Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Jan. 29, 2010

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 05 Feb 2010 07:52

shiv wrote:
...
...

Fundametally I see Pakistan as anti-Hindu. The only thing that has thus far prevented me from writing the above mentioned article is that I have not made it a point to assiduously collect up all Pakistani references that are anti-Hindu in nature. I have been too busy studying Pakistan internally and seein how Islamic Pakistan is to concentrate on the other side of the coin - the fact f how anti-Hindu Pakistan is as a result of its being so Islamic.
...
...
the accusation of Hindu oppression is the basis of Pakistan. The idea of Pakistan is summed up very well by the Stephen Cohen himself in a book by the same name.. Pakistan was meant to be a homeland for the Muslims of the subcontinent safe from "Hindu oppression". You may get anything in Pakistan, but there will be no Hindu oppression in Pakistan.
...
...

It is not a crime to be Islamic. But I believe it is a travesty to be anti-Hindu for no reason other than a claim that Hinduism is against Islam or that Hindus are against Islam. Once you set up the strawman - the "reductio ad Hitlerium" (Thanks Rahul M) that Hindus are bad, everything else follows from that.
...
...

It is not as if Pakistan is Islamic and India is anti-Muslim. The fact is Pakistan is anti Hindu. That is a fundamental realization that had somehow escaped my typing fingers.
...
...

Incidentally I would appreciate forum help in collecting up every single anti Hindu statement and article and video from Pakistan to build up a database.

It is true that pakistan is anti-Hindu but we alway say the following line "Pakistan is anti-India and regarding Islam and Muslims we have more than what pakistan has so we don't need any lessons from Pakistan". Will ever India change the line to Pakistan is anti-Hindu officially?

Regarding the examples, I can give you the oldest incident for which there is no link with me. ICC awarded 1987 Worldcup Cricket to India and Pakistan. However, the main sponsor has to be Indian company only for some reasons. Hindujas was the first approved sponsor who won the BCCI's bid. The cup's name would be Hinduja Cricket world cup 1987. Everything finalized and Pakis protested the word Hindu in Hinduja and hence to save the event for India BCCI went with Reliance.

sanjaychoudhry · Post by **sanjaychoudhry** » 05 Feb 2010 08:09

Will ever India change the line to Pakistan is anti-Hindu officially?

Calling spade a spade is no longer a Hindu trait. Pakistanis are Muslims and hate all non-believers equally -- Jews, Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists or Bahais. Their hatred of India is grounded in a hatred of Hindus, who they consider inferior and unclean. Why cannot this simple fact be articulated by the Hindus?

Hindus have developed a curious habit of not stating the reality lest their enemies are embarassed.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 05 Feb 2010 08:24

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/KC12Df03.html

The cricket issue, revisited. After 2009, why would anyone risk a repeat in 2010?

Even before the Lahore attack this month, the otherwise lucrative business in the sport between the two countries had taken a severe hit after India suspended its scheduled January 2009 cricket tour of Pakistan following the Mumbai attack.

The cancelation, which led to the Sri Lankans touring instead, led to an estimated $40 million loss to the near-bankrupt Pakistan Cricket Board, which suffers from similar boycotts from other cricketing countries fearing terrorist attacks. The sudden flight home of Sri Lankan players who bucked the trend by venturing into Pakistan, six returning with bullet wounds, will serve as a long-remembered warning against other such tours.

Pakistan's players are also paying a financial penalty for the attacks and government responses, over and above the immediate loss from canceled games. In retaliation to India pulling out of its January tour, the Pakistan government banned its cricket stars from participating in multi-billion dollar Indian Premier League, denying their own players and families massive income from six weeks of playing in Asia's richest cricket tournament.

In response, eight IPL franchise teams suspended the IPL contracts of Pakistan players, at considerable cost to those involved. Misbah ul-Haq lost $125,000 in his annual contract fee, Sohail Tanvir $100,000, Umar Gul $150,000 and Kamran Akmal $150,000. The contracts of the other five Pakistani IPL players were terminated, costing Younis Khan $225,000, Shoaib Akhtar $425,000, Mohammad Hafeez $100,000, Shoaib Malik $500,000, Salman Butt $100,00 and Shahid Afridi $675,000.

Masaru · Post by **Masaru** » 05 Feb 2010 08:44

-delete-

arun · Post by **arun** » 05 Feb 2010 08:47

It’s not as if the Islamic Republic of Pakistan is bereft of news demonstrating progress

.

Over the years the world’s first “Ideological Muslim State” has successfully whittled down the population of Un-Islamic movie theaters that distract the citizens of the Land of the Pure from their religious obligations with Rawalpindi / Islamabad having just one:

Avatar steps into Pakistan as cinema catalyst

Source: Xinhua
[09:08 February 05 2010]

"After 20 years, this is my first time to watch a movie in cinema," Khalid told Xinhua when coming out of the Cinepax, the only cinema in Pakistan's twin cities of Islamabad and Rawalpindi. …………………

Global Times

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 05 Feb 2010 09:01

Muppalla wrote: It is true that pakistan is anti-Hindu but we alway say the following line "Pakistan is anti-India and regarding Islam and Muslims we have more than what pakistan has so we don't need any lessons from Pakistan". Will ever India change the line to Pakistan is anti-Hindu officially? .

The reason "we" (india) say this is because we want to say that we are secular - i.e that we "means all Indians" -"Hindu-Muslim-Sikh-Isayi sabko mera salaam". The unintended consequence of this was that India consistently fudged anti-Hindu statements being anti-India.

But when Hindus are criticised by Pakistan, India does not admit that only Indian Hindus are being criticized - not Indian Muslims, Sikhs, Jains, Christians, Buddhists. India says "India is being criticised" when only Indian Hindus are being criticised. So India's secularism comes to a grinding halt when Hindus are criticised - and this what the "secular' parties. do. Not even the "sangh parivar" is involved in this inability to call a spade a spade.

For a moment leave aside the "dharmic faiths" part and see that Pakistan has classified India into the following parts:
1) Dominant Hindus - all high caste and in a minority
2) Subjugated "other faiths" - Muslims and Sikhs
3) Untouchables (assorted "low castes" )

For Pakistan - the Indian equivalent of RAPE are "Hindus". The Indian equivalent of what we call ordinary Abduls would be "untouchables". And "subjugated minorities" are Muslims and Sikhs. So Pakistan has classified India in a mirror image of the BRF classificaton of Pakistan - but Pakistan had made that classification long long before the Internet nd BR came into existence.

I think India will do itself a favor by recognizing that it takes criticism of Hindus seriously. Pakistan has successfully cornered India into a position in which India cannot directly protest criticism of Hindus in the name of "secularism".

It is high time India wakes up to the truth that Pakistan is not anti-India. It is anti-Hindu. Pakistan believes that India is a USSR type artificial union held together by a fascist Hindu elite. If the fascist Hindu elite are defeated (in Pakistan's view) India will break up into multiple small states of which the Islamic component will be the largest. India is not held together by a Hindu elite, If India's failures are Hindu failures, India's success is equally a Hindu success. There should be no Indian takleef in calling Pakistan's bluff. Unless India is able to pinpoint what Pakistan is actually doing - we are only bluffing ourselves that we are dealing with Pakistan. Pakistan is anti-Hindu. Period. Pakistan's actions regarding India revolve around that premise and unless we read Pakistan in that light we are only buggering about.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 05 Feb 2010 09:03

India shells out big bucks to buy howitzers, transport aircraft from the US, and this is where the money ends up going:

Big jump in Pakistan aid
PTI

U.S. President Barack Obama has proposed $3.2 billion in assistance to Pakistan in the fiscal 2011, a substantial jump in American aid.

Noting that Pakistan is a key country in the war against extremism, Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources Jacob Lew said the budget focused on improving basic infrastructure.

“This is key to improving stability and will also provide the military the tools needed to wage an effective counterterrorist campaign. For fiscal 2011, funding for Pakistan is $3.2 billion,” he said, adding that in 2010 it had been $1.88 billion.

“For Pakistan, the budget also increases security assistance and funds a new signature energy project,” said the White House in a fact sheet, adding the budget expands the number of civilian personnel in Afghanistan and Pakistan to build government capacity, increase diplomatic engagement, manage expanded assistance programmes, and reduce the potential for fraud and misuse of American funding.

Mr. Obama has proposed $1.2 billion for the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Capability Fund as against $700 million in 2009.

It is a shame that although there are people from the US who are willing to call a spade a spade, but our own leadership remains tied up by diffidence and servility:

‘We (the US) are creating a big problem for India... we have created a monster on steroids in Pakistan’

Y P Rajesh Posted online: Thursday , Feb 04, 2010 at 2231 hrs

Mumbai : He is a self-confessed Indophile and the eponymous Pressler Amendment is not the only symbol of that. But these days, former US Senator Larry Pressler is disappointed and saddened over what he says is New Delhi not speaking up against the mistakes Washington is making in South Asia.

Recent US decisions such as ordering more troops to Afghanistan, continuing to pump billions of dollars worth military and development aid to Pakistan, entering into arms deals with India are perfect recipes for instability in the subcontinent, he says, and adds that he is puzzled why the Manmohan Singh government has not seen through this.

“I have been disappointed in India not raising a voice about what’s happening in Afghanistan, what a mistake we are probably making,” Pressler, who was in India on a speaking tour, told The Indian Express. “We are creating a big problem for India because at the end of the day India is going to have on its border a highly armed loose canon in Pakistan, a rogue state whose government is not what we espouse or support. A rogue Pakistan on steroids of US money,” he said.

While that may sound like an anti-Pakistani rant from a hawk in the strategic affairs community, Pressler is not just another armchair expert talking glib. The first Vietnam veteran to be elected to the US Senate, the Republican politician from South Dakota was also a US Foreign Service officer before serving as a Congressman for 22 years until 1997.

As the Chairman of the Senate Arms Control Subcommittee in the early 1980s, he says he and some colleagues saw the danger of surging aid and arms exports to Pakistan. This resulted in the Pressler Amendment of 1985 which required the US President to certify that Pakistan did not possess a nuclear weapon, failing which significant US aid to the country would be curtailed.

The amendment was invoked by President George Bush Senior after the end of the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in 1989, hurting Islamabad until Bill Clinton repealed it in 1998. Among other big ticket items that were blocked due to this were 28 F-16 fighter jets that Pakistan had already paid for, a decision that caused much heartburn in Islamabad for years.

Now a lawyer, teacher and speaker on the global conference circuit, Pressler, 67, is writing his autobiography, expected to be released this year, and also a smaller book on how he foresees the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan unfold in the short term. And his gut feeling, he says, is not optimistic.

“I don’t believe we can win in Afghanistan, whatever that means, because nobody is going to stand and fight this highly technical army but they are just going to move aside until we leave,” he said. “We are going to be in Afghanistan for three or five years, declare victories, and they’ll be killing some people and so forth and vice-versa, then we’ll decide to come home.”

“But at that point, what have we left behind? We would have created a monster on steroids in Pakistan because we’ve made such sweeping enhancements of their equipment and long range bilateral promises. We are making 20-year commitments on weapon systems and so forth. I don’t think the Pakistanis give a hoot about the Taliban. They are worried about India,” Pressler fires away, no holds barred.

.....

Pressler’s final words though, are reserved for India, a country to which he has made dozens of trips, including as an independent director on the board of software giant Infosys until three years ago. A photograph of him shaking hands with Atal Bihari Vajpayee when he came to India as a member of President Clinton’s entourage in 2000 occupies a special place on Pressler’s website.

While the US and the UK could be blamed for the mess in Afghanistan and Pakistan, “the leaders of India have got to be speaking up more. It seems as though they have kind of subdued their voices because they are getting this nuclear deal and all these arms and there is this special relationship,” he said. “Having a close relationship between democracies does not mean you agree on everything. And there should be some robust disagreements occasionally. I hope that the Prime Minster of India speaks out on these matters publicly more and he can remain just as close to the US and so do we,” he added.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/we-th ... n/575094/0

Malayappan · Post by **Malayappan** » 05 Feb 2010 09:06

shiv wrote:

Unlike the past, though, the stakes appear to be higher because of the uncertain future of Afghanistan and a ‘nuclear overhang’ that may be affected by ‘Cold Start’.
What utter tripe! The stakes are no higher today. Why press panic buttons now? Ho Hum....

Someone wake me up if something new happens.

Shiv Sir,
My take from that piece in Dawn is not so much that Kiyani was breaking fresh ground. I found a clear articulation of his fears there. In particular, Cold Start seems to have rattled him totally. It is easy conjecture that they would have made a big fuss of that to the Americans. A lot could have flowed from there. As was picked up in BR earlier CS when worked out can be a big game changer - in particular the point he makes about attack before (or rather without the need for) mobilisation. If US pressure from there onwards was so relentless, I am not sure if our current Govt can handle it. We hope the babus and the army salvage things for us. Current civil soceity lacks the critical mass to logically argue it out - lack of salience!

sum · Post by **sum** » 05 Feb 2010 09:18

The Pakistan Army’s concerns about ‘Cold Start’ are well known, but Gen Kayani went as far as to put a timeline on its implementation: two years for India to achieve partial implementation and five years for full.

Is this( 5 years before cold start is fully ready) what GoI is also waiting for before letting Pak know whose the boss?

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 05 Feb 2010 09:20

Asked to comment on a recent suggestion by the US Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen that India and Pakistan needed to resume back-channel diplomacy on the Kashmir issue, Mr Holbrooke said the United States would “applaud and encourage” any step the two countries took to reduce tensions. “But we are not going to act as intermediaries between Islamabad and New Delhi. That is not what we are here to do,” he added. “On the specific you talked about, we are not going to negotiate or mediate on that issue and I’m going to try to keep my record and not even mention it by name,” said the US envoy without using the word ‘Kashmir’ in his response.

Mr Holbrooke also made it clear that he was not talking about himself but setting out the US position. “That is not what we are here to do,” he said adding: “I’m not just talking about myself.”

India-Pakistan conflict a dilemma for US
( as long as they dont tilt , its fine )
http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/daw ... 520--bi-11

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 05 Feb 2010 09:26

They are still having Cold Sweats, wait till FGFA play Annkhmacholi.

Fumbling response to a 'cold' doctrine
By Professional Wailer

India formulated its Cold Start War Doctrine way back in April 2004 but we in Pakistan have yet to wake up to its full implications. General Musharraf, our generalissimo then, was into other things: prolonging his hold on power and, in the process, making a mess of everything. Strategy was a word always on his lips. He just couldn't do without it. But did he ever speak of this new war doctrine?

It goes to General Ashfaq Kayani's credit that he is trying to educate Pakistani public opinion about what it means and why, with it around, Pakistan must be wary. This is also a way of conveying to our American allies that try as they might to wean us from our preoccupation with India, the perceived threat from that quarter will look real enough to Pakistani eyes when the Indian military command chooses to deal in the imagery of surgical strikes and rapid armour movements. For the Cold Start Doctrine is not out of science fiction. It is now the heart of India's war plans against Pakistan. In simple terms what it envisages is the creation of up to eight battle groups -- comprising armour, mechanized infantry and self-propelled artillery, backed by close air support -- capable of mobilising rapidly and carrying out fast, 'surgical' operations against targets in Pakistan, without crossing Pakistan's nuclear threshold. This at least is the theory and to all theories must be attached Field Marshal von Moltke's timeless observation that no battle plan survives the first contact with the enemy.

What is Pakistan's nuclear threshold? What is, for that matter, any nuclear power's nuclear threshold. This has never been tested and to the extent that India's new war doctrine makes bold assumptions about something yet unknown, it rests on uncharted territory. Anyhow, cold start doctrine may sound new-fangled but it is actually the rediscovery of blitzkrieg -- lightning war -- by the Indian military, 70 years after its application, to devastating effect, by the German Wehrmacht in the Second World War. Donald Rumsfeld, the American defence secretary, may have used 'shock and awe' for the first time in 2003 to describe the American invasion of Iraq. But the original shock and awe was Hitler's destruction of Poland in 1939 and his defeat of France a year later. The Israelis replicated blitzkrieg in 1967 when they defeated Egypt, Jordan and Syria in a war which lasted for no more than six days.These are the images, these the memories, behind India's cold start doctrine, the idea that if Pakistan is up to any mischief, and if it is to be taught a lesson, the way to deal with it is in the fashion of blitzkrieg: rapid armoured thrusts, backed by heavy airpower, to hit at chosen targets in Pakistan and cripple the capacity of its army to retaliate. This presupposes rapid mobilization and the ability to attack before Pakistan has a chance to respond. In other words, catching Pakistan unawares

http://thenews.jang.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=222650

sum · Post by **sum** » 05 Feb 2010 09:29

BSF develops 'spy fidayeen bomb vehicle' to blow up militants

The Border Security Force has developed a 'spy fidayeen bomb' vehicle, which can stealthily enter into enemy territory for surveillance and explode itself to eliminate a militant.

The force's technical wing has developed a battery operated, four-wheel-enabled vehicle which has a night vision camera and a cavity to carry an explosive to neutralise the enemy.

"The apparatus can be operated by a remote control at a distance of 200 metre. It has a video camera attached to it for receiving visuals and can function at night also," BSF Inspector Rajendra Prasad said.

The device, costing Rs 20,000 has been developed by the Assam-Meghalaya frontier of the force and the functioning of the apparatus was also demonstrated to BSF Director General Raman Srivastava during an exhibition in New Delhi [ Images ].

The orange coloured four-wheeler's signals can be received on a screen by the handler outside an enemy hideout and can be used by troops in operations, Prasad, whose team developed the device, said.

The paramilitary force has got a full-fledged technical wing which takes up research and development of such gadgets and devices which are useful for the force in it's operational areas.

The usage of this device will be very interesting since i assume it will be Pak/PoK specific.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 05 Feb 2010 09:48

^ car bomb.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 05 Feb 2010 09:57

Talks with India must include Kashmir, water disputes

Pak may agree but skip talks on terror: US thinktank

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 05 Feb 2010 10:13

Pakistan agrees to Foreign Secretary level talks

Foreign secretary Nirupama Rao called her counterpart Salman Basheer a couple of days ago to propose the talks, which would cover all aspects of "peace and stability" in South Asia and can potentially lead to the resumption of the composite dialogue stalled in the aftermath of 26/11 attack on Mumbai.

The talks are likely to be held in Delhi and within weeks. Dates are yet to be confirmed, though Pakistan foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi said the high commissioner, Shahid Malik, had been asked to work out dates with the MEA. The talks between foreign secretaries are expected to be devoted to sorting out the scope of dialogue.

While the agenda is yet to be formalized, sources said India would focus on counter-terrorism, while Pakistan, expectedly would focus on Kashmir.{If the talks are about talks themselves, how can Kashmir issue be raised by Pakistan ? After all, didn't the composite dialogue stop because of the 26/11 ? If the talks have to resume then the agenda for the 'talk on talks' should be only about what progress is made on the situation that led to the suspension of talks, and not on the issues like Kashmir which are covered by the composite dialogue}

The move, taken at the Indian initiative, was waiting to happen. The prime minister has been keen to move forward with Pakistan, but the Sharm el-Sheikh joint statement made it difficult for him to proceed. Besides, it was well known that former NSA M K Narayanan was not in favour of talking to Pakistan without any give from them on Mumbai.

The PM and Menon are known to be thinking along similar lines, especially since Pakistan managed to keep a check on its jihadis all through 2009, which many in the security establishment here say is testimony of Pakistan's complicity.

Sources said that the government would not just approach the talks with an open mind but also be ready to discuss any issue.

The proposed talks are definitely a thaw, but within the government no one holds out any hope that these talks could stop another jihadi attack or, for that matter, soften Pakistan's approach to India in Afghanistan.

Last week, Pakistan successfully kept India and its concerns out of the Afghanistan strategy, which went down badly here, but the government did not make an issue of it.

While some might see it as a case of giving in to international pressure, the government was coming to the conclusion in recent months that the silence did not get them anywhere. It led to issues like the IPL decision becoming bigger than normal.{This is the most ridiculous argument one can hear that IPL finally was the last straw. What a bunch of jokers if that was indeed true}

Of late, there has been tremendous pressure on New Delhi from world over to engage Pakistan in some sort of dialogue. Sources acknowledged that India could no longer afford to look unduly churlish in dealing with the neighbour.

khan · Post by **khan** » 05 Feb 2010 10:25

Something is going on here.

The Aman Ki Asha BS, leading up to an unprovoked offer for "talks" on India's part...

Does anyone remember the whining about Cold start and the shrill voices about the IPL snub?

To me the conclusion is fairly obvious.

Obama's people have brokered a deal between India and Pakistan. The Aman ki Asha nonsense was to prepare the way for talks. Now that talks have started, said deal will be arrived at "bilaterally". I think this is the long term plan to neutralize the security establishment in Pakistan and India seems to be on board with it.

The Pakistani security establishment is not happy with this and trying to do everything that they can (within reason) to sabotage this process. They stepped up the firing across the border. They screamed from the top of mountains about Cold Start. They played up the IPL snub. Terrorism in J&K appears to be heating up again. We will probably see more 26/11's.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 05 Feb 2010 10:27

khan wrote:
The Aman Ki Asha BS, leading up to an unprovoked offer for "talks" on India's part...

They want all kinds of talks including talks with terrorists and hosting the terrorists in the Taj Hotel.
We want 'all-encompassing' talks: Pakistan
http://news.google.com/news/more?pz=1&c ... FM&topic=w

negi · Post by **negi** » 05 Feb 2010 10:30

It is very clear now that Aman ka Tamasha had Gobermund support for they this time wanted to address the issue of public opinion unlike the S.e.S fiasco , let us see how long this 'composite dialogue' tamasha runs in the land where Kookaburras are preferred to chai biskoot.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 05 Feb 2010 10:32

There must be representation of the LeT in the talks. These talks have to be tripartite i.e. between India, Pakistan and LeT.

GuruPrabhu · Post by **GuruPrabhu** » 05 Feb 2010 10:40

Did anyone watch Burqah Dotty interview Udhav Thackeray yesterday? UT mentioned something about Jagjit Singh being humiliated in Pureland when he went there after being invited to some Music Programme. Does anyone know anything about the incident?
Why does our media downplay that incident and give full coverage to the perceived loss of H&D over the IPL snub to purelanders?
I think there is more than meets the eye, UT must be having some logic behind his comments on SRK

Raja Ram · Post by **Raja Ram** » 05 Feb 2010 12:04

With March approaching and searing tempratures will be the order of the day. It is the season of "lemon selling" to quench thirsts. We will have Asha and Ayesha, we will have how India is a soft super power, India is a global partner etc. Many a "lemon" selling attempt there will be in the months to come, and some of them will find even willing buyers in Delhi's GOI.

Yes something is happening, it is evident if one cares to look at the big picture and connect the dots. It is indeed sad to see that we are marching to someone else's tunes.

Resumption of any dialogue with this artificial terrorism sponsoring entity does not have any benefit for India, be it strategic or tactical, diplomatic or economic. Yet, every indication is that we are headed towards that. To critique this is not something that is of any use any more. Even here. So even if one could write a lot more, it may not be politically correct these days. So I shall not.

This time it is just a lament rather than the usual ramble. Sorry about that.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 05 Feb 2010 12:41

US Welcomes Indian Offer of Talks

"This is a welcome move," the Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs, P.J. Crowley, told reporters at the Foggy Bottom headquarters of the State Department.

"We are supportive of dialogue among India, Pakistan and Afghanistan as a key component of moving ahead and achieving a stable region," Mr. Crowley said in response to a question {Why is Afghanistan being dragged in ? The US is selling a story here to India that the talks are eventually to let Pakistan see India's PoV and tone down its objection to India's influence, apart of course from resolving the J&K dispute. Pakistan will never allow India to exercise any influence in India similar to what it used to enjoy during the earlier monarchists' rule. Pakistan can never let go of its hostility to India, for its own internal reasons. And, there are players like the US & PRC who do not want India-Pakistan to resolve the issues either. For its part, all the US is interested is a relatively tension-free period between India and Pakistan for the next two years at the end of which it would have run away leaving the place in shambles once again. India should also play the game and extract maximum pound of flesh from the Americans, a game in which the Pakistanis are adept having honed their skills for over five decades. We are very poor in that}

"We certainly have been encouraging steps that both Pakistan and India could take to address mutual concerns and to take appropriate steps so that tensions can be reduced, cooperation can be increased, and, as a result you have a more stable region that is focused on threats, both interests that they share and threats that they share, Mr. Crowley said.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 05 Feb 2010 12:52

vera_k wrote:There must be representation of the LeT in the talks. These talks have to be tripartite i.e. between India, Pakistan and LeT.

Are you serious?

What if the ISI says include us too? paki army?

What about the other murderous "non state" crackpots?

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 05 Feb 2010 12:56

^^^

The Pakistan government has said repeatedly that they are not in control of these groups, so they have to be talked to separately from the Pakistan government. For one, it would be good to check if these groups can be paid off in some way (money, weapons, women, goats, power) to restrict their activities to present day Pakistan territory.

Dhiman · Post by **Dhiman** » 05 Feb 2010 13:00

vera_k wrote: There must be representation of the LeT in the talks. These talks have to be tripartite i.e. between India, Pakistan and LeT.

Not to mention ISI and the army as well. Hopefully TSP's rep will be blessed by all its power centers. Otherwise what's new here besides some new PR propaganda to relax the public opinion in India.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 05 Feb 2010 13:07

Dhiman wrote:Not to mention ISI and the army as well. Hopefully TSP's rep will be blessed by all its power centers. Otherwise what's new here besides some new PR propaganda to relax the public opinion in India.

The ISI and the Army are state actors, so the TSP foreign secretary can represent them. But who will speak for the LeT and any other non-state actors that are acting against India?

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 05 Feb 2010 13:09

Now I know why MMS was upset at the rejection of TSP players. He was scared based on TSP's furious reaction that they might lash out, and all his Aman Ki Tamasha will come to naught because the dromant Indian public will wake up. Hence his immediate summons to PC and others to issues statements of emptahy to TSP; and notice the swiftness with which post IPL action India surrendered so as to not loose any momentum.

Raja Ram

Does one laugh or cry at India's pain and subjugation. Here we are, with Mumbai attack still in memory; India was the victim then and many times before, and yet TSP has managed to pull this rope trick off that it is a victim of Indian designs. Is this a vcitory for TSP or abject defeat for India? And when you consider that it was TSP who was begging for talks, they are making demands even before talks begin. Where do you think this is headed?

Guys, I don't go to TSP forums. But is the reaction of the TFTA crowd? Are they crowing that they have bludgeoned India into blinking?

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 05 Feb 2010 13:15

vera_k wrote:^^^

The Pakistan government has said repeatedly that they are not in control of these groups, so they have to be talked to separately from the Pakistan government. For one, it would be good to check if these groups can be paid off in some way (money, weapons, women, goats, power) to restrict their activities to present day Pakistan territory.

The ISI's current chief pasha has also "proposed" to our military attaches that the GOI talk to it as it is involved in policy making!

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 05 Feb 2010 13:43

From Such Gup of TFT

When push came to shove

Many people were surprised when Gill on the Hill came out fighting alongside Hubby when the going got rough for the government. Our mole reports that there was a reason for that. In a meeting of PPP heavy weights it was decided that when push came to shove, the government would resign, including Gill on the Hill, and sit on the opposition benches or call a fresh election. That’s the day, they say, Gill woke up and smelled the coffee and stopped playing footsie with the khakis.

Inti, Inzi & the Tableeghis

Now that the Pakistani cricket world has also been split into groups at war with each other, one cabal is busy trying to ease out the team’s coach Inti. The Tableeghi group’s suggested replacement is Inzi who will doubtless prove to be a great coach in the time that’s left over after the players have been made to say their five prayers and tahajjud.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 05 Feb 2010 13:48

From NUGGETS of TFT

National hockey team goes crazy

Reported in Jinnah the national hockey team, while participating in a tournament in Argentina, went crazy when it visited a club. Its members got themselves photographed with half-clad women in a mood described as rang raliyan. Two players were fined for indecency while the president of Hockey Federation Qasim Zia said the lady photographed in ghair ikhlaqi poses was the liaison officer of the team. The photographs were published widely in the national press.

Midnight Jackals was a ‘big mistake’

Ex-ISI officer Brigadier Imtiaz ‘Billa’ was reported by daily Islam as saying that his conduct of the covert Operation Midnight Jackals against the PPP government was a big mistake which convinced the PPP that Billa was against the PPP. He said if the case is reopened then ex-army chief Aslam Beg, ex-ISI chief Hameed Gul and President Ghulam Ishaq Khan will be in the dock.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 05 Feb 2010 13:53

..."extract maximum pounds of flesh from the Americans".I wonder who did that last? It is always the Yanquis who finally end up betraying friendships and later on turning against their own,finishing them off like Saddam! If you embrace Uncle Sam too closely,you run the risk of the "kiss of death".A firm handshake as equals is what is enough.It earns respect,not grovelling in psycophancy with sentimental statements ,"India loves you",ad nauseum.In the current context of Indo-Pak relations,and the demeaning behaviour of the MEA,where it is Pak who are imposing conditions regarding the "talks"; it is very clear that the pieces on the chessboard,both white and black are being moved by the same player ,the US.India and Pak are the pawns.

More on the sub scandal.

http://in.reuters.com/article/southAsia ... 0920100204

French police probe claims of Pakistan kickbacks
Fri Feb 5, 2010 2:10am IST Email | Print | Share| Single Page[-] Text [+]

1 of 1Full SizePARIS (Reuters) - French police have opened an inquiry into whether kickbacks from submarine sales to Pakistan helped fund ex-Prime Minister Edouard Balladur's 1995 presidential campaign, the Paris prosecutor said on Thursday.

Balladur, who lost to fellow conservative Jacques Chirac, has denied any involvement in the affair. Current President Nicolas Sarkozy, who was Balladur's campaign manager in 1995, has dismissed the suggestion of any wrongdoing as a "fable".

The affair is linked to an unsolved bomb attack in 2002 against a coachload of French naval engineers and technicians working on building French submarines for the Pakistani navy. Eleven French citizens were killed by attack.

At first blamed on Islamist militants, the attack was later suspected by French investigating magistrates to have been organised by unidentified Pakistani officials as revenge for the non-payment of bribes on the submarine sales.

Relatives of the victims filed a complaint against French officials in December alleging corruption, perjury and obstruction of justice.

Records show the payment of commissions to Pakistan had been given the official go-ahead in Paris although former defence minister Charles Millon has said that Chirac halted the payments after winning power in 1995.

According to the allegations being investigated, some kickbacks may have ended up in the campaign funds of Balladur, who was prime minister between 1993-95.

The lawyer for the relatives of the bomb victims, Olivier Morice, said he welcomed the opening of the inquiry. "My first reaction is that this investigation is a victory," he said.

(Reporting by Thierry Leveque; writing by Sophie Taylor)

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 05 Feb 2010 14:04

Najam Sethi's Edit in TFT, "Pakistan's Afghanistan Paradigm"

The dramatic change in the Pentagon’s position is owed in no small measure to two factors: first (necessary condition), the palpable failure of NATO/ISAF to achieve short or long term goals in Afghanistan in eight years; second (sufficient condition), the precise articulation of a “do-able” strategic policy at this critical stage from the Pakistani army chief, General Ashfaq Kayani. This was spelt out in the recent NATO moot in Brussels following detailed briefings earlier to the top American civil-military leadership.

General Kayani’s timely input can be summarized briefly. (1) The strategic framework defining the “space” for Pakistan’s political and military instruments is evidenced by successful anti-Taliban operations in South Waziristan and other tribal areas with minimal collateral damage. (2) Pakistan’s strategic direction, understanding and scope of the threat are in sync with global efforts. This is demonstrated by the “silent troop surge” in the war from 60,000 in 2001-3 to 140,000 in 2009, significantly more than the 100,000 troops committed by 43 countries in Afghanistan. Over 2300 soldiers have laid down their lives, nearly 80 per cent in the last two years. One out of every ten killed was an officer, an unprecedented ratio. (3) The domestic blowback has been huge, especially in terms of 2m IDPs. But despite lack of sufficient funding, all have returned to their homes in less than five months. The total estimated cost of the Swat operation alone exceeds $2bn, half of it coming from Pakistan’s own budgetary resources. (4) There is no plan to extend the operation into North Waziristan without consolidating the re-captured areas. But the Pakistan army has one Division stationed there already and is discreetly conducting search and softening-up operations there. (5) Pakistan’s military operations have helped the Af-Pak paradigm by decreasing cross border incursions, decreasing the spaces in the control of the Taliban and increasing the logistical flows between Pak and NATO forces. (6) NATO’s goal of raising an Afghan army of 140,000 cannot be achieved in less than 4 years. Nor can militias be raised without changing the deep-rooted perception that the Taliban are winning the long-term war. Indeed, unless the Afghan security apparatus posts a ratio of 75 per cent Afghans and 25 per cent NATO soldiers, this perception cannot be changed. (7) The centre of gravity in Afghanistan must be a national government which is both effective and credible. There must be a reconciliation of the short and long term interests of Pakistan and the international community in the region. Afghanistan is Pakistan’s past, present and future. Pakistan must be part of its solution. (8) The strategic paradigm for Pakistan is located in several factors: it is the second largest Muslim nation in the world; it is situated at competing crossroads; there is a nuclear overhang; there are more Pakhtuns in Pakistan than in Afghanistan and neither must covet the other’s territory; (9) The strategic paradigm for Afghanistan is anchored in factors like: inadequate counter-insurgency capacity; fragile public opinion; shallow political consensus; hostility to Pakistan; potential emergence of military capacity hostile to Pakistan because of ethnic imbalance and Indian influence. (10) India’s cold start doctrine is critical to Pakistan’s security because of unresolved disputes, its Pakistan-specific military capability, and history of conflict, all of which adversely impact Pakistan’s defense and development framework.

In short, the international community must work with Pakistan as partners to ensure that the Afghanistan of the future is stable, peaceful and friendly to Pakistan. A Talibanised Afghanistan is not in the region’s interest. But soft strategic depth is critical to Pakistan’s survival and growth in view of the unresolved Pak-India paradigm. {A new terminology 'soft strategic depth' is being introduced. Najam has been critical of the concept of strategic depth before but he is singing a different tune now}

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 05 Feb 2010 14:26

Khaled Ahmed in TFT on "Life after the London Conference"

A UN official said that the UN special representative Mr Kai Eide had met the Quetta shura on January 8 in Karachi, ‘who requested talks and wanted protection to come out in public’. Mr Eide of course denied he ever met the Quetta Shura. If there is anything to the ‘leak’, then Pakistan has been the facilitator and would seek to gain from the role it has played.{Very similar to 'facilitating' the Kissinger visit to China and getting benefits from both with the sole intention of defeating India}

Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi has returned from London overjoyed that Pakistan’s stance on Afghanistan has been accepted. One can only guess what that means, if not that India should be made to leave Afghanistan and that Taliban be asked to rule from Kabul once again. One assumes that the ISI would have traction over where the talks with the Taliban will lead. Pakistan is hurting with the policy being followed by the ISI but anti-Indianism and anti-Americanism in Pakistan denotes that at least at the public level, the ISI is winning.{That is why, it angers one to hear about how people-to-people friendship would lead to milk and honey flowing in India}

Pakistan’s affected populations may be pro-Taliban because of intimidation but when it comes to people living outside the epicentres of terrorism, the Taliban are sincerely much loved together with Al Qaeda. {No one knows Pakistan more than Khaled Ahmed. The Aman-ki-Asha types are deliberately propagating myths in India about Pakistan.} On the other hand, the entire population of Afghanistan hates the Taliban and supports the presence of NATO-US forces although the proportion of this support is lowest at present: at 63 percent. The NATO-US military commanders don’t think they can win the war in the face of the fact that the Taliban dominate most of the provinces of Afghanistan.

Pakistan has uncannily proposed that it be allowed to train the Afghan troops and police. This is uncanny because in doing so it will bring on itself the additional wrath of the ‘good’ Taliban led by Mullah Umar. (Imagine Pakistan-trained Afghan troops being massacred by Pakistan-protected ‘good’ Taliban.) The proposal might have been underpinned by the not so easily concealed intent that this will give Pakistan the opportunity to establish a military (trainers) presence in Afghanistan against the Indian presence there. It doesn’t however take into account the Afghan hatred of Pakistan going back to the days when trainers like Col Imam were ruling in tandem with a culture-destroying Taliban government.

Yet, something may have happened, if not in Karachi then in the Maldives. A secret meeting with the Taliban and the son of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar has supposedly taken place. (A part of the ISI clings to Hekmatyar, refusing to believe that has little or no influence over the Taliban.) After that the Security Council – with China and Russia agreeing - has removed the names of five ‘Taliban leaders’ from the list of terrorists, led by ex-foreign minister of the Taliban, Abdul Wakil Mutawakil. But Mutawakil is already reconciled and had broken with Mullah Umar when the latter did not abandon Al Qaeda. He had surrendered to American forces in 2002.

Is the ISI on board? Old ISI officer Amir Sultan Tarar alias Col Imam, also known as Ruler of Herat, told a newspaper said to be the mouth-piece of Jaish-e-Muhammad, the daily Islam (January 28, 2010), that America should talk directly to the Taliban leader Mullah Umar and not to the ‘peaceful’ Taliban if it wants peace in Afghanistan. No effort should be made to divide the Taliban, he said. The daily Jinnah reported that Col Imam also offered to facilitate contact between the Americans and Mullah Umar. Can it afford to offend the ‘good’ Taliban of the Quetta Shura?

The Iranians never came to the London Conference and know that Jandullah terrorists, embedded among the ‘good’ Taliban of North Waziristan, are killing Shias all over Pakistan. After the Ashura massacre of Karachi, Jandullah has killed Shia pilgrims going to Iran during their stopover in Quetta on January 30, 2010. They know that Pakistanis in general have a Sunni weakness for Al Qaeda and are in denial about its anti-Shia aspects. The Saudis came to the Conference saying reconciliation with the Taliban was okay if they gave up their nexus with Al Qaeda. The Americans say they will have no truck with Mullah Umar.

Is there a secret side to London Conference? Russia and India have fallen in with the idea of buying off the disenchanted Taliban most reluctantly, India saying dividing the Taliban into ‘good’ and ‘bad’ was wrong. This was a dig at Pakistan who is fighting the ‘bad’ Taliban owing allegiance to Al Qaeda and Mullah Umar and is protecting Mullah Umar’s Quetta Shura of ‘good’ Taliban in hopes of getting back into a position of dominance in Afghanistan through a reinstated Taliban government. Pakistan’s policy is static, much helped in its sclerosis by the non-success of America and the wobbliness of its NATO allies.

Life after the London Conference is not going to change – it may actually become tougher – unless something has changed within the Quetta Shura but is being kept under wraps. Pakistan can be a player in proportion as it can restrain its ‘bad’ Taliban from going into Afghanistan and killing the ‘reconcilers’ among the ‘good’ Taliban. Above all, it can be a player only after it has tamed its ‘bad’ Taliban and reconquered from them the territory it has lost by helping the political parties in power who are willing to stand up to the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Pakistan is not as keen about getting rid of Al Qaeda as it is about getting rid of the PPP-ANP-MQN government in Islamabad.

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 05 Feb 2010 14:51

Perhaps the Foreign Sec. level talks is a give by India owing to Intl. preassure , also I don't know if the mentioned means "talks" thats are perpetually ongoing between Foreign Sec. or Just a meet a la S-e-S in which case there is less to be afraid of.

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 05 Feb 2010 15:42

Bomb Blast in Karachi.

----
12 dead, several injured

KARACHI: A suicide bomb blast occurred at Saddar, near the FTC building Friday.

The bomb was installed in a motorcycle which was collided with a passsenger bus.{bus carrying Shiite Muslim worshipers} It was a suicide attack.

Twelve persons are confirmed dead. More than 30 injured.
. SAMAA

sum · Post by **sum** » 05 Feb 2010 16:20

In short, the international community must work with Pakistan as partners to ensure that the Afghanistan of the future is stable, peaceful and friendly to Pakistan.

The level of entitlement of the Pakis is mind boggling.

arun · Post by **arun** » 05 Feb 2010 17:08

shravan wrote:Bomb Blast in Karachi.

----
12 dead, several injured

KARACHI: A suicide bomb blast occurred at Saddar, near the FTC building Friday.

The bomb was installed in a motorcycle which was collided with a passsenger bus.{bus carrying Shiite Muslim worshipers} It was a suicide attack.

Twelve persons are confirmed dead. More than 30 injured.
. SAMAA

I see you have already got in with the story of the IED Mubarak variant of the IEDology of Pakistan targeting the minority Shia sect on the Muslim Sabbath of Friday in Karachi.

Since you have not provided a weblink, I am taking the liberty of X posting an alternate weblink to the same story:

Bomb attack targets Shia Muslims in Karachi

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 05 Feb 2010 17:19

Second Karachi explosion, this time at hospital where wounded from 1st blast were taken.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 05 Feb 2010 17:21

It's one thing to agree to talks, it's another to agree without any conditions being met. What happened to the Kandahar Hijackers and the killers of Rupin Katyal? They walked free into Pakistan and live freely. Dawood ditto. If international groups/ lobbies/ countries are pressurising us to improve relations, why can we not pressurize them that Pukes must catch those responsible for such major incidents before we can fully dissasociate state and non state. IMHO this has not been done one bit by Indian politicians dealing with Pakistan. This is a tremendous evasion of responsibility to this country. Instead thats been substituted by woolly headed initiatives like ABVs Agra Summit, Lahore bus run, Aman ka Tamasha and stuff.

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 05 Feb 2010 17:23

Let the gloating begin. World pressure brought India to talks table

India was brought round to talk to Pakistan under pressure from the world community, Geo News reported Friday. Addressing a ceremony held at Kashmir House here, he said Pakistan will keep up its moral and diplomatic support for the just and principled cause of Kashmir in accordance with the United Nations resolutions.

Amazing, these pakis. When India refused to talk after 11/26, they begged, whined, threatened and pleaded. Now, after India's offer to resume talks, they gloat like pampered beggars (also, note the location where the statement was made). Unbelievable ****** (rhymes with tricks)!