Sunni Terrorist Fragments of Unstable Pakistan-Nov 21, 2015

[Kashi]

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... s-reports/

I wonder what they feel about Pakis.

Should serve as a great recruitment tool for them..

[A_Gupta]

I have tried to find any question or reply to a question in the Lok Sabha that deals with cricket with Pakistan, but my duck does not preclude someone else from making a great catch.

[partha]

Dunno if this has been posted here earlier, but this guy puts it pretty eloquently:

What makes someone become an Islamic extremist? Is it poverty? Lack of education? A search for meaning? Haroon Ullah, a senior State Department advisor and a foreign policy professor at Georgetown University, shares what he discovered while living in Pakistan.

This actually showed up in FB as well, and PragerU's FB page is filled with whining comments from Pakistani readers who want to know why he picked Pakistan as an example!

+1 to Prof Ullah for getting the map right
His views are refreshing compared to the usual BS we get like "terrorism has no religion" etc. A step in the right direction. Still I don't see any Muslim intellectual talk about Malsi reform.

[habal]

we should use periods of international instability and weakening of US lever of terror in west asia to strike at pakis. These are times which can be used to destabilize states like pakistan. The US is focusing on Ukraine and Syria and it needs peace in Indian subcontinent so that they can revisit their 'south asia' project in relative peace and give their undivided attention. It is also under economic pressure from EU breaking out and China's new economic role with their currency being accepted as reserve currency. This has creates lot of military and economic pressure in unkil. Use their periods of vulnerability to weaken or destabilize their allies.

If nothing substantial is done during such periods, we will have pay heavy price later when they feel more settled and ready to destabilize countries like India.

when is India going to behave like a raptor ?

[Satya_anveshi]

^^^So many opportunities, so many ideas, so much time but so little action. It is frustrating to even think about this.

We are truly a gou-mata!

[Prem]

Elements in Pakistan, Afghanistan major sources of terrorist financing: US report

http://www.dawn.com/news/1221855/elemen ... -us-report

WASHINGTON: Unidentified elements in Pakistan and Afghanistan are major sources of terrorist financing, says a report by the US Treasury Department.“There is evidence that recently some funding via donations has been diverted from Afghanistan and Pakistan to terrorist groups operating in Syria,” claims a similar report by the British government.Terrorist financing was the focus of discussions at a White House meeting last week between US security officials and Pakistani defence team headed by Army Chief Gen Raheel Sharif.The report — “Terrorist Financing Risk Assessment, 2015, — notes that the Haqqani Network generates funds by a wide range of sources including businesses and proceeds derived from criminal activities such as smuggling, extortion, and kidnapping for ransom in Afghanistan and PakistanThe report claims that Lashkar-e-Taiba receives the majority of its funds from within Pakistan, including by using its charitable front organisations, Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JUD) and Falah-i-Insaniyat Foundation (FIF), to solicit donations.LeT generates additional funds from private donations and commercial ventures. The report notes that the group’s two largest financial hauls come from private donations during Ramazan and profits associated with the collection and sale of animal hides during the Eid-ul-Azha, each of which nets the group millions of dollars.The report also points out that Faisal Shahzad, who tried to blow New York’s Times Square on May 1, 2010, received about $4,900 in cash from a TTP supporter in Pakistan in February 2010. He picked the money from a gas station attendant, Aftab Ali Khan, in Massachusetts.The report identifies Khan as an unlicensed money transmitter. Six weeks later, Shahzad received another $7,000 in cash, sent by the same source in Pakistan, in Ronkonkoma, New York, from a Pakistani businessman named Mohammed Younis who was also acting as an unlicensed money transmitter.The report names another Pakistani national, Saifullah Anjum Ranjha, who pleaded guilty to laundering money and to concealing terrorist financing. He ran an unlicensed money remitter business in the District of Columbia.Over the course of four years, a cooperating witness gave Ranjha and his associates a total of $2,208,000 to transfer abroad, explaining that the funds were the proceeds of, and related to, his involvement in international drug trafficking, international smuggling of counterfeit cigarettes and weapons.Ranjha conducted 21 transactions in amounts ranging from $13,000 to $300,000. He arranged with his associates for the equivalent amount of money, minus commissions, to be delivered to the cooperating witness, his third party designee, or a specified bank account in Canada, England, Spain, Pakistan, Japan and Australia.Another defendant, not named in the report, is accused of manufacturing heroin in clandestine laboratories along the Afghan border and of leading one of the largest heroin trafficking organisations in the world. The defendant sent the drug to more than 20 countries, including the United States. “Proceeds from his heroin trafficking were then used to support high-level members of the Taliban in furtherance of their insurgency in Afghanistan,” the report claims.

[habal]

^^^So many opportunities, so many ideas, so much time but so little action. It is frustrating to even think about this.

we are living in tropical country. For most Indians life is pre-occupied with wash, bathe, prayers, learn maths and science or learning-on-job. Strategy doesn't figure in this life-cycle. This needs to be broken somewhere for strategic temperament to take root, the old or existing model can be taken up later.

[Anujan]

Season Open on Paki & Jal Murgh

Europe plans to speed up deportation of tens of thousands of Pakistanis

So this was the takleef why Pakis refused to take back Pakistanis!

[SSridhar]

Elements in Pakistan, Afghanistan major sources of terrorist financing: US report

In the FATF meeting a few months back, India specifically brought up the Pakistani connection, but China put its foot down and prevented the discussion. Australia also supported the Chinese contention. Surprisingly, the US supported India.

[Rajdeep]

Six BRITONS arrested in Belgium as UK hate preachers linked to Paris attacks mastermind

SIX Pakistani-born British men have been arrested in Belgium after being spotted in old ambulances near Brussels while the capital was in lock down amid fears of a Paris-style terror attack.
The Pakistani-born British men were questioned by security forces as officers continued to search the ambulances - two Fiats and a Mercedes with British number plates.

The arrests came as it was revealed the alleged mastermind behind the Paris attacks was part of an extremist network linked to at least six hate preachers from Britain.

Paris ringleader Abdelhamid Abaaoud - who was killed in an anti-terror raid by French authorities in Saint-Denis after the atrocities in the French capital on November 13 - was associated with a banned terrorist group called Sharia4Belgium.

The militant group, which has sent more than 50 Belgian fighters to join ISIS in Syria, was founded by in 2010 by Fouad Belkacem after he travelled to London to seek inspiration from a radical British cleric.

The cleric, who cannot be named for legal reasons pakee anjem chaudry, has described Belkacem as a “dear friend” and told how he was asked to help “start something in Belgium”

[shiv]

I have tried to find any question or reply to a question in the Lok Sabha that deals with cricket with Pakistan, but my duck does not preclude someone else from making a great catch.

Doubt if parliament is in session now. I think winter session is due to start and the GST bill will come up for Congress to block

[A_Gupta]

^^^ past sessions

[Falijee]

Nuclear club eyes Indian inclusion, but risks Pakistan's ire
Another attempt at ==

NEW DELHI: Diplomats have quietly launched a new push to induct India into a club of nuclear trading nations, but rather than increasing stability in South Asia, the move could escalate strains with rival Pakistan.
The chairman of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) visited New Delhi recently to meet Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj as part of a diplomatic “outreach” that seeks to build a consensus to admit India at its annual meeting next June.

And Pakistan, an ally of China, also aspires to join the NSG. With a history as a proliferator, Pakistan's accession would be a tough sell.

To put it mildly !

A seat at the NSG would strengthen India's geopolitical clout and help it capitalise on nuclear trade and technology transfer opportunities, while also raising concern in Pakistan.

Pakistan sees a nuclear lead as vital insurance against possible aggression by its larger neighbour, and it appears to be gaining the upper hand over India in the nuclear contest.

Yet defending that lead is a “losing proposition” that imposes huge costs on Pakistan's economy and strains its social fabric, they said.

[Gagan]

The reason why Pakis oppose India's inclusion to the NSG is manifold.
The diplomutts are concerned that this will pave the way for one day making India a permanent security council member.
The politicians are concerned that there will no longer be a photo op with the four-fathers, consolidating their position with the army. There is concern of a potential loss of sawab points, which is acutely monitored by the COAS.
The mullahs and jihadis are un-clear on nuclear, but they know it has something to do with bum and explosion, so they don't feel good about any kafir having something that explodes, that they don't have.
The faujis don't know anything. They don't even know if what they have wotks or not. Their gripe is very much in line with the mullah-jihadi group, of having something that explodes, and not wanting the "enemy" from having it. They are concerned that this may be perceived as an H&D loss by the abduls in their country.

What gets every Pakis goat is that there is a loss of == and a "deal" is being done with kafir hindu bunniya India, and not with them, not the fact that they can't make head or tail of the word nuclear.

[SSridhar]

Pakistan turns down Afghan proposal for throughway to India - PTI

Pakistan has turned down an Afghan proposal for a throughway to India via Wagah border, showing that mutual distrust was holding back progress on key trade talks between the two neighbours.

During the 10th session of the Pakistan-Afghanistan Joint Economic Commission here yesterday, Finance Minister Ishaq Dar and his Afghan counterpart Eklil Ahmad Hakimi could only agree on a new framework to complete already agreed upon bilateral economic goals without achieving a breakthrough on border access, the Express Tribune reported.

Officials in the Economic Affairs Division said Kabul had sought access to New Delhi for its trucks via the Wagah-Attari border crossing. But Islamabad denied the request, citing security issues.

In response, Afghanistan declined Pakistan's request for access to Tajikistan's border.

Pakistan also turned down Afghanistan's requests to allow its trucks to load cargo as they returned from Wagah to Kabul.

Under the current regulations, Afghan trucks transporting goods can only drop off their cargo at Wagah and return empty.

"We want access to South Asia and Pakistan wants access to Central Asia and we discussed how to gradually remove the bottlenecks [to achieve this shared vision]," Hakimi said during a joint press conference with Dar after the meeting.

He complained that there were gaps in the implementation of the 48-point agenda agreed between Afghanistan and Pakistan when Afghan President Ashraf Ghani visited Islamabad.

The news conference had been delayed by an hour after the Afghan side reportedly raised last-minute objections over the language of the joint statement. This had followed from troubles over holding the JEC which had been postponed once and its duration was cut down from two days to one.

Dar also acknowledged this common objective, but noted that security issues had slowed progress on implementation of certain elements. "The security issue will remain a top priority for our agenda," he said.

The two sides also discussed a road project to expand the western route under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, which would see Gwadar connect to Herat via Khuzdar.

[Vikas]

Reason that India should have long term plans to assimilate Balochistan when the opportunity comes up in few years time. We need direct access to A'stan and CA

[CRamS]

I have tried to find any question or reply to a question in the Lok Sabha that deals with cricket with Pakistan, but my duck does not preclude someone else from making a great catch.

Supposing there is none, then what have you proved by that? That there is no India policy of no kirket with TSP till it stops terror? And so like a few others, all these reports of kirket resumption are not indicative of any policy turnaround, and you agree with their judgement that anybody like me suggesting so is basing their view on "emotions", Paki lies, "wanting to discuss kirket" etc?

But coming to your specific observation, I do recall a while back, the opportunistic opposition was thrashing ModiJi on some contact with TSP, can't recall if it was specifically kirket. But the de-facto policy has been no kirket with TSP until it addresses terror (for sometime it was until it brings perpetrators of 26/11 to book, but MMS love-fest with TSP put an end to that). Anurag Thakur has said so explicitly, other have to for e.g., Kirti Azad that I can recall, and many BJP spokesman that I can recall. So whether there is a document that shows ModiJi's signature that explicitly says no kirket till TSP addresses terror, India's terror concerns are indeed the reasons why there has been no kirket with TSP. And this is a fact: any resumption must be approved by govt of India. Aren't these enough for you to conclude that any resumption of kirket whether in India or in UAE or in SL is a major concession by India under a ModiJi-led govt? Yes/No? If Yes, the question I naturally ask is what has TSP done to deserve this largess?

[A_Gupta]

I have tried to find any question or reply to a question in the Lok Sabha that deals with cricket with Pakistan, but my duck does not preclude someone else from making a great catch.

Supposing there is none, then what have you proved by that?

It would be an indication of the importance the Parliament places on cricket.

I didn't have patience to read beyond the first question.

[KLNMurthy]

I have tried to find any question or reply to a question in the Lok Sabha that deals with cricket with Pakistan, but my duck does not preclude someone else from making a great catch.

Supposing there is none, then what have you proved by that? That there is no India policy of no kirket with TSP till it stops terror? And so like a few others, all these reports of kirket resumption are not indicative of any policy turnaround, and you agree with their judgement that anybody like me suggesting so is basing their view on "emotions", Paki lies, "wanting to discuss kirket" etc?

But coming to your specific observation, I do recall a while back, the opportunistic opposition was thrashing ModiJi on some contact with TSP, can't recall if it was specifically kirket. But the de-facto policy has been no kirket with TSP until it addresses terror (for sometime it was until it brings perpetrators of 26/11 to book, but MMS love-fest with TSP put an end to that). Anurag Thakur has said so explicitly, other have to for e.g., Kirti Azad that I can recall, and many BJP spokesman that I can recall. So whether there is a document that shows ModiJi's signature that explicitly says no kirket till TSP addresses terror, India's terror concerns are indeed the reasons why there has been no kirket with TSP. And this is a fact: any resumption must be approved by govt of India. Aren't these enough for you to conclude that any resumption of kirket whether in India or in UAE or in SL is a major concession by India under a ModiJi-led govt? Yes/No? If Yes, the question I naturally ask is what has TSP done to deserve this largess?

I am finding that your posts serve as an avenue for me to explore how the LeM narrative of undermining Modi operates, this time in the Pakistan relations domain.

Firstly there is a very loosey-goosey grasp of government machinery and the terms associated with it. Or even the English language. "Official", "policy", "spokesman" etc., are taken to mean whatever one feels like they mean at that moment. BJP MPs like Kirti Azad don't make or state policy. It is done by the concerned ministry or ministries; the statements of the minister or secretary can be taken as policy, nobody else's.

Secondly there is a stubborn rejection of all attempts to educate or correct regarding the importance of being precise and measured (at least trying) when analyzing or criticizing something so complex and sophisticated as the Government of India. This resistance or rejection is important because it turns out to be the only tool to undermine Modi.

Now, coming to the main narrative, it is that Modi is an uncouth, unsophisticated, uneducated thug and bully. As far as it concerns Pakistan, there is a feeling that this is a good thing, because, as a thug, he will give us the vicarious satisfaction of thrashing Pakistan.

This narrative doesn't stand up to any actual scrutiny or evidence at all. There is also ample evidence that Modi is the opposite of the crude thug picture of him that is presented. But I won't go into that here. A precise and fair review of his words and deeds on Pakistan will only lead to the conclusion that his overall Pakistan policy is much the same as that of his predecessor MMS, which is itself reflective of a broad national consensus. (Personally I think this is grievously wrong, but that is not relevant).

Based on the fictitious narrative of Modi as a thug and bully, everything he or anyone remotely connected with him says or does is viewed through the prism of aggression towards Pakistan.

What to do with evidence (poor quality or not) that doesn't fit into this prism of aggression? If you think you are pro-Modi, that will make you unhappy and you will angrily denounce Modi for betraying you. If you are anti-Modi, you will gleefully declare that Modi is only a paper tiger who backed down from his aggression at the first sign of resistance, so Modi is in fact a coward (or a disappointment if you thought Modi will beat up your bogeyman for you).

The fact that both factions are so eager to grasp at the flimsiest and poorest quality information to launch into this drama indicates that there is almost nothing Modi can do or say, objectively speaking, to make either his "friends" happy or his enemies at bay. Both sides work independently, on their own steam, to undermine Modi and thus the Government of India.

[Falijee]

Pak Tajikistan agreed on stronger cooperation in energy

He also mentioned the successful Single-country, `Made in Pakistan’ Exhibition(== once again ) in Dushanbe last month. The two countries that increased their trade from a meagre $15 million in 2011 to $89 million in 2014 are trying to increase it to $500 million. The Tajik president is accompanied by a high-level delegation comprising ministers and other senior officials, and a number of leading businessmen of Tajikistan. Nawaz said Pakistan was looking forward to the early completion of the CASA 1000 project and said it would help Pakistan meet its energy needs.

Ganja Sharif should stop dreaming of an "energy corridor" ; Afghanistan has made it clear that they are not interested in granting transit facilities to Pakistan As usual, lot of bombastic comments, all style and no substance !

[Falijee]

Convicted Bearded Pakistani Not A Criminal But A Terrorist - U.S Judge
Pakistani man sentenced in US to 40 years prison for Al Qaeda plot

NEW YORK: A Pakistani man was sentenced to 40 years in prison on Tuesday for plotting to bomb a shopping center in England as part of an Al Qaeda plan for attacks in Europe and the United States.
Abid Naseer, 29, had faced up to life in prison following his conviction by a US jury in March on charges including that he provided material support to the militant group.
“I know you're not what I'd say for any lack of a better word a 'typical' criminal. Not in any sense of the word,” US District Judge Raymond Dearie in Brooklyn told Naseer when imposing the sentence. “You're a terrorist.”

James Neuman, Naseer's lawyer, said he plans to appeal.

Naseer, who was raised in Peshawar, Pakistan and said he was a semi-professional cricket player, led an Al Qaeda cell that plotted to bomb a shopping center in Manchester, England, in April 2009, prosecutors said.

The proposed bombing in Britain was part of an overall plot involving Naseer and al Qaeda cells that included attacks against the New York City subway system and a Copenhagen newspaper,(Probably, related to the Danish "Mohamed" Cartoons) prosecutors said.

Naseer denied any affiliation with Al Qaeda or any plot, telling jurors that “terrorism is not compatible with Islam.”
Prosecutors had sought a prison term of 30 years to life for Naseer, saying he remained committed to Al Qaeda's cause and posed an extreme danger.

[Falijee]

The reason why Pakis oppose India's inclusion to the NSG is manifold.

What gets every Pakis goat is that there is a loss of == and a "deal" is being done with kafir hindu bunniya India, and not with them, not the fact that they can't make head or tail of the word nuclear.

Gagan-ji : You should be a little bit more charitable in your use of "diplomutt-ic language"; after all, these are your "neighbours" you are talking about here!

[Prem]

Europe plans to speed up deportation of tens of thousands of Pakistanis

So this was the takleef why Pakis refused to take back Pakistanis!

More Paki are deported , more the Paki lose Hard currency earning. It is double whammy on Paki Khushfehmi in competing with India. One place where there should no paki is Canada because of small population number of land with huge territory/ resources.

[shiv]

The fact that both factions are so eager to grasp at the flimsiest and poorest quality information to launch into this drama indicates that there is almost nothing Modi can do or say, objectively speaking, to make either his "friends" happy or his enemies at bay. Both sides work independently, on their own steam, to undermine Modi and thus the Government of India.

+1

I believe it is pure sophistry to ask a question about a hypothetical event that may or may not occur at some time in the future and then ask for an answer to be given right now as to whether Modi has let the nation down in case one of those two events occurs in future.

• The Modi government has said no dealings with Pakistan until terror stops.
• Cricket means dealing with Pakistan
• Therefore the Modi government has said "No cricket with Pakistan" until terror stops. No proof of this. Logic is enough
• So the question is: If cricket happens with Pakistan at some unspecified time in future, what has Pakistan done to get this concession from India?

The obvious answer is
1. No cricket match with Pakistan has occurred
2. It is not possible to state the reasons for the occurrence of a cricket match that has not occurred.

Discussions are going on between BCCI and PCB. Modi's/GOI's name should not have been brought in at all but it has been weaselled in using the following logic:

• BCCI is a private company
• The US and other unspecified countries prevent private companies from their nations from doing business with some nations.
• There is no reason why India/Modi cannot do that. This is a conclusion that is made with finality which must be accepted, like the Gospel, merely because it has been said.
• Why has Modi not done that?

[Picklu]

India should link playing any kirkut series with pakistan, even on neutral ground, with the granting of MFN status. I mean if they can not give even a bloody MFN status due to politics, how can we play kirkut? Situation is naat naarmaal, no?

Off course not in official way but as a sub project for unofficial RW brigade.

[CRamS]

India should link playing any kirkut series with pakistan, even on neutral ground, with the granting of MFN status. I mean if they can not give even a bloody MFN status due to politics, how can we play kirkut? Situation is naat naarmaal, no?

Off course not in official way but as a sub project for unofficial RW brigade.

+100. My point all along has been kirket is a leverage India has over TSP, and it should be used to the extent possible.

[Dipanker]

India should not play any cricket with Pakis as long as they keep sending terrorists across the border to kill Indian civilians and soldiers, period.

Playing cricket while they keep killing Indians is legitimizing their terrorism against us.

[A_Gupta]

The last statement I can find was May 31, 2015,
http://sports.ndtv.com/cricket/news/243 ... hma-swaraj

" No Decision on India-Pakistan Cricket Series: External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj
Sushma Swaraj's remarks came in the backdrop of Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) Chairman Shaharyar Khan's recent visit to India to push for resumption of Indo-Pak cricket ties. "

No decision has been taken. Where has this information come that this (Indo-Pak cricket series) has been decided and that I was not consulted. No decision has been taken," Swaraj said when asked about the reports that India will be playing bilateral cricket series with Pakistan.

Her remarks came in the backdrop of Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) Chairman Shaharyar Khan's recent visit to India to push for resumption of Indo-Pak cricket ties.

Khan, in a joint press statement with BCCI President Jagmohan Dalmiya in Kolkata, proposed a series comprising three Tests, five ODIs and two T20s in UAE in December this year. The BCCI has, however, not given any categorical statement yet on the proposed series and the venue.

What has changed between May and November?

PS: here is the latest:
http://www.cricbuzz.com/cricket-news/76 ... tan-series

Finally, Sri Lanka has emerged as the neutral venue of choice to host the series, comprising three ODIs and two T20Is to be played between December 20, 2015 and January 3, 2016. Sri Lanka's cricket board (SLC) officials confirmed this development to TOI on Monday.
...
While the BCCI is okay with this proposal, it has to be finally cleared by the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) and the ministry of external affairs (MEA). The MEA has concerns over India playing Pakistan at a neutral venue. The first is regarding the security of players and the second stems from its delicate diplomatic ties with Pakistan.

[Lisa]

Correction,

India should not play any cricket with Pakis as long as they keep sending terrorists across the border to kill Indian civilians and soldiers, period.

Playing cricket while they keep killing Indians is legitimizing their terrorism against us legitimises them.

[CRamS]

It would be an indication of the importance the Parliament places on cricket.

If you have the patience, don't worry about Indian parliamentarians, but what is your opinion on the following?

1. Is kiket not a huge leverage India has over TSP given the latter's desperation? (and many other reasons)
2. If answer to 1 is yes, should India not be using that leverage to drive a hard bargain to make TSP behave?

Also, may I loop in KLM as well regarding your post above on Sushma Swaraj's statement. She is clearly saying "No decision has been taken on India-Pakistan Cricket Series". That clearly tells me, unless it is some twisted definition of "sophistry" to conclude otherwise, that India govt has to decide on kirket resumption, and it is a policy not to play kirket with TSP.

[Lisa]

Convicted Bearded Pakistani Not A Criminal But A Terrorist - U.S Judge
Pakistani man sentenced in US to 40 years prison for Al Qaeda plot

NEW YORK: A Pakistani man was sentenced to 40 years in prison on Tuesday for plotting to bomb a shopping center in England as part of an Al Qaeda plan for attacks in Europe and the United States.
Abid Naseer, 29, had faced up to life in prison following his conviction by a US jury in March on charges including that he provided material support to the militant group.
“I know you're not what I'd say for any lack of a better word a 'typical' criminal. Not in any sense of the word,” US District Judge Raymond Dearie in Brooklyn told Naseer when imposing the sentence. “You're a terrorist.”

James Neuman, Naseer's lawyer, said he plans to appeal.

Naseer, who was raised in Peshawar, Pakistan and said he was a semi-professional cricket player, led an Al Qaeda cell that plotted to bomb a shopping center in Manchester, England, in April 2009, prosecutors said.

The proposed bombing in Britain was part of an overall plot involving Naseer and al Qaeda cells that included attacks against the New York City subway system and a Copenhagen newspaper,(Probably, related to the Danish "Mohamed" Cartoons) prosecutors said.

Naseer denied any affiliation with Al Qaeda or any plot, telling jurors that “terrorism is not compatible with Islam.”
Prosecutors had sought a prison term of 30 years to life for Naseer, saying he remained committed to Al Qaeda's cause and posed an extreme danger.

Falijeeji,

Best bit is missing from puki paper,

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... ailed.html

Abid Naseer: Student who plotted to blow up Manchester's Arndale Centre jailed for 40 years

"At his sentencing, Naseer requested a transfer to the country he tried to bomb, asking Judge Raymond Dearie “with humbleness to make a recommendation for a transfer to the UK”.
James Neuman, his lawyer, said “He wants to live there. He wants to pursue his education there. He likes the UK.”"

Can you make sense of this??

[A_Gupta]

I do not want India to play cricket with Pakistan until at least the terrorism issue is settled. I want #BoycottPakistan till that happens, not just cricket.

However, I do not see cricket as a huge lever over Pakistan. I haven't ever seen anything like Pakistani jihadis (and their sponsors) bowing down to Pakistani public opinion about cricket.

In fact, the jihadis (and their sponsors) could guarantee the safety of matches held in Pakistan; but the demand/desperation is simply not there in the Pakistani public or the elite to make that happen.
We just have to remember who shot at the Sri Lanka team, and whether it turned Pakistani public or official opinion against such things. I don't think so, any more than Dawood Ibrahim or Hafiz Saeed is in custody.

Cricket is of symbolic value mainly. By never issuing a definite policy statement about it (such as "no cricket unless terrorism is addressed"), the GOI has saved itself from seeming to have climbed down, except in the minds of those where there exists a definite GOI policy.

[vishvak]

Correction,

India should not play any cricket with Pakis as long as they keep sending terrorists across the border to kill Indian civilians and soldiers, period.

Playing cricket while they keep killing Indians is legitimizing their terrorism against us legitimises them.

Along with minimal relations with Saudis/Qataris/Turks/Turkmenistan/Pakistan - the whole terrorist corridors of greener than thou.

[CRamS]

Cricket is of symbolic value mainly. By never issuing a definite policy statement about it (such as "no cricket unless terrorism is addressed"), the GOI has saved itself from seeming to have climbed down, except in the minds of those where there exists a definite GOI policy.

How then do you interpret Sushma Swaraj's statement?

[A_Gupta]

Cricket is of symbolic value mainly. By never issuing a definite policy statement about it (such as "no cricket unless terrorism is addressed"), the GOI has saved itself from seeming to have climbed down, except in the minds of those where there exists a definite GOI policy.

How then do you interpret Sushma Swaraj's statement?

As exactly what it says - BCCI can negotiate its sweet heart away, but ultimately MEA and PMO have to say yes or no. That is simply a statement of how the machinery works, not a statement of policy.

[CRamS]

A_GuptaJi, please, I am not belaboring this, but does govt of India have to say Yes/No were TSP replaced by UK, or SL, or Aus? I don't think so. Its only in the case of TSP. And the reason for that is TSP terror, LoC violations. Right? Maybe other things. Furthermore, I am not sure if Bollywood were to rope in a TSP actor/actress to act in a film, visa is required for them enter India for sure, but does govt of India have to give explicit clearance for that? I don't think so. So why only in case of kirket?

[A_Gupta]

1. Given India is license-permit raj, I'm sure that in the case of UK, SL, Aus, permission has to be sought, but it can be taken for granted.

2. After cricketing ties resumed in 1978, the policy that MEA must approve of cricket with Pakistan seems to be have been put in place in 1989. The MEA has stepped in and cancelled previously scheduled cricket, in 1999 and 2008 most notably.

PS: As far as I can tell, any sporting event that uses "India" in its name is potentially under the purview of GOI. But I am not a good parser of govt. regulations.

[KLNMurthy]

The fact that both factions are so eager to grasp at the flimsiest and poorest quality information to launch into this drama indicates that there is almost nothing Modi can do or say, objectively speaking, to make either his "friends" happy or his enemies at bay. Both sides work independently, on their own steam, to undermine Modi and thus the Government of India.

+1

I believe it is pure sophistry to ask a question about a hypothetical event that may or may not occur at some time in the future and then ask for an answer to be given right now as to whether Modi has let the nation down in case one of those two events occurs in future.

• The Modi government has said no dealings with Pakistan until terror stops.
• Cricket means dealing with Pakistan
• Therefore the Modi government has said "No cricket with Pakistan" until terror stops. No proof of this. Logic is enough
• So the question is: If cricket happens with Pakistan at some unspecified time in future, what has Pakistan done to get this concession from India?

The obvious answer is
1. No cricket match with Pakistan has occurred
2. It is not possible to state the reasons for the occurrence of a cricket match that has not occurred.

Discussions are going on between BCCI and PCB. Modi's/GOI's name should not have been brought in at all but it has been weaselled in using the following logic:

• BCCI is a private company
• The US and other unspecified countries prevent private companies from their nations from doing business with some nations.
• There is no reason why India/Modi cannot do that. This is a conclusion that is made with finality which must be accepted, like the Gospel, merely because it has been said.
• Why has Modi not done that?

In fact, Modi government has *not* said there will be no dealings with Pakistan as long as terrorism is not addressed; the condition only applies to the so-called comprehensive dialogue. There are plenty of dealings with Pakistan going on, some of them warm and friendly, like the Geetha case.

There are also quite a few sporting matches going on with Pakistan, as in Hockey and other sports, certainly in multilateral tournaments. We played in the cricket World Cup with them, and IIRC in a couple of other cricket tournaments after that.

So, there is no question of a change in policy; we may say that GOI hands out permissions and visas for sports with Pakistan on an ad hoc, case-by-case basis. In each case, (I imagine) the protocol is that the concerned body or organization arranges with its counterpart and then approaches GOI for permission, which is then granted or not as per the GOI's discretion.

So, when talking to their counterpart about the arrangements, the Indian sports body would (I imagine) always include a rider that, all this is subject to the GOI granting permission. CRamS can "conclude" from that rider that the fact discussions are taking place under that proviso can only mean that permission has already been secured, but it would be a conclusion that would have no validity anywhere outside his own mind.

Whatever may happen behind the scenes, like say Arun Jaitley giving BCCI a wink and a nod, is pure speculation. The process, either ad hoc or policy-driven, is rightly designed to give maximum diplomatic and political flexibility to GOI. So, even if there is some "under the table " understanding between GOI elements and BCCI (about which we are not in a position to know anything), when it comes to decision time, GOI can make any decision it wants, understanding or no understanding.

As far as actual Pakistan policy is concerned, I think if we look at it objectively, Modi is basically implementing the policy that existed under MMS, except with more integrity and consistency. The whole drama that Modi is more aggressive or militant is just that, fiction spun out of thin air, by a weird confluence of right-wingers who think Modi represents their lost manhood and left-wingers for whom anyone who is upright and has integrity represents a threat.

Underlying CRamS's vehement insistence that there is a cricket policy and it has changed suddenly, I see an implicit presumption that GOI is run as a kind of banana republic, with no procedures or systems. It was never that, though it came close under the Sonia Gandhi regime.

[Falijee]

Minorities Snubbed For Local Government Poll Seats In Islamabad

The upcoming LG polls will not see many people from minority groups stepping up to the plate as both Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) and Pakistan Muslim League – Nawaz (PML-N) did not consider them for any top slot tickets.

So, the recent assurances at Diwali functions by Ganja and Immy were Public Relations purposes only

The two major political parties of the country ignored Christians, Hindus and other minorities as potential candidates. Neither the ruling PML-N nor PTI have non-Muslims candidates on their tickets for the slots of chairman and vice-chairman.

So much for making Pakisatan a liberal society !

Ironically, Jamaat-e-Islami (JI), which is considered far more conservative than PTI and PML-N, is running one non-Muslim candidate i.e. Jamil Khokhar(code name for an "Ahmedi" ) for the slot of vice-chairman from G-7/2. Khokhar is also the president of the party’s Islamabad minority wing.

PML-N senior leader Anjum Aqeel, whose party did not award a ticket to anyone from a minority for the top slots, said that the PML-N awarded tickets to deserving candidates after through consultation.
He said that non-Muslims were not given tickets for the position of chairman and vice-chairman because these were responsible posts, and only well-educated candidates were fielded.
Christian Progressive Movement leader Naila Dayal said that the party did not field any candidate in the LG polls in the federal capital due to their bitter experience of the past.
Naila said that though they were staunch nationalists they had a serious identity crisis because they were being treated like second-class citizens.

Lashing out at the selection criteria, she suggested that non-Muslims should be given the right to elect their representatives. She said that often selfish and greedy sycophants are selected, who are least concerned about the problems being faced by their communities.

Guess, the Pakis are not interested in an = = in this dept

[KLNMurthy]

A_GuptaJi, please, I am not belaboring this, but does govt of India have to say Yes/No were TSP replaced by UK, or SL, or Aus? I don't think so. Its only in the case of TSP. And the reason for that is TSP terror, LoC violations. Right? Maybe other things. Furthermore, I am not sure if Bollywood were to rope in a TSP actor/actress to act in a film, visa is required for them enter India for sure, but does govt of India have to give explicit clearance for that? I don't think so. So why only in case of kirket?

CRamS, you may not think so, but that doesn't mean it is actually the case. Every time someone leaves the Indian shores or comes in, GOI can stop them for reasons of state. This also applies to sportspersons and sports teams and to any country, including UK or Sweden. Due to the "special " relationship with Pakistan, this process tends to be more visible, that's all.

Can you explain to me what a visa is, if it is not "explicit clearance" allowing someone to enter the country?