is availed of!

Shaashtanga wrote:Now, coming to my question, and believe me i tried to search answer on net but couldn't find, when PLA is in Porkistan do they get regular pork shipments from Pandaland or they get local pork (highly unlikely in porkistan) and when Porki sherdils or other TFTA's are in Pandaland do they dare ask PLA cooks whether the food they are eating was cooked in separate utensils (in which pork was never cooked) or do the Porkis also rely on their own imports from porkiland? i have also watched shiv saars video where he tries to open the eyes of porki apduls that China is the biggest pork producer and consumer in the world. Still not sure how the arrangement is between Pandaland PLA & Porkis when it comes to pork. Have the porkis come to a consensus (at-least the RAPE's & defense) that pork will be a non issue between the deepel then ocean , tallel then mountain, sweetel then honey, stlongel then steel, fliendship between PakWhore & Chipanda? Can this become an issue in the future? Can the Porki Apdul eventually Qadrify those who endorse the godless commie chipandas who eat pork?

I really don't think the prohibition of eating pork is really going to damage the relationship between Pakis and Chinis. It is not!

Different than Hindus, who feel offended at when a cow is slaughtered, the Muslims don't feel anything like that when a pig dies. So they don't really have a problem with the slaughter of pigs in Pakistan or elsewhere. This is an important difference. So anybody can come into Pakistan, start rearing and killing pigs and swine and it doesn't matter.

Also the Pakis acknowledge that the Chinese are Kufr who eat pork, but being Kufr they can eat pork. The Islamists don't have a problem with Kufr eating pork, only with the fact that there are Kufr at all. But considering the wider picture, that the Chinese are enemies to both their ideological enemies - the Judeo-Christian-Secular West and the Dharmic India, it is okay to avail of their 'friendship' for the Chinese themselves are not really enemies of Islam themselves - neither ideologically nor politically. Or are they?

The Pakis keep saying the Chinese are friends. Most Pakis buy into this propaganda, and so do many other Muslims around the world, simply because they see China as a bulwark against the American military machine. Also Mohammed told the Muslims that if need be they should go to China to get their 'knowledge', including 'know-how' on how to beat up the other Kafirs like West, Israel and India.

This is something that we should change - the perspective that the Chinese are not enemies of Islam and Muslims. It must be emphasized that they are occupiers of Muslim lands and oppressors of Islam and Muslims - in East Turkestan.

The pork bit, I think is useless propaganda. The Pak-Chinese Friendship is not going to shatter on the rocks of pigs alone! As long as Chinese are not seen as encouraging Paki Muslims to eat pork it doesn't really matter if the Chinese eat some on their own.

partha · Post by **partha** » 04 Dec 2011 13:42

shiv wrote:
Altair wrote:There is a growing sense of hate against pakis among goras.
Some of the more jingoistic ones need to see this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epwvxaSNAfo

I think these videos should be posted on Pakistani jingo Facebook pages.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 04 Dec 2011 13:46

Pak-India Relations: Challenges & Opportunities - Ishtiaq Ahmed in DT

The first and foremost challenge is that of demonising and dehumanising of the ‘Other’. The ‘Other’ is the Hindu for Pakistan and Muslim for India.

The second challenge is systemic. The bureaucracies on both sides, especially the ones entrenched in the foreign office, follow set routines and patterns. After the Mumbai terrorist attacks and especially after it was found that Pakistani-origin US citizen Daood-David Coleman Headley had abused his multiple entry visa to India, the Indian bureaucracy has had a whale of a time in establishing a visa regime that thrives in treating all Pakistanis with equal suspicion.

The third challenge is posed by external spoilers.

More specifically, the challenge posed by extremism and terrorism by hardcore religious fanatics is the biggest challenge we face. In India as well, Saffron terrorists have been identified a number of times, most notably in the attack on the Samjhauta Express in 2007. Then of course the Shiv Sena is always there to remind us that a fascist mindset is entrenched in Maharashtra and particularly Mumbai

That's it. Everything is equal between India and Pakistan. Let's get going !

This guy, whom I have always considered a snake, does not mention the name of any Pakistani terrorist organization which have been responsible for nearly 200 terrorist incidents around the world (from Japan to North America, Denmark to Australia) *since* 9/11. Their Army is considered by neighbours, NATO and others as supporting terrorism. Yet, not a word about them.

RSoami · Post by **RSoami** » 04 Dec 2011 14:25

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/02/opini ... istan.html

The choice is between Pakistan on one hand, and Russia and Central Asian nations on the other. And Russia, unlike Pakistan, has not hosted militants who are killing Americans on the battlefield.

Russia is a friend and more trusted than non-Nato ally.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 04 Dec 2011 15:06

The Islamists don't have a problem with Kufr eating pork, only with the fact that there are Kufr at all.

RajeshA wrote:If a Muslim can show that his contributions to the glory of Islam have been quite substantial, he may claim an opt-out from all the compulsions as a Muslim - no alcohol, no pork, no dogs, only four wives, etc. OBL's father married 22 times and fathered 54 children. Similarly Jinnah drank alcohol, ate pork, had dogs! And he is still the father of Pakistan. His contributions to Islam's cause were of such caliber, that his "faults" don't matter. Similarly the RAPE class tries to spit such vitriol on India in their own way, that they think they too can buy themselves an opt-out!

The Jihadis on the other hand think differently about it. It is in their interest to show that the contributions of RAPE have been pitiful and they do not deserve an opt-out! The Taliban have increased the bar for opt-outs, and the RAPE do not seem to be able to measure up to that bar. Also one can argue that a certain Muslim, say Jinnah, didn't really do much for the Muslims and thus diminish the impression of his contributions to the Glory of Islam. In this case, he would be seen as one who did not abide by the tenets of Islam and thus a bad Muslim. That one can do!

This means that the mango abduls, who cannot contribute much to the glory of Islam anyway, which includes beating the crap out of Kafirs, they have to show themselves as extremely pious and submitting to and abiding by all the prohibitions of Islam.

So the new Paki woman from Lahore was simply trying to show that she is pious, and any opportunity that one can find, is availed of!

Rajesh, I have to disagree with you on the 'Glory of Islam' bit. There is no opt-out possible just because somebody has contributed in 'other' areas. Islam believes in very strictly following the code and no deviation is tolerated because that would then lead to a lack of control among the flock. For this very reason, questioning and ijtihad have also been shut down.

In the specific case of Jinnah, neither Mawdudi nor JUI accepted Jinnah as a leader ( to this day that Maulana Fazlur Rehman of JUI refuses to have the mandatory picture of Jinnah in his chamber in the National Assembly. The Sandwich Samiul Haq, who leads the other faction of JUI also has a similar opinion about Jinnah). Mawdudi referred to Jinnah once as Kafir-e-Azam and only accommodated with him uneasily as the inevitability of Pakistan became clear to him. That Jinnah had all these 'vices' which are haraam in Islam was not widely known among the Muslims. Jinnah would meet British leaders coated and booted in Oxford Street high fashion but would address local Indian Muslims with a skull cap and invoke 'tutored' Islamic symbolism. It was all 'tutored' because he wasn't much aware of these. He fixed a luncheon meeting with Mountbatten in October 1947 forgetting it was the fasting month of Ramadan. But, all these were carefully hidden from the masses. Even today, most Pakistanis refuse to believe that he liked pork or drank wine and loved dogs or could not recite the Kalima etc. Sections of Ian Talbott's book on Jinnah, dealing with these aspects of him, remain censored in Pakistan until today. After Independence, Jinnah addressed all his gatherings as 'Dear Mussalman' even as over 20% of his population was still non-Muslims, instead of as ‘Pakistanis’ and used terms like ‘mujahid’, ‘tenets of the Holy Quran’, and referred to Pakistan as a ‘bulwark of Islam’. His August 11, 1947 speech containing that single vague reference to secularism remains blacked out to this day in Pakistan. If 'opting-out' was an accepted course of action, all these would have been unnecessary. No, no, it is simply not possible to opt out of obligations within Islam.

However, elites cannot be expected to adhere to the strict code and the way out is to do all these things within safe confines and not openly. Everyone knows about the loose character and the incredible propensity to yielding to forbidden temptations among the princes and princesses of the wahhabi/salafi Saudi Arabia and yet the King is the 'Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques'. The strictest personal and public codes of Islam are enforced in that Kingdom and yet the Royalty are the biggest and the bestest violators of the codes. That's acceptable because nobody can prove the Royalty or the Shaikhs have erred and deviated from Islamic injunctions. I think there is a huge difference between a dharmic religion like Hinduism and Islam in that the former lays stress on personal adherence to piety and principles whereas public display is important in the latter. Thus, perhaps mass prayers and the tendency to debate on who is purest of them all etc.

The RAPEs have a serious problem today. In order to win over the Westerners, they have to ingratiate themselves with them which means giving a go-by to sharaab, pork etc. At the same time, they have to go back to the jihadists to fight the kufr. The jihadists do not have any such issues. Their problem is, because they are all living together in the same community of Believers, that they have to vie with each other constantly to reach the top slot of 'purest of them all'. The good life that the RAPEs enjoy makes the jihadists feel jealous, but they make haste slowly. They do not want to wipe out the RAPEs in a hurry because there is as yet so much to be gained from them. In this they are like a parasite which doesn't kill its host quickly. So, the Taliban will not eliminate Imran Khan all too quickly. They will do so after they gain access to the nuclear weapons of Pakistan, for example.

Of course, mango abduls have it burning at either end, poor fellows. They can never become RAPEs and never meet all the conditions laid down by the jihadists.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 04 Dec 2011 15:10

shiv wrote:This one has subtitles and makes it easy for more people to understand what mullah p0rnuddin is saying

akash_k · Post by **akash_k** » 04 Dec 2011 16:23

On a humorous note :

Pakistanis are pathological liars...! (as if we didn't knew

)

Apologies if posted earlier.

Edit : For grammar correction.

arun · Post by **arun** » 04 Dec 2011 16:29

X posted from the Oppression of Minorities in Pakistan thread.

The Islamic Republic of Pakistan, a country self- claimed to have been created to provide a homeland for the Mohammaddens of the Indian Sub-Continent is lectured by the “Kaafir” Human Rights Watch on the need to protect Mohammaddens belonging to minority sects:

Pretty shameful that Kaafir’s need to lecture Momin in order to drum in the ethical value that it is not correct to kill fellow members of the Ummah for simply belonging to minority sects:

Prevent Targeted Killings of Shia Muslims

arun · Post by **arun** » 04 Dec 2011 16:47

Airavat wrote:Pakistan does have a large population of wild boar, which is related to the domestic pig:
a senior official of the National University of Sciences and Technology (Nust) maintained: “We have several hundred students on the campus, which also has a residential area, and herds of boars cross into the area every night. We do have a barbed wire around the campus but these wild boars damage them and enter the campus, becoming a source of concern for the security of students and families.”

He said a team of dog handlers did visit the campus as their help was sought after seeing a practice of containing the movement of wild boars in DHA Phase-I. “Learning from their experience, we sought help of the same team from Chakwal and they helped us in killing wild boars around the vicinity of the campus,” he added.

A senior official of Pakistan Wildlife Foundation, Mohammad Waseem, said: “It`s inhuman and cruelty to animals and killing of boars in this manner is against animal rights. You can give permits to foreigners since they may enjoy its meat. And the other way is to give them poison if you really want to contain their movement.”

The also run into fighter aircraft

:

Boar Reportedly Ruins Pakistani F-16 Jet

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 04 Dec 2011 17:09

US starts vacating Shamsi

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 04 Dec 2011 17:15

^^^^^

The first F16 that Pakis lost was when a wingman fired his missle at his flight leader. The second a boar. They are reversing down the evolutionary chain. With apologies to the boar.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 04 Dec 2011 17:20

People's Daily says that US-TSP relations collapsing

"The US-Pakistan anti-terrorism coalition is about to collapse," it said, adding that different strategic objectives were the basic causes behind the unsustainable relationship.

Rupesh · Post by **Rupesh** » 04 Dec 2011 17:38

I was amazed by the number of Pakistanis I came across during my sojourn here. It got me thinking why this country attracted so many Pakistanis? In fact in 2008 alone Japan hosted a whopping 8,250 Pakistanis spread over three major regions and the number of immigrants has been on the rise since.

How long before IEDs start going up in Tokyo!

They don’t care about engendering a strong union with their Japanese counterparts, on the contrary their marriage is just a piece of paper, their little ticket to continue staying in Japan and avoiding the shame of deportation. These are not just baseless claims but the grim reality I discovered after hearing about cases of so many abused Japanese wives victimised at the hands of their Pakistani husbands.

well if u marry a Paki..u pay for it.

Today as I travel the country I feel as though there are more Pakistanis than any other nationality in Japan (although statistically Chinese and Korean form the major diasporas) many of whom have taken a keen interest in up keeping the traditions of Islam conscientiously. There are now more than 300 mosques in Japan and many of them have been constructed under the generous auspices of Pakistani residents.

I have even witnessed young Japanese women going to the mosque with their children and this revolutionary change can be accounted for by those Muslim nationalities, primarily Pakistanis who took the initiative to introduce a religion that not so many years ago was novel in this fast paced country.

Unfortunately, a significant number of Pakistanis are bent on tarnishing the image of their own country with their vile and corrupt ways, and the fact that so many still reside illegally doesn’t help matters. It is because of people like them that Pakistan’s representation is hugely jeopardised.

Impression matters