Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP) : 24 July 2012

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 28 Jul 2012 13:17

CRamS wrote:My question was more about US law rather than US perfidy which you address. . . .

I understand. I think I didn't complete the post correctly. The perfidy and the compliance with law are inter-related, IMHO. In order to comply with the law that would kick in automatically and brand TSP as such, the LeT-GoTSP-PA nexus has to be proven. The US has all the evidence to do so, but it has chosen not to do so for its own reasons, which must be obvious to us. OTOH, the US also has PA-GoTSP-Haqqani nexus and has gone to the extent of calling the Haqqanis as the 'veritable sword arm of the PA' through the highest ranking military officer of the US in a sworn testimony to the Congress. This statement has been later discarded by the PotUS. But, it was a hint to the Pakistanis that the US can go the whole hog if it wanted to. The effort therefore is not to go that far as to label Haqqanis as a terror outfit, which they undoubtedly are, because it would then lead to branding TSP and all the unpleasantness associated in dealing with the aftermath. Pakistan may also have some US skeletons locked up in its cupboards and the US may be mindful of that. However, the mounting US losses and the fear of the future if the Haqqanis are left unpunished, force the US to threaten Pakistan with sanctions but not actually carry out the threat. Having been in the same position of being branded twice before, the Pakistanis are confident that they can weather the storm in the teacup suitably, a result which the Americans also perhaps desire but without losing much face. Ultimately, an understanding will be reached that the US would not press too much on the LeT and Pakistan will launch a token operation in NWA and even help in some peace talks. PA & GoTSP are confident that once the US back is seen, things can go back to normal in Afghanistan and regain the lost paradise. The US Senators/Congressmen understand what needed to be done and are playing along as well.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 28 Jul 2012 13:18

harbans wrote:And i bet, the moment the US declares Paki's a terrorist state, we'll have Mulayam, Digvijay, Mamta, the commies, A Roy, S Swamy types all declaring India will be with Pakistan if US dares attack Pakistan. Anyone wants to dispute this?

Yes. Not only will I dispute this I will bet US$ 1000 that it won't happen. This will be the safest bet I have taken in my life because the US will never declare Pakistan a terrorist state. In fact - why not make that a US$ 10,000 bet? Neither you nor I will lose anyway. We will wait for that declaration forever.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 28 Jul 2012 13:38

SS:

Indeed, US laws or for that matter "international law" US talks about from time to time are only as good as the will and need to enforce them. Thats why I laugh my gut off when US mouthpieces on CNN/Fox sometimes cite "international law" to justify US action/inaction as it suits them. I guess one of the hall marks of a supreme superpower

. The other day on NPR (supposedly a liberal network

), they had a discussion on Stuxnet, the computer virus that CIA/Mossad/Iranian TFTA etc used to castrate Iran's nuke plant control systems. The program was about the new modern warfare and how US faces a cyber threat. With a straight face, the US "experts" cited international law to highlight the limitations US might face in using cyberwar fare. I mean I was laughing my ass off at the sheer self righteous delusion from the same folks who didn't battle an eyelid to set aside "international law" to knock off Iran's nukes using Stuxnet, and won't hesitate to do the same against any other country should the need arise, and they talk about "international law"

. In fact, I wonder who introduced cybeware into the war waging arsenal in the fist place?

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 28 Jul 2012 14:04

^^ What's new? Didn't a Red Indian say, over centuries back "white man speak with forked tongue"

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 28 Jul 2012 18:11

^^^ Totally off-topic, but this reminds me of a Tintin comic:
http://arunsmusings.blogspot.com/2012/0 ... 31-32.html

paramu · Post by **paramu** » 28 Jul 2012 19:03

CRamS wrote:SS:

Indeed, US laws or for that matter "international law" US talks about from time to time are only as good as the will and need to enforce them. Thats why I laugh my gut off when US mouthpieces on CNN/Fox sometimes cite "international law" to justify US action/inaction as it suits them. I guess one of the hall marks of a supreme superpower . The other day on NPR (supposedly a liberal network ), they had a discussion on Stuxnet, the computer virus that CIA/Mossad/Iranian TFTA etc used to castrate Iran's nuke plant control systems. The program was about the new modern warfare and how US faces a cyber threat. With a straight face, the US "experts" cited international law to highlight the limitations US might face in using cyberwar fare. I mean I was laughing my ass off at the sheer self righteous delusion from the same folks who didn't battle an eyelid to set aside "international law" to knock off Iran's nukes using Stuxnet, and won't hesitate to do the same against any other country should the need arise, and they talk about "international law" . In fact, I wonder who introduced cybeware into the war waging arsenal in the fist place?

They use the term "international law" when they need the get legitimacy and explain to "world" audience.
But they will followwhat is their national interest to attack any country

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 28 Jul 2012 19:17

Found an interesting blog called Partition of India. It has links to the Jinnah Papers. I will try to post interesting snippets on the great Djinnah (yes, from his own papers). Meanwhile, here's an interesting look at how the paki mind had started to see itself separate and different from its ancestors. This is text of the speech delivered by the first paki ambassador to the US.

Ispahani: We are from outside

Mirza Abol Hassan Ispahani was Pakistan's first Ambassador to the U.S.A. In his letter to Jinnah, dated September 19, 1947, he encloses "for your private information, copy of the speech that I shall deliver at the time I present my credentials" {to the President of the United States}. Here is the text of the enclosure.

Mr. President:

As the first Ambassador of Pakistan to the United States, it is my great privilege to present to you, Sir, my Letters of Credence, which open a new chapter in the relations between the East and your great country.

Pakistan came into existence, just like her neighbour, the Dominion of India, as a result of the recent partition of British India. We are, Mr. President, a new country in name, but old in history, tradition and culture. Ours is an ancient race, akin to your own. Our forefathers, like yours, came from the steppes of Central Asia and the Caucasian mountains. In one of the great movements, which from time to time, changed the history of mankind, our people moved South and East and set up an empire in the fabled Indies. After several centuries, renowned throughout the world for their glory and culture, the sceptre passed, less than a century ago, from our hands, into those of the British. Now again, our people stand free and independent in the territories where, once more, our national flag flies high, a guarantee of brotherhood and justice for all who live under its protection, and for all who bear it true allegiance and good faith.

We shall endeavour our utmost, Mr. President, to develop and maintain friendship and collaboration with every country which is willing to reciprocate equally and frankly, our cordial sentiments, and with none more so than the United States, to whom I have the honour, as Ambassador, to bring the sincerest greetings from my Government and my people, and from the father of our Nation, Quaid-e-Azam Mohamed Ali Jinnah.

paramu · Post by **paramu** » 28 Jul 2012 19:22

partha wrote:^
Why would (should) US bother to declare Pakistan a terrorist country when India (biggest victim of Pak terror) itself hasn't done so?

The oil lobby is strong in DC that they will prevent any of this
Pak is not alone in US. It has a large support groups which make sure that it survives.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 28 Jul 2012 20:51

Regarding international law: An American officer said (in David Sanger's book) that America would not make laws limiting cyber attacks as long as they are the leaders in that domain.

This is similar to our experience in nuclear matters. They started thinking about NPT etc when they saw other countries can make nuclear weapons.

Roperia · Post by **Roperia** » 28 Jul 2012 20:57

Olympics scam: The Sun story conspiracy against Pakistan, says Rehman Malik

The interior minister further claimed that The Sun’s story was part of a conspiracy against Pakistan. “He got a passport, but did he travel on it? No! Did he misuse it anywhere? No!” Malik declared. “Ali Asad has been involved in similar frauds in the past, and still is.”

Rehman Malik should tell UK that Visa fraud is a global problem and Pakistan is at the forefront of War on Visa fraud. Instead of blaming Pakistan in public, Britain should share evidence that such a fraud did actually take place. Britain may seek help from Indian Home Ministry as they are very adept at writing dossiers.

Ardeshir · Post by **Ardeshir** » 28 Jul 2012 21:30

anupmisra wrote: Our forefathers, like yours, came from the steppes of Central Asia and the Caucasian mountains.

I have always been fascinated by Pakis identifying with invaders and marauders rather than the original people of what is now Pakistan, Baluchistan, Sindh and the culture they espoused.
Almost like Jews identifying with Eichmann and Goebbels, although the scale of murder Indics suffered is far higher and sustained.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 28 Jul 2012 23:47

Ayesha Siddiqa tweeted: "the initial contact between Rohingyas and JI's Al-Badr was back in the 1960s".

Explains some of the Pak. uproar now.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 29 Jul 2012 02:03

A_Gupta wrote:Ayesha Siddiqa tweeted: "the initial contact between Rohingyas and JI's Al-Badr was back in the 1960s".
Explains some of the Pak. uproar now.

Rohingyas wanted to part of pakistan in 47 .

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 29 Jul 2012 02:16

Rohingyas are being trained by the Pakis. A suitable amount of public outrage is also being whipped out -- Lawyers in Karachi took a "long march" to express solidarity and JI asked Pakistan government to strongly protest to Burma and the taliban have issues threats to Burma. Burma is also being hyped up in TV news channels*. This is the groundwork to collect donations, and get the madrassa jihadi factory ready.

Burma is close to vulnerable Bangladesh and India's NE. With the political situation there improving and India having no dispute with Burma, you can expect relationship to normalize and things like roads and railways being laid from NE to Burma.

Pakis obviously dont want this and want to convert Burma to another Pakistan.

*Pakis obviously would like to believe that they are the custodians for world Muslims while hiring mercenaries to kill in Bahrain, aiding the Saudi Regime, cosying up to Libya while bombing the Balochis.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 29 Jul 2012 02:53

I am sure the Rohingyas will be airlifted to Pakistan as there is evidently so much love there for them.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 29 Jul 2012 02:58

Rohingyas are being relegated as second class citizens in Burma. Burmese (in the absence of political parties for the last few decades) have strong Buddhist monastery system, where people look to the pronouncements of Monks for political guidance. The Monks have been issuing statements along the lines of "Rohingyas are inherently violent, they are bad" etc.

There are not many Rohingyas in Burma, in a few hundreds of thousands. India should intervene quietly to make sure that they are accommodated somehow politically. India still has massive "soft" influence. Burmese are Theravada buddhists and bulk of their holy places are in India. I am sure that visa/travel etc between India and Burma will be liberalized. Trouble in Burma means trouble in India.

We should impress upon Burma that if they dont solve their problems, Pakistan and its ummah brothers will gladly fish in troubled waters. Burma is in the cross roads of shipping, arms and narcotics smuggling. The Ummah will gladly oblige to make it into another Afghanistan.

Dipanker · Post by **Dipanker** » 29 Jul 2012 03:38

sanjaykumar wrote:I am sure the Rohingyas will be airlifted to Pakistan as there is evidently so much love there for them.

Absolutely. Paki love Rohingyas, not their close cousin though, the Bangladeshis! In 1971 they killed 3 millions of them and raped 500,000.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 29 Jul 2012 05:24

Why is Britain complaining about visa fraud when countries like Canada are handling it gracefully?

http://www.torontosun.com/2012/07/26/im ... n-pakistan

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Jul 2012 05:59

SSridhar wrote:
CRamS, you have raised a very pertinent question. LeT is used by the US only to pressurize TSP whenever it needs to. The US had been aware of LeT's terror camps (testimony of the French terrorist Willy Brigitte) and had turned a blind eye (or even approved it, perhaps). We also know that the US was aware of Headley's LeT activities but chose to turn a blind eye once again. LeT, all said and done, does not target the Americans the same way that Haqqani does. Besides, why should the US declare Pakistan as a terrorist country based on LeT's terrorism activities against India ? .....

SSridhar, I know Rman will have a hissy fit but most likely explanation is LeT was a joint project in mid 80s during Reagan time-frame. Just as the Afghan Mujheddin were to take on FSU in Afghanistan, LeT and assorted dregs were to take on India in India. Its part of the Cold War fight. No hard feelings. Just deal with the reality and neutralize them.

The fact that Daoud Gilani can enter and exit TSP terrorist orgs with ease and at time of choosing by US shows he is a known entity to the terrorist orgs.

I think he ws put away when first time as part of closing the networks. He gets reactivated like some John LeCarre's "spy who came in from the cold" after 911 and heads to the very same gangs.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 29 Jul 2012 06:30

RamanaGaru,

What you say is so profound. I wonder how US practices this dichotomy, strict adherence to rule of law and moral clarity at home, while going to the extent of even sponsoring terrorism to secure its interests abroad. And they do this with supreme self confidence of upholding America's manifest destiny. Maybe TSP has a point when US asks it to crack down on terrorists of interest to US, TSP fires back saying even US has terrorist proxies to secure its interests, so why the double standard. Maybe this is the Abrahamic jihadi way of life, anything in pursuit of upholding their beliefs and way of life is the work of God. Problem with this way of life is, is it my God or your God?

For those who think there is a dime's worth of difference between Dems & Reps, Obama or Romney on foreign policy, particularly dealing with TSP, and more importantly India TSP equal equal, please read: Romney and Obama Strain to Show Gap on Foreign Policy

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 29 Jul 2012 07:37

Zardari has invited MMS to visit Pakistan and celebrate Guru Nanak anniversary there.

Which falls on 28 Nov.

Trust pakis to come up with something like this.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 29 Jul 2012 07:54

ramana wrote: SSridhar, I know Rman will have a hissy fit but most likely explanation is LeT was a joint project in mid 80s during Reagan time-frame. Just as the Afghan Mujheddin were to take on FSU in Afghanistan, LeT and assorted dregs were to take on India in India. Its part of the Cold War fight. No hard feelings. Just deal with the reality and neutralize them.

Reagan retired in 1988

The LeT was formed after the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1989.

Like all Pakistani jihadi groups currently in operation the LeT's first operations were in Afghanistan. That is why Hafez Saeed more often than not likes to wear the Afghan pakol in public.

The LeT did not begin to operate in India until after the fall of Kabul in 1992 - i.e. the Clinton years.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 29 Jul 2012 08:45

Johann wrote:
ramana wrote: SSridhar, I know Rman will have a hissy fit but most likely explanation is LeT was a joint project in mid 80s during Reagan time-frame. Just as the Afghan Mujheddin were to take on FSU in Afghanistan, LeT and assorted dregs were to take on India in India. Its part of the Cold War fight. No hard feelings. Just deal with the reality and neutralize them.
Reagan retired in 1988

The LeT was formed after the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1989.

Like all Pakistani jihadi groups currently in operation the LeT's first operations were in Afghanistan. That is why Hafez Saeed more often than not likes to wear the Afghan pakol in public.

The LeT did not begin to operate in India until after the fall of Kabul in 1992 - i.e. the Clinton years.

It is very murky to trace the origins of an organization, leave alone a terrorist organization like the LeT. Here is what I think how it developed.

Hafeez Sayeed was a co-founder, along with Abdullah Azzam, of Maktab-al-Khidmat (Office of Service) in Peshawar in circa 1979 to help the Arab jihadis. After Azzam's assassination on Nov. 24, 1989, variously attributed to Israeli Mossad or even the mujahideen faction led by Osama bin Laden, the Maktab became Jama'at-ud-Dawah.

In parallel, Hafeez Sayeed had started, along with Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi, Markaz-daw’a-wal-Irshad (MDI) in Muridke in 1985. MDI was started with the twin objectives of peaceful activities (such as running charities and prosletyzation) and Islamist jihad. In 1987, the deaths of the Emirs of two other Ahl-e-Hadith organizations (Allama Ehsan Elahi Zaheer of Jama’at-Ahl-e-Hadith and Jamil al-Rehman of Jamaat al-Dawa al-Quran wal-Suna) enabled the absorption of the members of these two organizations swelling thereby the strength of MDI.

In 1990, LeT was launched officially by MDI as its militant wing with Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi as its commander while Prof. Hafeez Sayeed remained in overall charge of the organization.

After the 1992 Babri mosque destruction, LeT sent Azzam Cheema to India to set up Tanzeem Islahul Muslimeen which much later became Indian Mujahideen.

Hafeez Sayeed was nominated to be a member of Pakistan's Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) by Gen. Zia-ul-Haq. So, there was a clsoe cooperation between the PA and Professor saheb even before 1988. Ostensibly, the biggest enemy for the PA was and has been India, not Afghanistan. The fact that Professor saheb has been solely, widely and effectively used by the PA against India since the 1990s shows what the intention of the PA was in propping him up. After all, Gen. Zia-ul-Haq authored the theory of 'a thousand cuts to bleed India to death' and remained preoccupied with India until his death. Would it be so much off the mark to assume that the good General desired some of these cuts, deep ones at that, to be inflicted by Professor saheb ?

Prasanna · Post by **Prasanna** » 29 Jul 2012 08:48

sanjaykumar wrote:I am sure the Rohingyas will be airlifted to Pakistan as there is evidently so much love there for them.

Why pakistan? Indian muslims have allowed these Rohingyas Muslims to inflitrate into India, they are right here in delhi with muslim ngo's illegally providing them shelter throwing all immigration laws to the wind. Some have even got jobs in the Metro which has been warned by the intelligence agencies as a likely target for islamic terrorists.

While Bangladesh has rightly said they don't want any Rohingyas in Bangladesh due to their terrorist connections.
http://zeenews.india.com/news/world/ban ... 90357.html

`Bangladesh doesn’t want Rohingyas` London: Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has warned of possible terrorist connections among thousands of Muslim refugees trying to enter her country from neighbouring Myanmar.

The day is not far when these Rohingyas will be found complicit in terror attacks in and around delhi, if they are caught the indian muslims will scream persecution and demand those accused be released as has happened after the batla encounter.

If there any concerned citizens here I request them to call the delhi police number and demand action against the ngo and infiltrators or else sleep now until the next bomb blasts planned by these people wakes you up.

Roperia · Post by **Roperia** » 29 Jul 2012 09:10

Roperia wrote:Olympics scam: The Sun story conspiracy against Pakistan, says Rehman Malik

The interior minister further claimed that The Sun’s story was part of a conspiracy against Pakistan. “He got a passport, but did he travel on it? No! Did he misuse it anywhere? No!” Malik declared. “Ali Asad has been involved in similar frauds in the past, and still is.”

Rehman Malik should tell UK that Visa fraud is a global problem and Pakistan is at the forefront of War on Visa fraud. Instead of blaming Pakistan in public, Britain should share evidence that such a fraud did actually take place. Britain may seek help from Indian Home Ministry as they are very adept at writing dossiers.

Pak to seek visa scam suspect’s deportation | Yawn

Pakistan to seek deportation of the person who exposed the visa fraud - of giving fake Visas to their coreligionists, being done by the pious paliticians of LaWhore.

Who else would you expect this from - that's right, the country which sentenced the Dr. who helped find Bin Laden to 33 years.

The rule is simple - anybody who points out that Mohammedans of Pakistan are doing wrong will be punished.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 29 Jul 2012 09:24

Allah-o-Akbar.

North Waziristan elder sends legal notice to the UK Government for exporting drone components to the US

A Pakistani tribal elder from North Waziristan through his solicitors in the UK has sent a notice to the British government for allowing UK-based companies to export components used in the unmanned drones.

Malik Jalal, through his counsel, has written to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills to raise a suspicion that companies in Britain were exporting technology that was used on armed unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). The solicitors asked for clarification of Britain’s export regulations for such products. They also voiced concern at the possibility that some items, such as computer software used to stream video feeds, were being exported without a licence despite having a military or dual-use purpose.

The letter, supported by Reprieve, a human rights charity that has been campaigning against the use of drones to kill suspects, named a subsidiary of General Electric, the US industrial giant, as being one of the possible producers that has offices in Britain.

“We believe that one company that exports such products is General Electric Intelligent Platforms (GEIP),” the letter said. The GEIP, which has a manufacturing facility in Towcester, a small town in England, acknowledged that it did produce single-board computers that may be used on the ground stations that communicate with the UAVs.

However, the company distanced itself from any suggestion that its products played a part in strike operations.

A spokeswoman added that the company complied with UK regulations.

Dipanker · Post by **Dipanker** » 29 Jul 2012 09:37

Prasanna wrote: Why pakistan? Indian muslims have allowed these Rohingyas Muslims to inflitrate into India, they are right here in delhi with muslim ngo's illegally providing them shelter throwing all immigration laws to the wind. Some have even got jobs in the Metro which has been warned by the intelligence agencies as a likely target for islamic terrorists.

While Bangladesh has rightly said they don't want any Rohingyas in Bangladesh due to their terrorist connections.
http://zeenews.india.com/news/world/ban ... 90357.html
`Bangladesh doesn’t want Rohingyas` London: Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has warned of possible terrorist connections among thousands of Muslim refugees trying to enter her country from neighbouring Myanmar.
The day is not far when these Rohingyas will be found complicit in terror attacks in and around delhi, if they are caught the indian muslims will scream persecution and demand those accused be released as has happened after the batla encounter.

If there any concerned citizens here I request them to call the delhi police number and demand action against the ngo and infiltrators or else sleep now until the next bomb blasts planned by these people wakes you up.

You have been warned by the Mod, and you are still continuing on with your agenda? Give it up.

Dipanker · Post by **Dipanker** » 29 Jul 2012 09:39

Johann wrote:
ramana wrote: SSridhar, I know Rman will have a hissy fit but most likely explanation is LeT was a joint project in mid 80s during Reagan time-frame. Just as the Afghan Mujheddin were to take on FSU in Afghanistan, LeT and assorted dregs were to take on India in India. Its part of the Cold War fight. No hard feelings. Just deal with the reality and neutralize them.
Reagan retired in 1988

The LeT was formed after the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1989.

Like all Pakistani jihadi groups currently in operation the LeT's first operations were in Afghanistan. That is why Hafez Saeed more often than not likes to wear the Afghan pakol in public.

The LeT did not begin to operate in India until after the fall of Kabul in 1992 - i.e. the Clinton years.

Regan didn't retire in 1988. He retired at noontime 20th January, 1989.

Prasanna · Post by **Prasanna** » 29 Jul 2012 10:02

Dipanker, I'm pointing out the terror threats to India emanating from giving shelter to terrorists.

If you have nothing to contribute don't quote my posts and stop with your silly one liners.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 29 Jul 2012 10:20

From the editorial in DT

With the combined weight of the House and Senate coming down on this particular policy, coupled with the Pentagon’s open calls for action against the network, it is unlikely that the Obama White House can fend off the pressure, particularly in an election year. Nearer home, just this week the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan’s (TTP’s) leadership threatened to mount savage attacks against the state should Islamabad submit to mounting international pressure to move against the Haqqanis. While the TTP’s war on the state is hardly a secret, the open threat confirmed that the nexus between the Haqqani network and the TTP is only too real, that the former, the intelligence agencies’ nurtured proxy, is in bed with the state’s existential nemesis in the shape of the latter.

Whenever TSP is in a tight situation, it has to be relieved through an attack on India. Let's therefore brace for a terror attack.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Jul 2012 10:33

CRS, Read about the "Ruins of Empire" Pankaj Mishra in the NWW thread.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 29 Jul 2012 10:35

Policy of seeking strategic depth has changed

Ambassador {Sherry} Rehman pointed out that Pakistan’s old policy of seeking strategic depth in Afghanistan had changed and so had its attitude towards India.

“We are not hedging bets on the Taliban,” she said. But this change was not recognised in Washington nor was Pakistan’s sacrifices in the war against terror, said the ambassador.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 29 Jul 2012 10:37

They seem to have had a heated debate. Sherry is not quite as tactful as good haqqani. She is more of a hina filled with resentful self righteousness.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 29 Jul 2012 10:38

SSridhar wrote:Policy of seeking strategic depth has changed
Ambassador {Sherry} Rehman pointed out that Pakistan’s old policy of seeking strategic depth in Afghanistan had changed and so had its attitude towards India.

“We are not hedging bets on the Taliban,” she said. But this change was not recognised in Washington nor was Pakistan’s sacrifices in the war against terror, said the ambassador.

Caught too many times lying leads to trust deficit.

TSP ambassadors literally take the axiom about "Ambassadors lying abroad for the country" very diligently!

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 29 Jul 2012 10:51

CRamS wrote:I wonder how US practices this dichotomy, strict adherence to rule of law and moral clarity at home, while going to the extent of even sponsoring terrorism to secure its interests abroad.

There is no dichotomy, terrorism is sponsored by elites both in the US and abroad.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 29 Jul 2012 10:52

Religion without morality?
In search of Djinn Poaqon particle

Indeed, the contradictions that are highlighted in this month have a larger and abiding significance. As I have alluded at the outset, it’s the juxtaposition of an obsessive religiosity and a deep-rooted malaise in a moral context that one cannot easily explain. There seems to be a symbiotic relationship between the two.Having said this, I would hesitate to enter into a debate on the consequences of a passionate induction of religion in the public space – in politics. We just do not have an environment in which a rational debate can be held on these matters. It would be pointless, at this time, to emphasise that religion is not the business of the state. Remember that speech made by someone on August 11, 1947 – someone who is increasingly becoming irrelevant in this country?
( Abbe batta woh speech kanha hai?)
lso this week, the Gilani Poll/Gallup Pakistan reported the results of two surveys conducted in their series on Ramazan and the role of religion in Pakistan. It was reported on Tuesday, with reference to ‘self-per caption as a religious person’ that 84 percent of Pakistanis define themselves as religious persons, 12 percent say they are ‘not religious’. Interestingly, one percent say they are atheists while three percent did not answer the specific question.On Friday, it was revealed, with reference to ‘approaches to religion’, that 77 percent of Pakistanis say their approach to religion is to observe religious code, while 23 percent say they can serve religion through good human relations. Make what you may of these results. I will only point out that a large majority professes to be religious.Would it not be fair to expect that a society that has so many ardent believers would be at peace with itself and generate honesty and trust in human relations? Would not they serve as a barrier to rampant corruption and misuse of power and authority? I do not know if these and similar questions are really important for religious people. Perhaps they are preoccupied with other matters.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 29 Jul 2012 10:59

The bloody Punjab partition — II — Ishitiaq Ahmek
http://dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?pa ... 2012_pg3_3]

The Sikhs demanded the partition of Punjab almost as a knee-jerk reaction to the Muslim League demanding in March 1940 the creation of Muslim states in the Muslim-majority northeastern and northwestern zones of India. The first name given to it was Sikhistan and also Khalistan, which in the 1980s became their slogan. However, unlike the Muslims who did have majorities in those two zones of the subcontinent, the Sikhs did not have a majority in any of the 29 districts of united Punjab. Moreover, they were only 13.2 percent of the Punjab population.Consequently, if the Sikhs wanted to have a Sikh state, they initially needed allies who could support them to achieve the partition of India. However, at that time the Congress High Command and the Punjab Congress both were committed to keeping India united as well as Punjab and Bengal. At that time, the ‘consociational’ model of power sharing developed by the Punjab Unionist Party provided stability and peace in Punjab. The Unionist Party was opposed both to the partition of India and of Punjab. The Muslim League wanted to have the whole of Punjab in a Pakistan created out of the partition of India.The last premier of united Punjab and leader of the Unionist Party, Sir Khizr Hayat Khan Tiwana, proposed that irrespective of whether India was partitioned or not, Punjab should seek separate membership in the British Commonwealth as a dominion in its own right. That proposal suited neither the Congress nor the Muslim League, not even the British.Since the Sikhs and not the Punjabi Hindus made the demand for the partition of Punjab, the puzzle why the Muslim League and the Sikh leaders failed to agree to keep the province united has to be solved. This is the main concern of my investigation.By rejecting the Cabinet Mission Plan of May 15, 1946, the Congress was prepared to pay the price in terms of a partitioned India to consolidate India as a cohesive and unified state, albeit reduced in size so that Pakistan as demanded by the Muslim League could emerge as a separate Muslim-majority state. On March 8, 1947, the Congress decided to support the Sikhs on the partition of Punjab as a means to checkmate Punjab as a whole going to Pakistan. A united Bengal was also out of the question for the same reason in the aftermath of the Great Calcutta Killing of August 1946. It is most interesting that in July 1947, the counsel for the Muslim League, Sir Muhammad Zafrullah Khan, pleaded before the Punjab Boundary Commission that defence and security requirements were such that that the border in the Punjab should be drawn on the Sutlej — away from Lahore. The same logic informed the Congress strategy on partition — that is, to keep the border as far away from Delhi as possible — both in Punjab (and by the same token in Bengal too). All this is systematically presented in my book.

Roperia · Post by **Roperia** » 29 Jul 2012 11:46

Jhujar wrote:Religion without morality?
In search of Djinn Poaqon particle

... Remember that speech made by someone on August 11, 1947 – someone who is increasingly becoming irrelevant in this country?
( Abbe batta woh speech kanha hai?)

The reference to speech is a mirage that liberals in Pakistan, who aren't radicalized but believe in the IEDia of Pakistan use to pretend to the West that Poaq is as much a tolerant country as Yindia.

Here is what Jinnah actually said about Hindus and Muslims (quote from the archives of Columbia University)

It is extremely difficult to appreciate why our Hindu friends fail to understand the real nature of Islam and Hinduism. They are not religions in the strict sense of the word, but are, in fact, different and distinct social orders; and it is a dream that the Hindus and Muslims can ever evolve a common nationality; and this misconception of one Indian nation has gone far beyond the limits and is the cause of more of our troubles and will lead India to destruction if we fail to revise our notions in time. The Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religious philosophies, social customs, and literature[s]. They neither intermarry nor interdine together, and indeed they belong to two different civilisations which are based mainly on conflicting ideas and conceptions. Their aspects [=perspectives?] on life, and of life, are different. It is quite clear that Hindus and Mussalmans derive their inspiration from different sources of history. They have different epics, their heroes are different, and different episode[s]. Very often the hero of one is a foe of the other, and likewise their victories and defeats overlap. To yoke together two such nations under a single state, one as a numerical minority and the other as a majority, must lead to growing discontent, and final. destruction of any fabric that may be so built up for the government of such a state.

Roperia · Post by **Roperia** » 29 Jul 2012 11:54

Anti-terrorism court: Mumbai case hearing deferred till Aug 4 | Tribune

I see no urgency in EAM Krishna's trip to poaqistan. He should defer it indefinitely.

Ah, I remember the urgency - he has to lay ground for our dear PM Dr. MMS's impending visit to terrorist pariah capital of the world.

Roperia · Post by **Roperia** » 29 Jul 2012 12:03

U.S. aides, Pakistan's ambassador square off

ASPEN, Colo.—Two architects of the Obama Administration's policy in Afghanistan and Pakistan squared off with Pakistan's ambassador Friday in a discussion over the country's troubled relationship with the United States, drone strikes and safe havens for militants on Pakistani territory.

The first flash point was Pakistan's treatment of Dr. Shakil Afridi, a Pakistani physician who was sentenced to 33 years in prison for treason after helping the Central Intelligence Agency try to obtain DNA from residents of the compound where Osama bin Laden was found and killed by U.S. Navy SEALs last May.

60 Minutes correspondent Steve Kroft led off the discussion on that issue by asking provocatively if Afridi's punishment demonstrated that the Pakistanis "have more loyalty to Osama bin Laden than they do to the United States."

"In a word, I'd call it outrageous," said Lt. Gen Karl Eikenberry (Ret.), who served as U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan from 2009 to 2011.

Pakistan's ambassador to the U.S., Sherry Rehman, insisted that Afridi's conviction demonstrated that rule of law in Pakistan is alive and well. "We are working according to a constitutional norm," she said, joining the Aspen Security Forum panel via a video link from Washington, D.C.

Rehman said Afridi "was contracting with a foreign intelligence agency without any permissions. He was contracting with militant groups who were beheading our soldiers," she said, referring to the acts underlying his treat conviction. "He had no clue that he was engaged in a fight against or search for Osama bin Laden."

Rehman said Pakistan shouldn't receive any more criticism for militants in its difficult-to-govern areas than Afghanistan does for similar hideouts on its territory—a statement that drew a quick and sharp retort from Lt. Gen Doug Lute (Ret.), a White House aide who is President Barack Obama's special adviser on Afghanistan and Pakistan.

"There’s no comparison of the Pakistani Taliban's relatively recent, small-in-scale presence inside Afghanistan…to the decades-long experience and relations between elements of the Pakistani government and the Afghan Taliban. So to compare these is simply, I think, unfair," Lute said bluntly.

Rehman let loose a few zingers of her own, saying that Pakistan doesn't have the option of '"walking away from" the Afghanistan-Pakistan problem, the way the U.S. may end up doing.

And after Lute parried a question about still-classified drone strikes in Pakistan by referring generically to U.S.-Pakistan "cooperation," Rehman said it is time for that sort of "robotic warfare" to end.

"The drone strikes now see diminishing returns," Rehman said, while acknowledging that up to this point they have helped kill dangerous militants. "We will be seeking an end to drone strikes and there will be no compromise on that."

"We don’t welcome or sanctuary foreign fighters on our soil….There is no question now of hedging bets," Rehman insisted, before adding her own memorable retort: "This is a new Pakistan. Catch up, gentlemen."

Here is the video (an informative insight)