Sunni Terrorist Fragments of Unstable Pakistan - 12 Dec 2014

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 29 Dec 2014 05:01

In the book "Ghost Wars", there are interesting details on the relationship of Uncle with Talibums, TPSA, and Massoud. One thing that stands out is that the Uncle never could make up its mind on Massoud. The ground agents who worked closely with Massoud were mesmerized with him, the mid-level agents saw the potential of countering OBL and Taliban with Massoud, but Uncle never gave him a close embrace. Their just thought that Talibums could be controlled, and never wanted to go against the TSPA. Their relationship with TSPA is deep and far reaching. They did not want them to be hurt or curtail them. Their embrace of TSPA is utterly hard to understand. Anyone here have an insight into it?

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 29 Dec 2014 05:50

surinder wrote:Their just thought that Talibums could be controlled, and never wanted to go against the TSPA. Their relationship with TSPA is deep and far reaching. They did not want them to be hurt or curtail them. Their embrace of TSPA is utterly hard to understand. Anyone here have an insight into it?

SurinderJi, this is elementary BR 101. The answer is INDIA.

Guddu · Post by **Guddu** » 29 Dec 2014 06:07

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TD8PA4IZao

This video debate between Talib and paki army is fantastic. I think the TTP guy wins it hands down. Lots to learn about the religion of peace, I have to admit the TTP guy was articulate and clear in his reasoning (however misguided).

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Dec 2014 06:12

surinder wrote: Their relationship with TSPA is deep and far reaching. They did not want them to be hurt or curtail them. Their embrace of TSPA is utterly hard to understand. Anyone here have an insight into it?

Right here on this thread is a statement by a RAPE Paki that they have western values. The english speaking Pakis really held the Americans close by demonstrating that their values were no different from US values and their goals no different from the US. I think a lot of myth building goes on about Americans being hard nosed realists, but deep down they are human and have a human side, and the Pakis have handled that well. Particularly, Paki elite have had no problem sacrificing their own people to please Americans and show how much they value being on the American side. The US does not like anyone who shows any values of their own that go against US interests but are suckers for anyone who claim to stand by the US. Any American who has been taken for a ride by Pakis is hardly likely to admit that he is a jackass, but that is what the Pak elite have done. Goes to show that Americans can be made jackasses by the right type of con men.

But things have moved far beyond that now . The Paki RAPE elite who cynically used their own population to fight wars while they enriched themselves, pretending to be very pious and Islamic are now under grave threat. The holy grail of Pakistan, the army is under direct assault. No chance of a coup now. The US are now restricted to fighting a rearguard action in which they will provide the grateful and desperate Pakistani army and elite money and arms as long as they fight anti-US forces. On the eastern front the Paki army will have a revolt if they do not at least pretend to fight the kafir Indians. In the west, they have to fight the TTP by saying that "Indians" are supporting them. Inside Pakjab they cannot afford to antagonise the groups who still support them - the LeJ and LeT/JuD.

As long as there is civil war in Pakistan, we can stand by and watch. In my personal view the most important thing is to bring down the Pakistan army. Unfortunately - whoever takes its place will be a very powerful adversary who hates India just as much as the army. We have to hope that they also hate the US so the US does not keep bribing them as they have done to the Paki army for 67 years. Defeat of the Pakistan army will be loss of influence of the US in "sooth Asia". If the Taliban take over in Pakistan, the US may establish relations with the Taliban. The Taliban will find that running a country is less easy than waging a war against a country that is being funded and run by someone else. They wiil be looking for aid and both China and the US may step in. Hopefully India will be powerful enough to hold its own by then.

The moot point to me is whether a Talib government in Pakistan will
1. Strike a deal with the US
2. Strike a deal with India
3. try and fight everyone

There are some things that India and the Taliban have in common and that is a reduction of US influence in the region that plays one off against another. There is some scope for India and the Taliban striiking a deal to keep the US out of Pakistan. Whether any of us like it or not, India is a far more Islam friendly country than any western nation and we may be able to strike a deal. The US will react badly - but there may be little they can do about it. As long as we can ensure relative safety for India and some trade across the border - how the Taliban treat the US need not be our problem. The US may still create a slave rump Pakjabistan which is nuclear armed, pro US, anti-India and anti-Taliban. So let's see..

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 29 Dec 2014 07:00

shiv wrote:There are some things that India and the Taliban have in common and that is a reduction of US influence in the region that plays one off against another. There is some scope for India and the Taliban striiking a deal to keep the US out of Pakistan. Whether any of us like it or not, India is a far more Islam friendly country than any western nation and we may be able to strike a deal. The US will react badly - but there may be little they can do about it. As long as we can ensure relative safety for India and some trade across the border - how the Taliban treat the US need not be our problem. The US may still create a slave rump Pakjabistan which is nuclear armed, pro US, anti-India and anti-Taliban. So let's see..

Shivji,

Any deal with the Kuffar by any ijjlamic istudent (Taleb) is subject to Taqiya. This applies to the US and it applies to India. So if we plan to replace unkil as the chief Jizya source for the future Taleb govt in Bakshitstan, we better be prepared to get our backs stabbed by them, just like how the Baki RAPEists are doing to Unkil.

Your later suggestion (rump state of Bakjabshitstan funded by Unkil) may actually be better, since they will be under constant war of attrition by surrounding Balochs and Pashtuns due to them seeking redemption for genocidal crimes (and also access to Bakshitstani nukes).

The only way to control a bunch of unruly cults is to make them go to war with each other perpetually, make Bakistan another middle east, and build mile high walls among the borders to keep the barbarians in their miserable $hithole.

Keep strengthening countries that do not have direct borders with India (Balochistan, Pashtunistan, Afghanistan etc) and weakening the ones that do have borders with India: Sindh and Bakjab. All of them may hate the kuffar SDRE Indians, but before they can land up in India to do Jihad, they have to cross a hostile Bakjab and a hostile Sindh. Now if they are at war with Bakjab and Sindh, why bother with Jihad against India. They can get their 72 killing the Bakjabis (this scenario is already playing out ,the pious jihadi mission on Peshawar school itself being the latest in the string of pious acts by the Pashtuns).

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Dec 2014 07:37

Lokesh, In India we are between a rock and a hard place. if the US strikes a deal with anyone, they will arm them to the teeth and we are screwed. It is US arms and funding that we have to fight against. That must go. As long as no Paki group gets US arms and funding - we can handle them more easily. I think the word jiziya should not be overused. We will not be paying any jiziya, unless we are willing to see that both Pakistan and India are paying jiziya to the US right now. The US needs to be removed from the region, or we need a group that is opposed to the US. Pakistan is a problem - but Pakistan/Taliban backed by the US is a worse problem.

A rump Punjabistan would mean status quo for us and no chance of anything getting better. We are IMO better off getting a Taliban government in Pakistan and them moving forward from there.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 29 Dec 2014 07:45

Here is Lal Masjid cleric Maulana Abdul AssIs in a recent interview for a program called Jirga.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 29 Dec 2014 08:02

^^^^^^

Always wondered........

Are hirsuteness and piety really connected??

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 29 Dec 2014 08:35

It apparently correlates with wisdom (r=0.83)

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 29 Dec 2014 08:36

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 29 Dec 2014 08:39

Maulana Abdul Aziz in fact has stated that Muslims in India may be freer than in Pakistan.

The Maulana should be respected by India if he keeps his animosity confined to the Pakistani system. India need have no fight with him.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 29 Dec 2014 08:45

surinder wrote: Their just thought that Talibums could be controlled, and never wanted to go against the TSPA. Their relationship with TSPA is deep and far reaching. They did not want them to be hurt or curtail them. Their embrace of TSPA is utterly hard to understand. Anyone here have an insight into it?

Think about it this way. Their embrace of Zia was deep and far reaching. This is pretty much even when their population was radicalized under zia, drug trade flourished and thousands of Afghans were killed. They hurt Pakistan, but supported Zia. Before that they deeply embraced Yahya. Despite the genocide in Bangladesh. Why did they hurt Bangladesh and scar it for generations? Same in Iraq. Pretty much invaded because of the fascination with "Iraqi Resistance" by Chalabi (fellow was a sham). Why did they deeply hurt and scar Iraq? In saudi too. Embraced the monarch. Who deeply hurt the entire world through petro dollar fuelled radicalism. F'ed up Korea. Vietnam too. A generation of people in Cambodia paid the price (people are still discovering piled up skulls in ditches). How about Cuba? Sanctions are 60 years old now. People there have no access to even things like cement and internet. In every one of these cases, the other choice was to support people with just demands and with progressive ideas. The embrace of Pakis and their army is not unique.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 29 Dec 2014 08:50

http://www.dawn.com/news/1153757/govt-m ... nstitution

The government’s legal advisers are weighing the option of amending Article 8 (1) and Article 212-A and B of the constitution in order to establish military courts in the country, officials privy to discussions on the issue told Dawn on Sunday.

The proposed constitutional amendments currently under consideration will be introduced in these two articles. Article 8 is titled ‘Laws inconsistent with or in derogation of Fundamental Rights to be void’, while Article 212 deals with administrative courts and tribunals.

Military courts are to sort out the good taliban from bad taliban outside of public's gaze. Also a power grab by the TFTAs who now dont have to respect fundamental rights, and can arrest and prosecute anyone. Popcorn time everyone!

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 29 Dec 2014 08:55

From Saleem sehzad's book...

Al-Qaeda is primarily an Arab organization, but it did not
choose Egypt or any other Middle Eastern country for the launch
of its struggle. Its choice fell on South Asia, which has traditions,
religious ideologies, and customs that are diametrically opposite to
those of Al-Qaeda's ethnically Arab members. The main reason for
this choice, which might appear odd to some, is rooted in faith.
The Prophet Muhammad prophesied that ancient Khurasan would
be the initial theater of war for the "End of Times" battles , so
Al-Qaeda set out to fulfil this prediction.

It bears repeating that the geographically defined Khurasan
theater of war includes parts of modern Iran, the Central Asian
repuhlics, Afghanistan, and parts of Pakistan. The initial battleground
also incorporates Ghazwa-e-Hind (a term used in the
Prophet Muhammad's sayings ), or the battle for India, and this
serves to locate Al-Qaeda's initial theater of war between Central
Asia and Bangladesh. (Bangladesh is not the battlefield but comes
into the loop for logistical reasons in the war against India.)

It is a part of the Islamic faith that the Prophet's predictions will
come to pass, and that once the Muslim armies have won the battle
of Khurasan and India, they will march to the Middle East to join
forces with the promised Mahdi (the ultimate reformer), and do
battle against the Antichrist and its Western allies for the liberation
of Palestine.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Dec 2014 08:58

The latest issue of Vayu Aerospace Review is a 40th year anniversary edition with excerpts from issues of Vayu 40 years ago. From 1974 comes this report

Amidst news of Pakistani troop movements and concentrations along the Durand line on the North West frontiers of Pakistan bordering Afghanistan, it is reported that Pakistani Sabres, operating from Quetta, have carried out napalm bomb attacks in Baluchistan

Napalm on their own people? In 1974? The same rapists who were released as POWs from India were probably part of this action

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 29 Dec 2014 09:18

abhishek_sharma wrote:From Saleem sehzad's book...
Al-Qaeda is primarily an Arab organization, but it did not choose Egypt or any other Middle Eastern country for the launch of its struggle. Its choice fell on South Asia, which has traditions, religious ideologies, and customs that are diametrically opposite to those of Al-Qaeda's ethnically Arab members. The main reason for this choice, which might appear odd to some, is rooted in faith. The Prophet Muhammad prophesied that ancient Khurasan would be the initial theater of war for the "End of Times" battles , so Al-Qaeda set out to fulfil this prediction.

It bears repeating that the geographically defined Khurasan theater of war includes parts of modern Iran, the Central Asian
repuhlics, Afghanistan, and parts of Pakistan. The initial battleground also incorporates Ghazwa-e-Hind (a term used in the
Prophet Muhammad's sayings ), or the battle for India, and this serves to locate Al-Qaeda's initial theater of war between Central Asia and Bangladesh. (Bangladesh is not the battlefield but comes into the loop for logistical reasons in the war against India.)

It is a part of the Islamic faith that the Prophet's predictions will come to pass, and that once the Muslim armies have won the battle of Khurasan and India, they will march to the Middle East to join forces with the promised Mahdi (the ultimate reformer), and do battle against the Antichrist and its Western allies for the liberation of Palestine.

I am not so sure that Syed Saleem Shehzad's exposition of Al Qaeda rooted in Ghazwa-e-Hind is accurate. Ghazwa-e-Hind is in itself of doubtful authenticity and it is my understanding that only Pakistanis believe in that, not the Arabs. This was deliberately popularized in Pakistan because it served the establishment's and the State's ends against arch-enemy kufr Hindus. Even assuming that the Arabs believe in that, that does not fully explain the existence of AQ in Afghanistan/Pakistan wastelands.

There is a historical reason for that and that was that the Arab Kings did not want the hardcore jihadists to return to their countries after the Afghan Jihad and pose a challenge. They were forced to stay back in these places through threats and allurements. The ex-jihadists found support from the Pakhtuns, the tribes and the sinister ISI. Even OBL was relocated in these wastelands with the wink and nudge of KSA and the US and of course, the positive support of Pakistan. One can clearly also see that AQ in its pre 9/11 days wasn't much concerned about India though personally OBL contributed money to LeT but that was mostly because he knew Hafeez Saeed who was closely associated with OBL's mentor Abdullah Azzam in running the 'Al Maktab' organization for facilitating Arab jihadists. KSA thought that if OBL was kept far away and under the scanner of a friendly ISI, he would not be up to much mischief.

The TSPA and the State had set store multiple calculations in keeping these jihadists in what they thought was their 'controlled environment'. They were felt important for strategic depth, blunting of Pashtun nationalism across the Durand Line, and for training jihadists for operation against India.

So, many ideas coalesced.

Below is a worthwhile article to understand the Pakistani campaign on Ghazwa-e-Hind, published in 2010.

Zaid Hamid is the latest tool in the arsenal of the Pakistani security establishment to misguide, brainwash and indoctrinate the Pakistani youth, to win support for its belligerent agenda. To achieve his nefarious designs, especially to instill bellicosity and flare up anti-India emotions, Zaid Hamid delivers sermons on private television channels, gives inteviews and holds seminars and workshops in universities to impress and influence impressionable young minds. In order to authenticate his message of attacking and conquering India, Zaid Hamid repeats, ad nauseum, a set of ahadith [sayings of the Prophet (PBUH)] of doubtful authenticity about Ghazwa-i-Hind. Through such a medium, he tries to make his audience and viewers believe that conquering India is indeed a sacred duty of the Pakistani Muslims. Most religious scholars do not consider these ahadith to be authenic. Some who do consider them authentic say that the predictions and prophecies made in them have already been fulfilled during the first century of Islam, and are not at all applicable to what Zaid Hamid would like us to believe — the invasion of India by Pakistan. These scholars contend that none of these ahadith are found in the ahadith books considered to be the most authentic by the Sunnis, books like Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Daud, Ibn-i-Maja, Tirmidhi and Muwatta. Two of these ahadith appear in the collections of ahadith by Imam Nisai but not in Sunan an-Nisai al Sughra, the book considered to be among the Sihah-e-Sitta. The others are not even found in the reliable collections of respected muhadiseen (compilers of ahadith). These scholars also argue that Imam Nisai died in 915, after the death of all other respected muhadiseen to whom Sihah-e-Sitta are attributed. It, therefore, does not make much sense that we have these ahadith being narrated through Imam Nisai, but not through any of the other respected muhadiseen who lived before him. Another argument put forward by these learned men is that the chain of narrators of these ahadith contains people like Baqiyyah, Asad ibn Musa and Hushaim who have been declared as unreliable, untrustworthy and abominable by experts like Al-Zahabiy, Ibn Hajar and Al-Uqaily. It is clear that not even one of these chains of narrators consists of people who are reliable enough for us to say, with any degree of confidence, that the narratives under consideration are correctly ascribed to the Prophet (PBUH). They also add that, considering the reward for participating in this war and the importance of it, as these ahadith tell, they should have been narrated by more companions of the Prophet (PBUH) and should have been included in more books of the ahadith. These scholars also draw attention to the fact that none of these ahadith are found in any of the collections of ahadith, which the Shia Muslims consider authentic. This raises the question: did the Ummayads/Abbasids, considering their expansionist designs, invent them? It should also be noted that the Ummayads did reach Sindh, a part of Hind back then. Many scholars believe that it is possible that these ahadith are not genuine at all and that they might have been fabricated at the time of Muhammad bin Qasim’s invasion of Sindh in order to justify it. These scholars also note the fact that we do not have any historical report telling us about the use of these ahadith in the past by Muslim rulers or conquerors, even those who did invade India or waged a war on it and claimed to do it for religious purposes. If they were respected and authentic ahadith, we should have such historical reports. It would have been very easy for Muslim conquerors of India like Mahmud of Ghazni, Shihabuddin Ghauri, Timur, Nadir Shah and so on, to present the ahadith about the Ghuzwa-i-Hind, and use them to justify their attacks on the country. The scholars associated with their courts could well have suggested these to them had they wished. However, no such mention is made about this in history books. In the 18th century, the well-known Islamic scholar Shah Waliullah of Delhi invited the Afghan king, Ahmad Shah Abdali to invade India and drive out the Marathas, which he accepted, yet Shah Waliullah, too, did not use these ahadith as a part of his argument. Those who consider these authentic argue that the battle against India that these ahadith predicted was fulfilled in the early Islamic period itself, and is not something that will happen in the future. They also add that it is quite likely that the predicted Ghuzwa-i-Hind took the form of an attack by an Arab Muslim force on Thana and Bharuch, in coastal western India, in the 15th year of the Hijra calendar, during the reign of the Caliph Umar. Some scholars also argue that these ahadith could, possibly, have been fulfilled in the form of missionary efforts by some of the Prophet’s (PBUH) companions soon after, during the reign of the Caliphs Usman and Ali, in Sindh and Gujarat. Other ulema consider these predictions to have been fulfilled in the form of the attack and occupation of Sindh by Arab Muslims, led by Muhammad bin Qasim in the 93rd year of the Islamic calendar, which then facilitated the spread of Islam in the country. In any case, these ahadith do not talk about Pakistanis fighting Indians. They talk about Arabs on an expedition to India, after which they conquer it. The above clearly shows the extent to which Zaid Hamid and his supporters will go to further their agenda. They will not shy away from using religious texts of doubtful authenticity, with totally wrong and self-serving interpretations, to promote war. But the Pakistani youth is no more willing to be at the receiving end of this twisted interpretation of Islam, as was amply demonstrated by the students of Islamia College University, Peshawar, when Zaid Hamid tried to address them.

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 29 Dec 2014 09:21

shiv wrote: Napalm on their own people? In 1974? The same rapists who were released as POWs from India were probably part of this action

Our concept of "Own People" (Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam) and their concept of "Own People" (one tribe against the other, raping, killing and selling into slavery) are totally different. So, this is no big deal. Aisa to hota hi rahata hai.
Gautam

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Dec 2014 09:50

g.sarkar wrote:
shiv wrote: Napalm on their own people? In 1974? The same rapists who were released as POWs from India were probably part of this action
Our concept of "Own People" (Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam) and their concept of "Own People" (one tribe against the other, raping, killing and selling into slavery) are totally different. So, this is no big deal. Aisa to hota hi rahata hai.
Gautam

Accepted.

But while we 'accept' this fact without question, we are also accepting things that we should be questioning.

For example, the US funds and arms Pakistan and invites its leader for talks in America regularly despite a 60 year history of attacking people within its own territory. The US and the west also recognize Baluchistan as an integral part of Pakistan and recognize PoK as a de facto part of Pakistan

On the other hand, an Indian chief minister is refused a visa for a visit to the US based on his involvement of human rights violations against minorities in India. And J&K is "disputed territory". Either India is a timid state or we are just stupid in not being able to call out glaring discrepancies in how the world around us moves.

I think we are more stupid/ignorant/naive than timid. We do not question, analyse and relate the way we should We swallow the western view without dispute.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 29 Dec 2014 10:11

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/opinion/29 ... tupid-look

Why? The proliferation of al Bakistan license plates should give you an idea. Which self-respecting, intelligent people are going to deliberately make themselves objects of irony? Now take for example the latest manufactured quote ascribed to the father of the nation. It has been on billboards and al Bakistanis have been sharing it mercilessly on social media. The quote is “I do not believe in taking right decisions. I take decisions and make them right.” This is actually a quote by Rattan Tata, the founder of Tata Steel, and while in some context it may have made sense for him, per se, it is a senseless quote. Since when did being trigger happy become a quality? It is shameless bravado without any thought to its implications.

Yet some genius decided to appropriate the quote for Jinnah and now Defence Housing Authority and University of Lahore have, without any fact checking, put this quote on their billboards and other paraphernalia commemorating Jinnah’s birthday.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 29 Dec 2014 11:02

Shiv Aroor retweeted
Rishika Baruah ‏@rishika625 2m2 minutes ago
BREAKING: Islamabad High Court cancels detention notification of Zakir Ur Rehman Lakhvi. He is a free man now! #IsPakistanWithIndia

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 29 Dec 2014 11:08

I think it is better, now he and Haffeez Sayed should make well published, pre planned trip to LOC Zero and line and shout abuses in India.

In jail he was getting 5 star treatment and even fathered children. The secular Bull crap about Pakistan proscuetion is ridiculos, the only question is extradition.

gandharva · Post by **gandharva** » 29 Dec 2014 11:32

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 29 Dec 2014 11:37

abhishek_sharma wrote:BREAKING: Islamabad High Court cancels detention notification of Zakir Ur Rehman Lakhvi. He is a free man now! #IsPakistanWithIndia

We knew the outcome here.

member_27987 · Post by **member_27987** » 29 Dec 2014 12:04

gandharva wrote:

Reminds me of the Schroedingers cat.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 29 Dec 2014 12:08

SSridhar wrote: ...
Below is a worthwhile article to understand the Pakistani campaign on Ghazwa-e-Hind, published in 2010.
.... In any case, these ahadith do not talk about Pakistanis fighting Indians. They talk about Arabs on an expedition to India, after which they conquer it. The above clearly shows the extent to which Zaid Hamid and his supporters will go to further their agenda...

Bwhat? Does the author mean Pakistanis are not Arabs?

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 29 Dec 2014 12:09

I think our Media and UPA knew, they wanted to keeep the Aman ki Asha stuff going. The best part is crime happenned in India and only question is extradition. Yet our media and leadership sold prosecution in Pakistan and our Public as usual swallowed it.

Sometimes as a population I feel we dont care for anything other than personal wealth.

Baikul · Post by **Baikul** » 29 Dec 2014 12:26

EswarPrakash wrote:
gandharva wrote:
....
Reminds me of the Schroedingers cat.

That video posted by Maulener Gandharva is not just flat out funny, it's the finest summary of the hypocrisy and aridity of Mohammedan philosophy.

I'd highly recommend all Mauleners to watch it. Worth the time.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 29 Dec 2014 13:53

Father of the Islamic Bum, Photochor Khan crying over Pakistan's Future

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 29 Dec 2014 14:27

shiv wrote:The latest issue of Vayu Aerospace Review is a 40th year anniversary edition with excerpts from issues of Vayu 40 years ago. From 1974 comes this report
Amidst news of Pakistani troop movements and concentrations along the Durand line on the North West frontiers of Pakistan bordering Afghanistan, it is reported that Pakistani Sabres, operating from Quetta, have carried out napalm bomb attacks in Baluchistan

Napalm on their own people? In 1974? The same rapists who were released as POWs from India were probably part of this action

https://www.academia.edu/475149/Balochi ... _Evolution
Says 1965, does not mention napalm in 1974.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 29 Dec 2014 14:31

http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/jul/14guru.htm
quote:

Till 1977 the Indira Gandhi government actively worked for the democratic aspirations of the Baluchis and Pathans. Baluchi fighters were trained in the deserts of Rajasthan. We also provided them with financial and diplomatic assistance. With Bangladesh free, Indira Gandhi reckoned that Sind, Baluchistan and Pakhtunistan should follow.

After her electoral defeat in 1977, Vajpayee as the Janata government's foreign minister made his first misguided and woolly-headed attempt to normalize relations with Pakistan. We now remember Lahore as his first, but that is not correct. Indian support to various movements struggling for self-determination in Punjabi-dominated Pakistan was withdrawn. L K Advani was as much a comrade in arms then as he is now for he did not protest even when G M Syed's Jiye Sind movement was betrayed. He was quite pleased with being able to go to his hometown of Karachi and visit his old school.

End quote.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 29 Dec 2014 15:06

A_Gupta wrote:http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/jul/14guru.htm
quote:

Till 1977 the Indira Gandhi government actively worked for the democratic aspirations of the Baluchis and Pathans. Baluchi fighters were trained in the deserts of Rajasthan. We also provided them with financial and diplomatic assistance. With Bangladesh free, Indira Gandhi reckoned that Sind, Baluchistan and Pakhtunistan should follow.

After her electoral defeat in 1977, Vajpayee as the Janata government's foreign minister made his first misguided and woolly-headed attempt to normalize relations with Pakistan. We now remember Lahore as his first, but that is not correct. Indian support to various movements struggling for self-determination in Punjabi-dominated Pakistan was withdrawn. L K Advani was as much a comrade in arms then as he is now for he did not protest even when G M Syed's Jiye Sind movement was betrayed. He was quite pleased with being able to go to his hometown of Karachi and visit his old school.

End quote.

This I believe is creative History. IG was very committed to a unified Pakistan and if not Pakistani stupidy and massacres in 1971 would not have been in favour of Bangladesh.

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 29 Dec 2014 16:11

Three Iranian Revolutionary Guards killed near Pakistan border

Three members of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), sent to reinforce border police, were killed in an attack in the southeast of Iran near Pakistan, according to Iranian media reports on Monday.

Armed "bandits" killed the IRGC members late on Sunday near the city Saravan in the Sistan-Baluchistan region, according to a Revolutionary Guards statement carried by Fars news agency.

Similar attacks, usually against police officers and border guards, happen in the border region several times a year.

Sistan-Baluchistan has history of unrest with the mainly Sunni Muslim population complaining of discrimination by Iran's Shi'ite Muslim authorities. The area is also rife with drug and arms traffickers.

The report did not give the identity of the armed group.

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 29 Dec 2014 16:14

India summons Pakistan high commissioner after 26/11 accused Lakhvi's detention order suspended

ISLAMABAD/NEW DELHI: The ministry of external affairs on Monday summoned Pakistan high commissioner Abdul Basit, hours after it became evident that the 26/11 Mumbai attacks accused ZakiurRehmanLakhvi may walk free after a court order.

Coming out of MEA, Abdul Basit refused to comment on the meeting.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 29 Dec 2014 16:17

I think Pakistan must fire a Shaheen-1A with a dummy nuke, especially kish island, hope 1 more missile overshoots Kish and makes landfull 150km further south. That will teach those Iranians.

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 29 Dec 2014 16:17

Zardari accuses Musharraf of 'seeking to topple' Sindh govt

Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) co-chairman Asif Ali Zardari has accused the former military ruler Parvez Musharraf of conspiring to destabilize the Sindh government a day after he blamed Musharraf for failing to notice Benazir Bhutto's attackers.
According to the Express Tribune, Zardari said that he believed that Musharraf was "hobnobbing with some elements" in an attempt to destabilize the PPP government.
He said that anyone who is "seeking to topple the present provincial government" would not succeed in their schemes.
Earlier on Saturday, the PPP co-chairman blamed Musharraf for the rising militant violence in the country saying that if action was taken against terrorists after October 18, 2007 terror attack, the Peshawar massacre could have been averted.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 29 Dec 2014 16:30

MEA spokeman posted this on teetar

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 29 Dec 2014 16:39

A_Gupta wrote: Says 1965, does not mention napalm in 1974.

From your rediff link

In 1973 a war of independence broke out in Baluchistan.

For five long years there was total war. At its peak the Baluchis raised a force of 55,000 combatants. Nearly six Pakistan Army divisions were deployed to fight them. The Pakistan Air Force was also deployed and its Mirage and Sabre fighter jets carried out strikes all over rural Baluchistan. Widespread use of napalm has been documented by scholars like Robert Wirsing of the University of Texas and Selig Harrison.

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 29 Dec 2014 17:03

shiv wrote:
A_Gupta wrote: Says 1965, does not mention napalm in 1974.
From your rediff link
In 1973 a war of independence broke out in Baluchistan.

For five long years there was total war. At its peak the Baluchis raised a force of 55,000 combatants. Nearly six Pakistan Army divisions were deployed to fight them. The Pakistan Air Force was also deployed and its Mirage and Sabre fighter jets carried out strikes all over rural Baluchistan. Widespread use of napalm has been documented by scholars like Robert Wirsing of the University of Texas and Selig Harrison.

But onlee Sadaaam is baad guy naa that too onlee if he is not listening to see-eye-yay!!
The real nasty villain here is the guy who supplied Napalm to a country like Pakistan. Still, better napalm their own country people than Indians.
Must have been transported to Isloo Air base by American C-130s themselves.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 29 Dec 2014 18:03

Altair wrote:
. . .Widespread use of napalm has been documented by scholars like Robert Wirsing of the University of Texas and Selig Harrison.
But onlee Sadaaam is baad guy naa that too onlee if he is not listening to see-eye-yay!!
The real nasty villain here is the guy who supplied Napalm to a country like Pakistan. Still, better napalm their own country people than Indians.
Must have been transported to Isloo Air base by American C-130s themselves.

Defiant use of nuclear weapons, Napalm, Agent Orange, depleted Uranium, white phosphorous are allowed only by one country. But, that discussion is out of place here. All that we can note here is there is no wonder that country goes to bed with STFU-TSP and some American scholars write about the use of napalm as though they are Lily Whites.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 29 Dec 2014 19:58

The Indian Express ‏@IndianExpress 5m5 minutes ago
#ZakiurRehmanLakhvi submits surety bond, to be released anytime now
http://iexp.in/GBd132818