Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 15 Jan 2012

subodh · Post by **subodh** » 02 Feb 2012 22:55

rajanb

OT here, and the answer and my views cannot be reduced to a simple soundbite. Suffice to say, the palistinians and Israel's neighbours had enough chances over the last 60 years to better the lot of the 'refugees' - instead, their choice invariable was on the side of hate, fantasies of genocide and self destruction.

I have less than zero sympathy for the palistinians and their ilk.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 02 Feb 2012 22:58

Sure Subodh. No sweat since it is OT here. requires many soundbites. Am up for the debate on another thread.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 03 Feb 2012 00:02

Contempt case: Govt to file review plea on Gilani's indictment

ISLAMABAD: The government has decided to file an appeal for review of Supreme Court’s (SC) decision on contempt of court case against Prime Minster Yousuf Raza Gilani , Express News reported.
[...]
The court said that if Ahsan ensures that its order in the NRO implementation case is followed, then the contempt case will be closed; however, Ahsan did not provide any assurances.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 03 Feb 2012 00:31

Anujan wrote:Pakis in the program "capital talk" put MS Aiyar in the same panel as Hafiz Saeed. So much for pappi jhappi.

In the right company

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 03 Feb 2012 00:34

Anujan wrote:Pakis in the program "capital talk" put MS Aiyar in the same panel as Hafiz Saeed. So much for pappi jhappi.

He must have felt right at home there.

ajinkya · Post by **ajinkya** » 03 Feb 2012 00:46

Mani Shankar Aiyar confronts

JuD chief on Pak TV

Jamaat-ud-Dawah chief Hafiz Muhammad Saeed appeared to lose his cool on a TV talk show on Thursday when parliamentarian Mani Shankar Aiyar questioned his contention that Indians did not accept Pakistan, and said he should be arrested and brought before a terrorism court.

"There are some persons like Hafiz Saeed in our country who do not want things to move forward but thankfully the ordinary people want our ties to improve. We can improve our relations irrespective of what his (Saeed's) opinion is.

...We do not want Pakistan to be split up or be destroyed. We want Pakistan to be strong, prosperous and we want friendship with Pakistan.
"We want to face the world shoulder-to-shoulder with Pakistan and not oppose each other," Aiyar said.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 03 Feb 2012 00:53

You should post the full article instead of omitting the most important parts!

negi · Post by **negi** » 03 Feb 2012 01:41

To describe MSA in kind he is someone who has grown up on Chacha Nehru's cool aid , so no $hit that bugger suffers from similar hallucinations. Latter got shafted by his 'chin bhais' (deservedly so) former too shall get his due from the ones whom he aspires to rub shoulder or whatever else he feels like.

archan · Post by **archan** » 03 Feb 2012 01:53

However, I think we should often repeat this sentence loudly in various international forums.

We do not want Pakistan to be split up or be destroyed. We want Pakistan to be strong, prosperous and we want friendship with Pakistan.

I see no problem with that.
Ashwatthama mritah asti (naro va kunjaro)

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 03 Feb 2012 01:57

Negi, In the above new article he did want Saeed to be arrested and tried. And Seaad weaseled from it claiming he was innocent. In fairness to MSA, Saeed was sprung on him by phone line.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 03 Feb 2012 02:16

rajanb wrote:I am a refugee from Sindh, but luckily placed in an environment where one, whilst going through hard times, had a chance to get back our lives. But the trials and tribulations, the grief and pain, though a distant memory,is still a memory of what was rightfully ours being snatched from us.

rajanb ji,
I think, there is still some story left to be told on that issue! India and Dharmic Sindhis should concentrate on regaining Tharparkar and Thatta districts. And Dharmic Sindhis should help in formulating a strategy to that end,

negi · Post by **negi** » 03 Feb 2012 02:20

^One Hafeez Saeed is not our problem it's hundreds of thousands of others who condone his acts whom MSA wants to befriend is our problem. MSA dislikes Saeed because latter punctures the hot fart balloon which MSA was merrily inflating on the talk show about Indo-Pak bhaichara.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 03 Feb 2012 03:39

Ahmedis' past and Pakistan's future
http://www.3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdail ... r-ali.html

-Arun
Sharing information, not opinions.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 03 Feb 2012 04:01

I wasnt bothered as much about MSA appearing in the same program has HS. It is the host who should be blamed for acting like a Paki for a few ratings.

MSA could have asked for HS arrest, admonished the host and walked out. Or better still, done the Chunkiyan thing claiming that he is afraid of being questioned by Indian courts for consorting with a known terrorist and walked out.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 03 Feb 2012 05:17

INTERVIEW OF AMBASSADOR MARC GROSSMAN
Massa Playing With the Mind Of Munna

Dunya News: And I mean when we talk about Afghans talking to Afghans, we’re really looking at the Taliban as a key factor here. So tell us what – how far have you gone with the Taliban up until now?

Marc Grossman: Well, as I say, it’s not – our objective in any conversations that we’ve had is only one, and that objective is simply to open the door for Afghans to talk to Afghans. So any conversation that we have, whether it’s with people who are in the insurgency – Secretary Clinton has said that we’ve had some preliminary contact with the Taliban – or whether it’s with other countries or with other people, it’s only with one message and that message is: Let’s do everything we can together to get Afghans to talk to other Afghans.
Dunya News: So now you’re saying let’s look at what steps are you taking, what steps have you taken to implement that message? So what are we doing now? You met. You’re going to – is there a Taliban office that is going to be set up in Doha. And what are the mechanics of that?
Marc Grossman: Yeah. Well, first of all, who I see and where I see them – you’d be astonished if I gave you all the details of that. But on the question of --
Dunya News: We are very happy to hear the details you are willing to tell us.
Marc Grossman: You’d be amazed.
Dunya News: Yes. That is the good things. Tell us about it.
Marc Grossman: But you’d be amazed were I to talk about that, which you’ll understand is best not to.
Dunya News: Sure.

Marc Grossman: Well, I’d say a couple of things. First of all, there is a great need, I believe, especially now, to get back into the conversation with Pakistan about reconciliation. And our ambassador has done a great job in Islamabad, and we welcome Ambassador Rehman here. And so there’s a conversation going on.
But I’d like to take it back to the next level, where we can really talk about reconciliation, one. Two is we ought to get back to meetings of the core group of Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the United States, because that’s also a very important place to talk about reconciliation. Third, I think for Pakistan there’s decisions to be made about the safe havens and about the enablers, which can keep this war going. And this war going, in my view anyway, and I recognize I’m not a Pakistani and I’m a foreigner – but my view is, is that the continuation of the conflict in Afghanistan is bad for Pakistan.

Marc Grossman: Well, first of all, I think, as the President said last night, and I wouldn’t add or subtract to that – but again, let’s wait and see what the Pakistani parliament has to say and the Pakistani government has to say about this, and see what we can do to work together. But the important thing is Pakistanis and Americans are both victims of terrorism, and we ought to find a way to systematically be able to identify that shared interest and act on it together.
Dunya News: Can there be any rethink on the drones as far as Pakistan – as far as the process of conducting the drone attacks?
Marc Grossman: Well, as I say, I’d like to see what the Pakistani parliament has to say. We

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 03 Feb 2012 05:29

PM Gilani to be indicted in contempt case on Feb 13
( No squeezing be Sqeezer on valentine day )

Gillano Goes Gropping Guillotine

The Supreme Court has summoned Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani on Feb 13 ruling that he committed contempt of court by not implementing court orders. Charges would be framed against the prime minister during his presence in the court on Feb 13. It was a shock announcement in a long-running case that significantly escalated pressure on the embattled prime minister, threatening to plunge his weak government deeper into crisis and force early elections within months. Head of the seven-judge bench Justice Nasir-ul-Mulk told the court there were grounds to proceed against Gilani over the government's refusal to follow a court order and ask Swiss authorities to re-open corruption cases against President Asif Ali Zardari. Earlier, the Supreme Court asked prime minister's counsel Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan, to complete his arguments as the larger bench of the apex court resumed hearing. Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan told the court that the prime minister acted on the advice of ministry in accordance with rules of business. Justice Nasirul Mulk remarked that on one hand there was advice and on the other hand there were clear court orders. He said that contempt case could not be initiated against the prime minister even the advices were wrong. Ahsan said that he wanted to save the court from embarrassment. “Do you want to say court’s respect will be increased by not implementing its orders” Justice Asif Saeed Khosa remarked. Justice Nasirul Mulk remarked that law secretary had told the court that Swiss cases against President Asif Ali Zardari could not be reopened

MurthyB · Post by **MurthyB** » 03 Feb 2012 05:34

A_Gupta wrote:Ahmedis' past and Pakistan's future
http://www.3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdail ... r-ali.html

-Arun
Sharing information, not opinions.

Wow, learnt something new.

(Known) Qadri --> Salman Taseer --> Mohammad din Taseer --> Ilamdin funeral --> Raj pal (murdered)

(Something new) Ahmadiyas -> Mirza -> Pandit Lekh Ram (murdered)

Didn't know that even the founder of the sect had blood on his hands. Poor "Seculars" and "Mirzaees" in Bakistan

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 03 Feb 2012 05:43

jamwal wrote:There are too many threads dedicated to Bakis already.

same opinion here.

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 03 Feb 2012 06:32

Ahmadiyas are reaping what they had sown!! They claimed that Guru Nanak Was a Muslim as he visited Mecca., When Guru Nanak Visited Mecca in 1400s it was under Hashamiite's control who didn't stopped anybody to visit Mecca. The restriction that only muslims can visit Mecca is as recent as Ibn Wahab and since Saudis took over the control of Mecca.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 Feb 2012 08:55

negi wrote: MSA dislikes Saeed because latter punctures the hot fart balloon which MSA was merrily inflating on the talk show about Indo-Pak bhaichara.

This is interesting:

MSA=Congress/Aman ki Asha = Disliked by patriotic Indians

Saeed is able to puncture MSA's hot fart balloon = opposes Mani Shankar Aiyar

Does that mean Saeed == patriotic Indians?

Patriotic Indians know that MSA is wrong. Saeed knows that MSA is wrong. Patriotic Indians have an ally in Saeed. But hey, you know what? Mani Shankar too has an ==ally in Pakistan among their Aman ki asha crowd. So it is bhaichara of an unexpected sort. Aiyer'r views are aligned with the minority WKKs of Pakistan. Patriotic Indians views are aligned with Hafeez saeed.

MSA wants Indians and Pakistanis to unite.

Hafeez Saeed and patriotic Indians want Indians and Pakistanis to stay divided.

Guess who has a common cause with whom? Guess which Paki opinions are helped by MSA? Guess which Indian opinions are helped by Saeed?

This can be taken further.

If I argue that only 0.1% of Pakistanis desire friendship with India and 99.9% support Hafeez Saeed, how many Indians support Mani Shankar Aiyer?

If only 0.1% Indian support MSA and 99.9% do not, then it means that 99.9% of Indians and 99.9% Pakistanis (along with Hafeez Saeed) are in agreement with each other.

But Hafeez Saeed wants to hit/punish India. 99.9% of Indians do not want that. So what is the exact nature of agreement with Hafiz Saeed?

if I am accused of "twisting words" could someone please untwist them and explain how I am wrong?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 03 Feb 2012 09:08

jash_p, why are you tying up two disparate things in the above post ? This is like a student who learnt by rote about cow and when asked a question instead about a tree, wrote everything about the cow and added that such a cow could be tied to the tree in question.

Please delete your post. Or, I will.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 03 Feb 2012 09:11

shiv wrote: This can be taken further.

If I argue that only 0.1% of Pakistanis desire friendship with India and 99.9% support Hafeez Saeed, how many Indians support Mani Shankar Aiyer?

If only 0.1% Indian support MSA and 99.9% do not, then it means that 99.9% of Indians and 99.9% Pakistanis (along with Hafeez Saeed) are in agreement with each other.

But Hafeez Saeed wants to hit/punish India. 99.9% of Indians do not want that. So what is the exact nature of agreement with Hafiz Saeed?

2 parties in conflict obviously agree with each other on the point that they are in conflict.

It's not necessarily the case that the message MSA is giving should not be given. The problem is the yearning for self-deception. Like Nehru was finally forced to admit that "we were living in a world of our own". Even in that admission he showed cowardice by trying to spread around the blame.

Shaashtanga · Post by **Shaashtanga** » 03 Feb 2012 09:35

The Inside Story - US report targetting ISI
Aljazeera video 1feb12

A discussion totally hijacked by Lal Topi wala maskhara.
Have ISI & PA now decided to go on offensive by unleashing the uber pig ZZH instead of the old pig Hamid gulgul.

kmkraoind · Post by **kmkraoind** » 03 Feb 2012 09:47

MSA best can be described as a cat sitting on a fence that separating a peaceful, prosperous neighborhood and a jungle with burning patches who is threatening to burn entire jungle. One this side it behaves as a pet cat so that the food and shelter is guaranteed, on other side it want to become a model cat for junglee cats, but wilder cats always shafts this fence sitter.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 Feb 2012 09:49

Pranav wrote:
2 parties in conflict obviously agree with each other on the point that they are in conflict.

It's not necessarily the case that the message MSA is giving should not be given.

Pranavji. Mani Shankar Aiyers message states that Saeed is a criminal. The statement that quotes Saeed as puncturing MSA's "hot fart balloon" indicates that MSA's views are wrong and that Saeed has managed to call MSA out. What alternative message is sought to be sent by that statement? If MSA is right, Saeed is wrong. If Saeed is right MSA is wrong.

Pranav wrote: The problem is the yearning for self-deception. Like Nehru was finally forced to admit that "we were living in a world of our own". Even in that admission he showed cowardice by trying to spread around the blame.

Basically all this is added fluff about MSA, which is a personal opinion and has nothing to do with the article quoted. It is ironic that Saeed's murderous criminality has to be set aside to use his credentials to say "I disagree with MSA. Look even Saeed is proving that MSA's "hot fart balloon" is wrong"

Is MSA such a threat that Saeed has to be used as speaker of great wisdom about MSA? This sort of self goal is completely unnecessary. Why blame Nehru/MSA for self goals? If MSA is being accused of having a faulty thought process, exactly what indicates great wisdom in the above self goal that estimates MSA based on Saeed's opinion.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 03 Feb 2012 10:04

^^^ The content of Saeed's demented raving is not to be given much credence. All I am saying is that policy should be based on realistic assessments and not wishful thinking. It is not necessarily the case that the message MSA is giving should not be given. But I do doubt his capacity for objective analysis, given his known beliefs on incidents like Batla House.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 03 Feb 2012 10:06

There is a specific role that Mani Shankar Iyer is playing and I commend him for that. Hamid Mir should not have brought the terrorist on the show (he lost some credibility and switched topic...he asks Iyer if he did not mind him bringing terrorist on the show implying that this situation was not planned). Mani's impromptu response to such a heavy situation has been extremely good. He was trying to find a common platform of court cases, judiciary etc within the narrative that exist today. Of course it is desirable to change the narrative but needs a massive leap of imagination on the part of audience. Instead, it is easier to dilute/deflect some negative attention especially at a time these terrorists are trying to regroup and rebuild.

Check it out - Mani Iyer on capital talk

Sudip · Post by **Sudip** » 03 Feb 2012 10:18

MSA's TV debate.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 03 Feb 2012 10:20

I am amused to see how much hard Mani Shankar Iyer is trying to talk shuddh urdu.

In part2, he says..pakis are so lovely, so intelligent, so similar...there is no nation in the world whom we love as much..if he was a pakistani, he work under folks like Hamid mir..

He does take it to next level..

Folks who know telugu will know the real meaning of praising some one like..meeru poojyulu, kuberulu, nana vidha balasampannulu, kempurushulu etc etc...and rest I am sure telugu folks can relate to

basically if you add all the first letters..it means a very dirty word.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 03 Feb 2012 10:23

shiv wrote:
if I am accused of "twisting words" could someone please untwist them and explain how I am wrong?

That it is beneath any self-respecting Indian's dignity to debate a bloody vile terrorist. Oh, but nowadays every shameful act by India is Chanakyan, or engineered to create spilt between TSP civilians and military; so maybe this abominable act by MSA is also in the same vein?

symontk · Post by **symontk** » 03 Feb 2012 10:24

if I am accused of "twisting words" could someone please untwist them and explain how I am wrong?

Let me try. The below quote although correct doesn't convey on what reasons indians and pakistanis need to stay divided. Both are for differnt reasons

Hafeez Saeed and patriotic Indians want Indians and Pakistanis to stay divided.

Indians want a division from Pakistan so as to acknowledge that all terror happens from Pakistan. If India and Pakistan became united, there is no way to acknowledge this. Similarly, Pakistanis want to have a division with India since India has Hindu majority and to show that Pakistan is different from India.

Thus although division is preferred by both the Indians and Paksitanis, it's basis is different. If we extend the argument further, this groups want to swallow other country by itself. Patriotic Indians want to merge Pakistan with India based on the Akhand Bharat and patriotic Pakistanis want to merge India with Pakistan based on the Islamist expansion policy

Similar is the case where Indians and Pakistanis want peace. Pakistanis want peace with India and union with India since it will hide the ills of their society. They can blame "hindus" for all the ills and appreciate Islam for all good. Indians want peace with Pakistan since they believe Pakistanis will understand that the good lies in the better relations between both countries and possible merger of both the countries

In short both the countries favour / relish mergers for different reasons although they are divided for the same reason

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 03 Feb 2012 10:36

IMO, this round definitely goes to Mani Shankar Iyer (not sure about his other antics). I am going to correct his name in my previous posts.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 03 Feb 2012 10:56

Pakistan hints at end to Nato blockade
http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news- ... o-blockade

ISLAMABAD - Pakistan signalled on Thursday that it could shortly end a more than two-month blockade on NATO supplies entering Afghanistan for foreign forces.Islamabad shut the border and ordered a review of its US alliance after air strikes killed 24 Pakistani soldiers on November 26, in what NATO and the US military later blamed on a series of mistakes by both sides.Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar told reporters that parliament, tasked with adopting the review, would “hopefully” meet next week.“I cannot pre-empt what the parliament is going to decide but I would assume that should not be so much of a problem,” she said when asked if the recommendations would include re-opening the border.Responding as to when parliament would pass the review, she said: “I’m going to hopefully ensure and push it very hard that it is no later than within a week... first half of February is probable.” She said Pakistan would encourage Afghan insurgent groups like the Haqqani network and the Taliban to pursue peace if asked by Afghanistan.Khar also told reporters that the Afghan reconciliation process was active on several fronts but was far from producing results.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 03 Feb 2012 10:59

These are political equivalent of Diffa-e-pukistan council preparing for election and of course..as usual fundamentalist will only get 0.001% of public vote but will have VETO on every policy of pakistan.
Two rallies that shook Sindh

Considering how organized these rallys are, I feel that Puki Army planned for these way too before...even before the salale attack which came in handy to ban drone attacks in pukistan. Otherwise, any given DPC rally's stage is the most hottest target for a drone attack US will every find.

Truly, as outed by Saleem Shehzad, Pukis are getting ready for Gazwa-e-Hind right after Taliban re-installation in Afghanistan.

Single most important objective for US should be to break the back of these jihadis..there may be umpteen fissures that may exist among these beards...it should be played and this needs to stop. US cannot afford to ignore these else it will prove extermely costly for them in afghanistan and elsewhere.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 03 Feb 2012 11:07

negi wrote:^One Hafeez Saeed is not our problem it's hundreds of thousands of others who condone his acts whom MSA wants to befriend is our problem. MSA dislikes Saeed because latter punctures the hot fart balloon which MSA was merrily inflating on the talk show about Indo-Pak bhaichara.

And what choice does MSA has, unlike TSP RAPE he does even pretend to talk decently. Can he show Paapi Jappi to Saeed mass murderer? Even I am willing to talk on the phone with Hafiz Saeed and tell him why him, his army are nothing but mass murderer's who should tried for crimes against humanity.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 03 Feb 2012 11:15

shiv wrote:
Pranav wrote:
2 parties in conflict obviously agree with each other on the point that they are in conflict.

It's not necessarily the case that the message MSA is giving should not be given.
Pranavji. Mani Shankar Aiyers message states that Saeed is a criminal. The statement that quotes Saeed as puncturing MSA's "hot fart balloon" indicates that MSA's views are wrong and that Saeed has managed to call MSA out. What alternative message is sought to be sent by that statement? If MSA is right, Saeed is wrong. If Saeed is right MSA is wrong.

Pranav wrote: The problem is the yearning for self-deception. Like Nehru was finally forced to admit that "we were living in a world of our own". Even in that admission he showed cowardice by trying to spread around the blame.
Basically all this is added fluff about MSA, which is a personal opinion and has nothing to do with the article quoted. It is ironic that Saeed's murderous criminality has to be set aside to use his credentials to say "I disagree with MSA. Look even Saeed is proving that MSA's "hot fart balloon" is wrong"

Is MSA such a threat that Saeed has to be used as speaker of great wisdom about MSA? This sort of self goal is completely unnecessary. Why blame Nehru/MSA for self goals? If MSA is being accused of having a faulty thought process, exactly what indicates great wisdom in the above self goal that estimates MSA based on Saeed's opinion.

Shiv 2 wrongs don't make a right and the questions is not one but different;

1) Is Hafiz Saeed view of murdering Indians correct - Wrong

2) Is hafiz Saeed Mass murder of Indians is Justified - Wrong

3) Is Hafiz Saeed view that Paki problems are because of India - Wrong

Now Questions of MSA/ Nehruvians would be

1) Pakis and peace loving and it is only because of Hindu fascists there is enimity - Wrong.

So there is no self goal - the Answer is both are wrong, But Hafiz Saeed is Criminal who represents Paki Army and MSA was wrong in thinking that Paki Rape would treat him kindly.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 03 Feb 2012 11:16

TFT Nuggets

ISI chief to go in March
Daily Nawa-e-Waqt reported that ISI chief General Pasha was expected to finish his second tenure in office on 18 March 2012 and will go home. Major general Naushad and corps commander Peshawar General Khalid Rabbani were being considered for the ISI top job.

Marvi Memon leftover of Imran Khan
According to Haroon Rasheed in Jang old PMLQ firebrand Marvi Memon wanted to announce her entry into Insaf party but Shah Mehmood Qureshi did not allow her to make the announcement and later did not let her come to the mike and speak. She was politically savvy and hardworking but was emotional and self-centred. She wanted Imran Khan to announce her entry and then put her in charge of information, which Imran Khan denied her. After that she turned away from Insaf. She was picked up by PMLN which was like eating the leftovers of Imran Khan.

Dr AQ Khan attacks Imran Khan
World famous nuclear scientist Dr AQ Khan was quoted in Mashriq as saying that the end of Imran Khan would be same as Mian Azhar after he revolted from the PMLQ. He said if a gathering of the people and clapping was any yardstick then Mira and Reema would be more popular leaders than anyone

TFT Such Gup

We hear from reliable sources that Chory Shuj of Guj showed exemplary gumption at a meeting with Canny recently. The Chory complained that many of his Qing's party stalwarts had been encouraged to defect to The Great Khan. Canny pooh poohed the idea but the Chory stuck to his guns and blamed the Invisible Soldiers Inc. He then pulled out his Blackberry and showed Canny the evidence - text messages from you-know-who to various Quitters who bolted from Chory's camp to The Khan's. We hear Canny then told the Chory that he'd "take care of it". Is that why the lota stampede has slowed down of late?

The Great Khan is developing expensive tastes. We hear he has taken to jetting about in private or chartered aircraft, within the country and abroad too. Some of this transport is provided by his richy-rich supporters, the rest is chartered by the party which is flush with funds, rumour has it. Wags are saying he was flown out on a private jet from Dubai to Davos to attend the World Economic Forum meeting, recently, and back from where he took a commercial connection onwards to Kolkatta and the literary festival. For all the high-minded talk about "waste" and "corruption", how will The Great Khan say no to his providers and never mind about his carbon footprint.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 03 Feb 2012 11:18

Anujan wrote:I wasnt bothered as much about MSA appearing in the same program has HS. It is the host who should be blamed for acting like a Paki for a few ratings.

MSA could have asked for HS arrest, admonished the host and walked out. Or better still, done the Chunkiyan thing claiming that he is afraid of being questioned by Indian courts for consorting with a known terrorist and walked out.

Thats the problem with India WKK Sikulars, they think by pandering to the Rape's and Paki Fundoos they will be immune to attacks. The problem is for Pakis there is the unfinished agenda of Killing many Indians and raising Green Jhanda on India Gate.

MSA was wrong to Travel to Pak and Address Paki Ar**Ho*** as normal Humans

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 03 Feb 2012 12:04

Shiv ji,

The counter argument is zimple onlee. If somebody says X committed murder and Y is a rapist to a family Z. Now unfortunately for Y, his rape would have been covered up if X didnt commit murder. Y saying X is a murderer does not absolve Y of rape. and if Z pooh poohs Y for saying the same and then says Z and Y are both criminals. It doesnt follow that Z is friendly to X.

You or I can hate two people irrespective of the love/hate relationship between them. and we can love as well. All of the married do love both their mother and wife, right

Read further only if you dont want to invoke the "Goldwin's law". I couldnt immediately think of a better example.
If one hates Hitler and Stalin, but since Stalin hates Hitler - it doesnt follow your equality or friendship hypothesis.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 03 Feb 2012 12:57

shiv wrote: Does that mean Saeed == patriotic Indians? ?

I will take a different track. You are correct.

Saeed == Patriotic Indians. Since they in different ways do the best for Indian intrests overall.

These are two groups which know what is really what, cut through the maya and get to the reality.

As we have said before, the Saeeds are our best friends, they make sure that the slow poison does not get injected in our system by calling poison poison.

A Saeed >>>>>> MSA+MMS for Indian intrests. A honest enemy is much better than a dumb and corrupt "friend"