Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan - November 06, 2009

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 30 Nov 2009 23:39

The caller calls again

The person is talking in Urdu but with a very heavy thick punjabi accent (ever heard Dara singh speaking hindi.. it is same) Dara singh is also from Amritsar area and with same accent.

"Inshaallah allah tala ne tuhade waaste jannat hun bilkul kareeb hai tuhade"

The heaven is very close to you now.

I can understand each and everything.

AdityaM · Post by **AdityaM** » 30 Nov 2009 23:51

On an unrelated note, why has there been a disruption in the biopic on behnazir bhutto?
It was being made by Mahesh bhatt with Shabana azmi as mohterma bhutto

Mahendra · Post by **Mahendra** » 01 Dec 2009 00:22

AdityaM wrote:On an unrelated note, why has there been a disruption in the biopic on behnazir bhutto?
It was being made by Mahesh bhatt with Shabana azmi as mohterma bhutto

Mahesh Butt is waiting for confirmation from Zaid Hamid that Col Purhoit was behind BeBe's assassination, once Zaid makes his pronouncement Butt will release his movie.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 01 Dec 2009 01:54

SSridhar wrote:
vishal wrote:US tells Pakistan to stop using terror as a strategic tool

Extract: Jones did some straight-talking with the top Pakistani leadership, the daily said. "If Pakistan cannot deliver, he warned, the US may be impelled to use any means at its disposal to rout insurgents based along Pakistan's western and southern borders with Afghanistan."
But, I don't like the carrot he dangled ". . . to try to "reduce tensions" between India and Pakistan. . .".

In my Tamil language, there is a proverb that roughly translates thus: A pilgrim who simply takes for free a coconut from the shop to offer to Lord Ganesh on the way.

Unless of course, if it is a grand opera that both the US and India are coordinating. Does India have enough trust in the US to do that ?

It is normal to be suspicious, but if we are to assume that the words used in the WashPost article are the ones Obama is willing to use, then there has been a subtle shift in the US position and I would venture to state that there is a greater convergence between Indo-US views.

HOWEVER, IMVVHO, these are just coincidental. It has nothing to do with the either India or the US. It has to do with Pakistan. They have not been able to manage the terrorist brigade at all. All Pakistan has to do is to make sure that the pain WRT the US is reduced and we all can dial back to some 5-10 years as far as Pak-Af fatwas from the US are concerned.

What I would like to see is the blasting of the LeT from the face of this earth. This should be the implemented policy of the US in a given time period. Pakis are great at buying time from the devil himself. Jones goes to Isloo to rescue Z from Kiyani and Gilani - 2011, WashPost.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 01 Dec 2009 05:42

SBajwa wrote:The caller calls again

The person is talking in Urdu but with a very heavy thick punjabi accent (ever heard Dara singh speaking hindi.. it is same) Dara singh is also from Amritsar area and with same accent.

"Inshaallah allah tala ne tuhade waaste jannat hun bilkul kareeb hai tuhade"

The heaven is very close to you now.

I can understand each and everything.

Bajwaji - thanks for your efforts.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 01 Dec 2009 05:59

Pakis are Jumping like a Pig with Laal Mirch in the Musharraf.
http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news- ... shington/1
Manmohan's mission to Washington
By Inbreedatullah

Mr Zakaria asked Singh what his thinking was about of the lasting impact of 26/11, at the international level. Manmohan's answered: "At an international level it has solidified the understanding that Pakistan remains a deep source of problems relating to terrorism. Even right after 9/11 people were not aware of Pakistan's role in supporting the Taliban. This understanding does not mean it is easy to do something about it, because Pakistan is like the bandit who comes into your house and says I am going to hold you up and if you object I am going to blow my brains all over your carpet."
The Indian prime minister in another statement sought to insinuate that Pakistan was not sincere in the coalition policy towards Afghanistan and counselled USA to stay on in the country as otherwise Pakistan would revert back to a pro-Taliban relationship.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 01 Dec 2009 06:04

The US surge and thurst Preassure and Pakistan's Painful Moaning .
http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news- ... rge-threat

At a strategic level, Pakistan needs to be more assertive in protecting its interests. The leadership needs to take a firm stand on the surge issue and insist on being consulted before the US makes a paradigm shift in its Afghan policy. So far Pakistan has never been asked to give inputs into the US Afghan policy; we have simply been confronted with the consequences and effectively told to accept them regardless of the costs for our country. This has to end and Pakistan presently has the ability and space to impact US decisions on Afghanistan since without our cooperation the US will suffer even greater losses in Afghanistan. On that there can be no doubt. What makes this insistence on the part of Pakistan a strategic imperative is the volatile situation not just in FATA but also in Balochistan. With the government finally moving to rectify decades of neglect of this province, it cannot afford to have the situation destabilised by a US surge. Already the Indians are using Afghanistan to this end.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 01 Dec 2009 06:11

Let’s start with Siachen ---- Dr Saleem H Ali

Several pragmatic solutions have already been proposed and with very little loss in political capital both countries can make a huge cognitive jump in resolving this dispute. For the past several years, various constituencies in South Asia and beyond have been attempting to establish a jointly managed conservation area, or ‘peace park’, in the Karakoram Mountains which divide the hostile nations of India and Pakistan. Researchers, mountaineers, and conservationists have joined forces to promote their vision of using environmental cooperation to make the magnificent Siachen Glacier region — militarised since 1986 — safe for geographers, tourists, and wildlife. This is an uninhabited region which, military leaders on both sides agree, has little military importance and yet soldiers are dying of hypothermia at elevations exceeding 18,000 feet above sea level.

Oh really, who in the IA leadership said this??

The framework for moving forward in this is clearly evident and this is a pragmatic proposal, rather than an idealistic one. There have even been joint reports by Indian and Pakistani brigadier-generals as well as the retired Air Marshall of the Indian armed forces, K C Cariappa, on the strategic salience of such a common-sense solution. All that remains is leadership to move forward. With the Copenhagen Summit on climate change approaching, the prospects for using the Siachen Peace Park as a measure of conflict resolution in the name of science are even stronger. Since Indian forces are in control of the glacier itself, the initiative must come from them to move ahead with this effort. Mr Singh, you have it within your power to leave a lasting legacy and resolve this senseless dispute in the name of science and environmental conservation once and for all.

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 01 Dec 2009 06:17

No problem Dr. Shiv.

I will keep on adding hear as I hear them (in between my work).

Then.. the caller speak in urdu saying that media is reporting that you are doing good job and more than 50 persons have entered the city. the whole city is being destroyed, fires everywhere., many people are dying., so allah has given you a great "Sabab" (can't translate Sabab) to do this great deed., the listener says "ahamdullah" then he says "mera veer" in punjabi i.e. "my brother" and then next conversation starts

Then again in urdu somebody says

"Main keh raha tha na ke aik hamara banda wahan pe pachaas ke barabar hai"

i.e. "I was saying this to you the other day that one of our men is equal to 50 of theirs"

the same person talks to the hostage (Chabad house) in english "just sit back and relax and we will talk to you again and save your energy for later .....".

Then the person calls again this time in punjabi..

caller calls and the terrorist pick up the phone replying with "Salaam-e-leikum"
The caller says "walekum islam .. ke haal ne.. khairiat hai?"

how you doin? are you okay?

Terrorists reply with "ahamdulliha ji.. some name (I can only pick up antdarwaan ji)... allah noo piare hogya ne"
i..e. some name... (antdarwaan ji) has gotten the love of the allah (i.e. has died).

The caller says "Achha.. tuhade kol hi ne"
"ok.. is he with you"

Reply is "nahi"
ie. no

then he says something in arabic (fateha) or whatever..

The terrorists says "Kamre noo aag laggie hai agar media noo dikha rahe ne te., khirkian te bathroom vi"
The room is on the fire if they are showing to the Media., also on windows and in bathroom

The caller says authoratively like passing a command "Giraftari wali ji shakal nahi paida hon deni.. aih gall yaad rakhi"
i.e. "Let me remind you that you are not to be captured (giraftaar)., just remember it"

the terrorist replys with "Inshallah"

i.e. "Okay Allah willing"

The caller says again "Asmaan ullah.. umm... ladai wali koi shakal nahi hai je toun bahar nikal ke oothe lare, grenade sutt ke te nikal jave"

i.e.. "Asmaan ullah (the name of the terrorists). Isn't it possible that you go out on the roof to fight, throw a grenade and come back"

The terrorists replies in a very rustic villager punjabi "Grenade sit ditte ne dono hi"
i.e. I have already thrown my both grenades.

The caller says "Himmat karni mera veer... ghabrana nahi hai"

"Be brave my brother.. and don't be afraid"

--- more later ---

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 01 Dec 2009 06:19

Pomp and substance ---- D. Maleeha Lodhi

But any Indian expectation that the visit would operationalise the civilian nuclear deal and open the way to rapid technology access failed to materialise. This was due to persisting differences over a reprocessing agreement. These relate to safeguards to ensure that low enriched uranium supplied by American companies are not reprocessed as weapons-grade fuel and rules for the handling of enriched uranium. Another obstacle is a law yet to be enacted by India to limit the liability of foreign firms in the event of a nuclear accident.

While these issues have delayed the execution of the nuclear deal, this does little to reassure Islamabad that once implemented the agreement will enable India to enhance its nuclear-weapons capability as its ability to purchase nuclear fuel from outside will free up indigenous fuel to be diverted to its weapons programme. This has strategic ramifications that will urge Pakistan to take appropriate countermeasures to address the rising asymmetry in fissile material stocks, and to consider ways to ensure that nuclear deterrence is not eroded.

As for US affirmation of India’s global role, officials in Delhi were apparently satisfied that their partnership has been acknowledged as “indispensable for global peace and security.” Indian concerns that a Democratic administration would be less enthusiastic on this score than the Bush administration (which was more willing to embrace the notion of India as a counterweight to China) were evidently allayed by the joint statement’s recognition of “India playing an increasingly important role in world affairs.”

Significant from Pakistan’s perspective was the recognition accorded to India’s role in Afghanistan. The joint statement “appreciated India’s role in reconstruction and rebuilding efforts” and hoped for its enhancement. This struck a very different note from that by General Stanley McChrystal in his Afghanistan review, where he referred to Indian activism in Afghanistan exacerbating regional tensions.

Islamabad would view this part of the joint statement with sharp concern. This will likely strengthen suspicions in Pakistan’s security establishment of a Delhi-Kabul-Washington nexus, which in turn could heighten fears of Pakistan’s strategic encirclement. This might urge Islamabad to consider ways of neutralising the effects of such a nexus for its security.

The Singh visit may not have yielded all that the Indians wanted from it because of their unrealistic set of expectations. But several aspects of solidifying US-India ties have ramifications for Pakistan that will need to be carefully evaluated.

A hard-headed appraisal must be conducted in the context of renewed American requests for Islamabad’s cooperation to implement Obama’s new strategy in Afghanistan. It must also be undertaken from the perspective of the country’s broader strategic vision, especially future relations with its abiding strategic partner, China.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 01 Dec 2009 06:22

SSridhar wrote:India & Pakistan: Case for Common Defence - Pervez Hoodbhoy

Posted without permission, from my sis:

Prof. Hoodbhoy,

I have been wondering what you really mean in your article. You suggest that India and Pakistan should have "joint defense".

You don't say against what? In the absence of a common enemy country or bloc, you probably mean India and Pakistan should have joint defense against extremism in Pakistan. Well, first you need to acknowledge that India has been fighting extremism from Pakistan for the last 20 years. Also, that India has kept exhorting Pakistan to fight extremism on its own(Pakistan's) account and multiple Indian governments agreed to set up institutional exchanges on joint action on extremism. Yet Pakistan refuses to shut down jihadi groups in Pakistan.

So perhaps in advocating a joint defence, you actually mean India should submit to Pakistani demands on many matters of interest to the Pakistan Army including Kashmir.

Yet, you don't explain why India's surrender to a 20-year long extremist movement launched from Pakistan in Indian Kashmir and rest of India will make India safer from extremism. After all, the Soviet exit from Afghanistan did not end extremism emanating from Pakistan in Afghanistan, did it? Not even the sacrifice of a million Afghans' lives in the subsequent civil war and Afghan acceptance of Pakistan Army supported Taliban rule brought an end to extremism in Afghanistan emanating from Pakistan.

In addition, you threaten that Indian Muslims will also get radicalized if India does not yield to Pakistan's extremist-led agenda on Kashmir. Again, that is wishful thinking. Submitting to extremism does not end extremism, it feeds it,

The fundamental problem lies in your framing of the Muslim/Islamic extremism issue - that the well being of Muslims in Pakistan requires sacrifice from Indians and/or others. In the guise of a solution, you are setting negative goals for Indians and no positive goals for Muslims/Pakistanis.

You are not alone in falsely setting Indian sacrifice as the necessary prerequisite for Pakistani well-being - this has been happening since the early 1900s. Churchill did it too. He told the Americans during WWII that if a constituent assembly or national government reflecting the true majority of Hindus was constituted, the Muslims in the Indian Army would refuse to fight the War. Churchill even lied about the Muslim percentage in the Indian Army to get Americans to acquiesce in denying India a constitution and self-rule. The positive goal of Muslim self-governance could wait and the Hindu right to self-rule needed to be sacrificed to keep Muslims and Britain happy. (Let it be pointed out that merely forcing such sacrifice could not block Indians from ultimately achieving their positive goals of a constitution and self-rule).

Not just Churchill, Jinnah also set sacrifice by Hindus as the prerequisite for Muslim well-being. He framed Muslim rights/ nationalism/sovereignty as achievable only as negative goals for Hindus, not positive ones for Muslims - he threatened to destroy India if it was not divided.

He refused to accept any common accepted principle for the division, he just demanded as big a Pakistan as he could think of - provinces, princely states, land corridors. Once India was divided, he refused to settle the matter of the princely states on any commonly accepted principle - even with respect to Hyderabad and Kashmir he preferred to depend on force to overcome Indian disagreement. In his rhetoric and negotiations, he always cast achievement of Muslims' rights/ nationalism/ sovereignty as a zero sum game which required the cost of the share/rights/sovereignty of Hindus/others.

There is no evidence to this day that it needs to be so. Yet, today like Churchill and Jinnah, you too view India-Pakistan welfare as a zero sum game. You decree that peace, moderation and the well-being of Muslims in Pakistan can only happen with sacrifice of Indian interests. You seem to suggest that India must not continue to protect its interests in Kashmir nor defend the principles on which Indians interests are based. You do not suggest a commonly accepted principle on which India and Pakistan could operate and reach agreement - you simply decree that India must 'visibly' fulfill whatever agenda Muslims in Pakistan have been pursuing with the help of extremists, or suffer even more loss. All the effort must come from Indians, the Pakistani state sending mass murderers to India owe nothing to no-one.

You also don't even offer a win-win type of argument such as, that Pakistanis cannot prosper when jihadi activities and the Pak Army agenda infringe on the public space, the economy and policy making, hence India should cooperate with Pakistan for a joint economic policy, a joint trade policy, or a joint water management/agricultural policy for the welfare of ordinary people in Pakistan (and India). Again, you don't mention any of that, you simply lay down that the Indian state should submit to jihadi extremist agenda emanating from Pakistan under tutelage of the Pakistan Army, under your threat of even more such extremist violence.

Peace will come and extremism will end in Pakistan, you seem to argue, not by Pakistanis creating positive narratives/goals for themselves and their neighbourhood, and by fighting extremism and its negative narratives against enemies. You rather argue that peace and moderation will only come if India pays up the demanded extortion cost to Pakistan's extremist-run agenda in Kashmir.

Unfortunately, I doubt even the most 'liberal' Indians today mistake your negative goals for India as a recipe for lasting peace, so please stop insisting that Indian sacrifice is necessary for Pakistan's well-being.

You should also realize that Indians find nothing new in the sight of Pakistanis threatening Indians or others with religious extremism. The whole region's population, whether Indians, East Bengalis or Afghans, has by now learnt to fight to the death the Pakistan Army and its negative goals in defence of their own positive goals. When the Pakistan Army has positive goals to offer Indians and others, let us know.

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 01 Dec 2009 06:47

Mr. Gupta,

This is an excellent "Moooh toud jawaab" article. Can you popularize it by getting published?

thanks
Sandeep

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 01 Dec 2009 07:05

SBajwa,
It has been submitted to the newspaper.
-Arun

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 01 Dec 2009 07:35

Britpakis pelt one of their own with eggs. Click here

The male protesters accused her (Baroness Warsi) of not being a proper Muslim and supporting the death of Muslims in Afghanistan. The shadow minister for community cohesion and social action was then taken into a nearby shop. Baroness Warsi told the BBC that the men were "idiots who did not represent the majority of British Muslims".

MurthyB · Post by **MurthyB** » 01 Dec 2009 07:43

Not sure if this has been recognized by the forum as a new addition to the glorious lexicon of Pakistani English:

A BAD SMELLING KISS

The said Carry Logger Bill has no doubt won the hearts of the people of Pakistan but on the other hand the situation is not very much pleasing for India.

arun · Post by **arun** » 01 Dec 2009 07:54

Prime Minister of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani in Berlin

:

‘India is stalling the dialogue process and the European Union must play its role to bring it back to the negotiating table for resolving all outstanding issues, including the core issue of Kashmir, between the two countries,’

‘On the one hand the world community, including Britain, praises Pakistan for its efforts in the war on terror and appreciates the military operation, but on the other they ask for more.’

From Dawn:

India not sincere about talks, says Gilani

arun · Post by **arun** » 01 Dec 2009 08:14

X Posted.

The Army of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and its ISI seems to be running an operation to intimidate journalists.

Kamran Shafi of Dawn receives death threats and had his house shot at. Kamran Shafi believes that “the threat were from inside the powerful security establishment, possibly from the military’s intelligence arm, Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI.”:

Pakistani Journalist Critical of the Military Is Threatened

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 01 Dec 2009 08:38

A_Gupta wrote: Shiv,

What are other places to get views of the temper of India? Not the official pundits, but regular folks.

-Arun

Arun, one thing to do is to read the Indian media - some of which are called dhimmedia, or leftist, or unpatriotic without attaching any labels to the views they express. Equally it is important not to imagine that the views expressed are going to be accepted by everyone. India is the sum total of a billion viewpoints some of which are expressed in the media.

A news report of a fatwa against vande mataram is no more or no less representative of India than the news report of a Muslim working in an Indian temple. Both are just examples of some Indians doing or saying something that suits him in a country that allows him to do that.

I find the contrast between Pakistan and India very revealing. Both were the same country, At the "people level" both countries had and still have the same problems namely poverty, illiteracy, and lack of opportunity, shelter, drinking water etc.

But over 62 years Pakistanis have been taught to blame their problems on an external force - namely India, and feel that defeating India and getting Kashmir will solve their problems while they have been old that their leadership, the Pakistan army is to be admired.

In India people have been encouraged to vote to change leaders, in other words they can blame their current problems on their leaders, whom they can change. Indians are therefore obsessed with local problems and anger against their leadership for failures. Since the problems Indians face (whether they are Hindus, Muslims or whatever) are the same (poverty, illiteracy, and lack of opportunity, shelter, drinking water etc.) it is a difficult trick to get Indians to believe that their real problem is Islam and or Pakistan. This forum would have one believe that the real problem that Indians face is Islam and or Pakistan and an American conspiracy to rule the world. Indians do not care if Islam is a problem or if America wants to rule the world as long as their most urgent and immediate needs can be met.

Anyone who points at external agencies as a cause of hunger and deprivation will have his bluff called by Indians who know damn well that there is a wealthy and successful India that seems to be doing fine despite all these external threats so the presence of external threats cannot be a reason for their misery. Even the dire need for a temple in Ayodhya needs to be viewed through this filter. The temple may be needed and will acquire national support if it somehow translates to a better life for Indians. But if squabbling and building a temple does not help to make a ground level change for Indians - nobody will give a damn about that issue any more. Anything will be given a chance in India - Secularism, pseudosecularism, socialism, Hindutva whatever - but in each case it will have to make a ground level change for Indians. Otherwise they will just spit out what they just took in and look for something new.

Sorry OT

asprinzl · Post by **asprinzl** » 01 Dec 2009 08:51

Doc,
I gotta give it to you sir for the surgical accuracy in perception and articulation. A surgeon indeed.
Avram

Skanda · Post by **Skanda** » 01 Dec 2009 08:53

Foreign Policy just released a survey from what it calls its "Top 100 Global Thinkers," a list that includes Friedman, Robert Kagan, Henry Kissinger, and David Petraeus, among others, and here were the results for this question: "What is the Most Dangerous Country in the World"

from this link

sum · Post by **sum** » 01 Dec 2009 09:16

Manmohan's answered: "At an international level it has solidified the understanding that Pakistan remains a deep source of problems relating to terrorism. Even right after 9/11 people were not aware of Pakistan's role in supporting the Taliban. This understanding does not mean it is easy to do something about it, because Pakistan is like the bandit who comes into your house and says I am going to hold you up and if you object I am going to blow my brains all over your carpet."

MMS said these actual words?

arun · Post by **arun** » 01 Dec 2009 09:18

X Posted.

Did not take very long after the ego massage dished out during our Prime Ministers official visit for the US to revert true to type and undercut Indian interests to reward the bad behaviour of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan

.

The New York Times on the likely contours of US President Obama’s new Af-Pak policy which is reported as being designed to prevent India exercising influence in Afghanistan after the US pulls out

:

Obama’s Speech on Afghanistan to Envision Exit

By PETER BAKER, ERIC SCHMITT and DAVID E. SANGER
Published: November 29, 2009 ……………………………….

Officials of one allied nation who have been extensively briefed on the president’s plan said, however, that Mr. Obama would describe how the American presence would be ratcheted back after the buildup, while making clear that a significant American presence in Afghanistan would remain for a long while. That is designed in part to signal to Pakistan that the United States will not abandon the region and to allay Pakistani fears that India will fill the vacuum created as America pulls back. ……………….

New York Times

Seems like US President Obama was not reflecting US policy

when he welcomed Indian involvement in Afghanistan during the recent visit of our Prime Minister there and that Gen. McChrystals characterisation of Indian influence in Afghanistan as a dangerous thing is more reflective of American policy.[/quote]

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 01 Dec 2009 09:32

From FP posted above, other worthwhile worries:
Note Pakistan is also involved in the 29% Iran case.

negi · Post by **negi** » 01 Dec 2009 09:36

I think issue of IRAN acquiring nukes is as usual being bloated out of proportions by bunch of paranoids in DC specially when these saviors of democracy looked the other way when Photochor and land of phoonk sundari were busy disbursing WMDs.

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 01 Dec 2009 10:00

Here we go. LaWhori Logic, at its best

Pakistan should not be portrayed as war zone: PM

ISLAMABAD: Prime Minister Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani has stated that Pakistan should not be portrayed as a war zone, as the war against terrorism was forced upon us due to the world’s non-caring of region after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

The Prime Minister, further said, “We are doomed to succeed.

To another query, Prime Minister Gilani said, “We fight against terrorists (Thanks be to Allah). They are not Pakistanis; they are Uzbeks, Chechens, Arabs and Afghans. And they cooperate with agents of foreign powers to destroy peace in Pakistan”. He said there are militant Pakistanis, adding, but the revolt is driven by foreign elements.

“There are in fact interferences in Afghanistan. This is not only our opinion, many people in USA think the same”, he added.

To a question as if Pakistan has any evidence against India, the Prime Minister said, “I don’t say that there is evidence. But many experts have analyzed the revolt already, like American think tanks, and they mention strange involvements”.

The Prime Minister in response to another query said when people all over the world think of Pakistan, they mainly think of terrorism, adding, “of course, this has battered the image of our country. But you must not forget that otherwise, we are making good progress”.

“Despite all these things, terrorism is no topic in large parts of the country. We care for the security of workers and employees, we care for our immigrants for other countries, among them e.g. many engineers”.

“Can’t they see that Pakistan has made enormous developments?” he questioned.

He, however, added, “I guarantee you, I guarantee our people and I guarantee the world that our complete command structure is in the most reliable hands. It is absolutely sure. By the way, USA thinks this, too”.

The Prime Minister said at present all people in Pakistan support our military strikes, because they fear the terror threat.

About Pakistan-Germany relations, the Prime Minister said, “We have special relations with Germany. The two countries were the first to sign a Bilateral Investment Treaty - that was in 1959. So why shouldn’t we continue our good relations? Germany already is the fourth biggest investor in Pakistan, European Union is in lead”.

Pakjabi, and to top that, a LaWhori Pakjabi. Lots of "Gruntees".

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 01 Dec 2009 10:10

That guy calls himself the Prime Minister of a nuclear power ? Pathetic.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 01 Dec 2009 10:24

What led to change of nuclear command ?

Sorry for using some smileys here, but cimply couldn't resist them.

The change of hands in controlling the National Command Authority (NCA) of Pakistan’s vital strategic assets on the day when the notorious National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) operation ceased to exist for good will have far-reaching implications on the power structure of the country.

It is a demonstration of complete mistrust in the hands from which the authority has been withdrawn and expression of confidence in the person who has assumed it. It is a first reshuffle in Pakistan’s commandand control authority of the strategic assets ever since its inception nine years ago. The authority that deals with domestic system of Pakistan’s invaluable strategic assets has the most obvious external dimensions. The important world capitals and P-5 (permanent five members of the UNSC) had been watching and taking keen interest in the development of the paraphernalia of the command in Pakistan since these are the countries which had been showing their concern about the safety and security of Pakistan’s strategic assets. It is not possible that the change did not have the blessings of these capitals while on domestic front every sane person was expressing concern about the capacity and capability of the previous holder of the command.

The first statement resenting the change and most probably it will be the only one has come from Indian Army Chief General Deepak Kapoor, who has become the mouthpiece of New Delhi’s South Block these days to vent Indian anger and wrath on its neighbours.

Sources at the relevant places told The News it was officially clarified last year with the inception of the incumbent government that control of Pakistan’s nuclear programme is unchanged. The president of the country continued to be the chairman of the National Command Authority (NCA) while the prime minister was made the vice-chairman of the same. The control and command structure of the nuclear programme provided the ‘nuclear button’ to the chairman.

The fear was being expressed that some grave mistake might not be committed by the president as he was under colossal duress of various kinds. Reuters reported on April 8, last year that the command and control system for Pakistan’s nuclear weapons will stay unchanged under the country’s new government, made up of opponents of President Pervez Musharraf, an official said. “Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal was overseen by a National Command Authority (NCA) headed by the president and with the prime minister as its vice-chairman.” The situation remained unchanged for less than fourteen months and ultimately the president had to quit the most powerful assignment. The ordinance to formalize the NCA is present on the agenda of the National Assembly after its adoption by the standing committee on defence.

In the meantime, MNAs Ayaz Amir and Begum Ishrat Ashraf of the PML-N have submitted Amendment to the NCA bill 2009, saying ‘in clause 3, (a) in sub-clause (3) for the word “president” the word “prime minister” shall be substituted; (b) in sub-clause (4), for the word “prime minister” the words “minister for defence”, shall be substituted; and (c) in sub-clause (5), paragraph (b) shall be omitted and the preceding paragraphs will be re-numbered accordingly.

According to an international report, the US has helped Pakistan secure its nuclear facilities through various forms of assistance, including a $100 million programme launched under President Bush. In 2000, President Clinton created a joint US-Pakistan commission to develop Pakistan’s command and control system. In the process, the US had insights into Pakistan’s nuclear infrastructure. Along with financial assistance, the US also made secret agreements to station US personnel in Pakistan solely to guarantee the safety of the nuclear weapons.

The defence observers have pointed out that President Zardari had submitted in a European court that he has been suffering from dementia. The certificate with regard to the ailment was submitted in the court and he sought relief on account of that. Since then he never produced any certificate that could become proof for his recovery from the acute psychological ailment. He is also on heavy dose of medicines and above all in a situation when his everything is at stake the nuclear button must had {sic} to be placed away from him and the authority must had {sic} been withdrawn from him. They have proposed that the president can proceed on leave till the thick black clouds hovering over his office are cleared. It has become more essential in the wake of the information that Asif Zardari has also been suffering from insomnia and he is under heavy medication.

The defence analysts have raised their finger at President Asif Zardari’s serious disinterest in the affairs of the armed forces of which he is the supreme commander. The officers and men of the army are offering supreme sacrifices for the motherland but he practically never bothered to visit the troops or he did not visit any hospital to inquire after the health of the injured men and officers of the army. His discourteousness on this account is being widely felt in all services including the civil armed forces (CAF) which are also offering great sacrifices for the cause of the nation.

Diplomatic and political observers are of the view that the change has not come voluntarily but it has been forced to ward off threats to Pakistan’s most precious assets. The shuffle is a conspicuous symbol of change of centre of gravity. It was the only and huge authority that was left with the president if the 17th amendment of the constitution is scrapped. Incidentally, law enforcement agencies including the armed forces’ feelings are that their supreme commander was not seen in action during the full-fledged combat in Swat-Malakand and now in the operation of South Waziristan where the jawans of the valiant armed forces have rendered invaluable sacrifices and safeguarded the motherland. Their supreme commander stayed in his bunker-like fortified multi-star presidency or visiting other countries without describing utility of his travelling.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 01 Dec 2009 10:31

shiv wrote:Indians do not care if Islam is a problem or if America wants to rule the world as long as their most urgent and immediate needs can be met.

That is true at two extreme ends of the spectrum - at one end are the political elites, who would sell their mothers to satisfy their "most urgent and immediate need" of filling their Swiss bank accounts, and at the other end are the utterly destitute, struggling for water and food.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 01 Dec 2009 10:33

anupmisra wrote:Here we go. LaWhori Logic, at its best
, a LaWhori Pakjabi. Lots of "Gruntees".

Well good old Squeezer represent 99.99% of sum total of Pakiland's "intelligence" , the rest .1%being shared in even quantity by 179900000 Paki Abduls born out of incest. Allah has indeed been merciful to India ; just imagine 180 Million retards roaming blind among civilized people.

Nandu · Post by **Nandu** » 01 Dec 2009 10:59

sum wrote:
\Pakistan is like the bandit who comes into your house and says I am going to hold you up and if you object I am going to blow my brains all over your carpet."
MMS said these actual words?

I can't find reference to those words other than in the Paki article. I am guessing, being familiar with the usual Paki negotiation tactics, the Paki pulled the quote out of his Musharraf.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 01 Dec 2009 11:28

Yeah appalling the calibre of Pakistanis in 'leadership' positions. With no disrespect to the occupation, my maali is more cogent and articulate.

Malayappan · Post by **Malayappan** » 01 Dec 2009 11:32

More on the happenings on Paki land -

US stalls as Pakistan drifts By Syed Saleem Shahzad, Asia Times

The message is that their role is limited and no matter the hostilities between the Pakistani military and Muslim militants, secular forces will never be allowed to influence broader strategic matters; that is, only Islamic ideology and its flag bearers can have control. (Hafiz Saeed for Amir ul Momineen!)

Last week, Zardari delivered a speech on the occasion of the PPP's 42nd anniversary. For security reasons, the speech was delivered from the president's residence in the capital, Islamabad, and telecast directly to a stadium in the southern port city of Karachi. (The President cannot travel within his own country)

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 01 Dec 2009 11:53

Nandu wrote: I can't find reference to those words other than in the Paki article. I am guessing, being familiar with the usual Paki negotiation tactics, the Paki pulled the quote out of his Musharraf.

The Paki journalist could be a lurker on BRF. This topic has been beaten to death on BRF. Paki walks into a bar, points the gun at himself and yells: "Nobody moves, or the Paki dies."

rajpa · Post by **rajpa** » 01 Dec 2009 12:23

that quote is actually by fareed zakaria who was interviewed by ht...

(link will try to print.. )
http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage ... 478877.asp

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 01 Dec 2009 14:10

the quote is derived from a scene in the movie "Blazing Saddles" about a black sherriff in a wild west town. we have used it on BRF for several years. in fact i am sure that we even had the clip from youtube here

arun · Post by **arun** » 01 Dec 2009 14:23

Excerpt from Spiegel Online’s interview of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani datelined Dec 1, 2009 dealing with Pakistan's theories regarding Indian involvement in terrorism in Afghanistan. Pakistani notions on proof are most interesting

.

To plagiarise Obelix, These Pakistani’s are crazy:

Gilani: The people we are fighting are militants. They are not from Pakistan, they are Uzbeks, they are from Chechnya, they are Arabs and Afghans. And they cooperate with foreign agents to disturb the peace in Pakistan.

SPIEGEL: Are you saying that there are no Pakistani Taliban?

Gilani: Of course there are Pakistani militants but the insurgencies are driven by foreign elements.

SPIEGEL: Let us guess: You believe that the Indian intelligence service is behind it.

Gilani: In fact, to some extent there is a lot of interference in Afghanistan. This is not only our opinion but also the belief in the United States.

SPIEGEL: But there has not been any proof of Indian involvement.

Gilani: I am not saying that there is. But the insurgency in Afghanistan has been analyzed by many experts, even from American think tanks, and they have mentioned this.

Read it all:

SPIEGEL Interview with Pakistan's Prime Minister

hulaku · Post by **hulaku** » 01 Dec 2009 14:26

Suicide attack occurs in NW Pakistan's Swat

ISLAMABAD, Dec. 1 (Xinhua) -- A suicide blast attack on the house of a local officer took place in northwest Pakistan's Swat on Tuesday, a local TV channel reported.

According to official sources, the house of Member Provincial Assembly (MPA) Dr. Shamsher was attacked in Swat in North West Frontier Province, and casualties were feared, the private TV channel Express reported

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009- ... 570828.htm

arun · Post by **arun** » 01 Dec 2009 14:43

rajpa wrote:that quote is actually by fareed zakaria who was interviewed by ht...

(link will try to print.. )
http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage ... 478877.asp

You are correct. It is from an interview of Fareed Zakaria by Hindustan Times.

The reason you are having difficulty in opening the link is that you missed an x.

Try this:

Not like good old Bush

Meanwhile what Fareed Zakaria said:

Do you think 26/11 actually had any lasting impact at the international level?

At an international level it has solidified the understanding that Pakistan remains a deep source of problems relating to terrorism. Even right after 9/11 people were not aware of Pakistan’s role in supporting the Taliban. This understanding doesn’t mean it’s easy to do something about it, because Pakistan is like the bandit who comes into your house and says I’m going to hold you up and if you object I’m going to blow my brains all over your carpet. The Pakistan military says you have to listen to us because otherwise the jihadis will take over the country.

arun · Post by **arun** » 01 Dec 2009 14:49

Lalmohan wrote:the quote is derived from a scene in the movie "Blazing Saddles" about a black sherriff in a wild west town. we have used it on BRF for several years. in fact i am sure that we even had the clip from youtube here

It could be equally likely that it was derived from Stephen Cohen’s book “The Idea of Pakistan”

In the book Stephen Cohen says :

Pakistan now negotiates with its allies and friends by pointing a gun to its own head

bart · Post by **bart** » 01 Dec 2009 15:06

Prem wrote:
anupmisra wrote:Here we go. LaWhori Logic, at its best
, a LaWhori Pakjabi. Lots of "Gruntees".
Well good old Squeezer represent 99.99% of sum total of Pakiland's "intelligence" , the rest .1%being shared in even quantity by 179900000 Paki Abduls born out of incest. Allah has indeed been merciful to India ; just imagine 180 Million retards roaming blind among civilized people.

This is Lawhore, and as the saying goes, when in Lawhore, follow Lawhori logic.

Pakistan is 400% intelligent. So 99.9 + .1 means 100.09 which leaves 299.91 % of intelligence unaccounted.

So stop 'casting a bad eye on Pakistan'