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

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 12 Feb 2010 04:16

It starts at the top. Without controlling the leadership whether of Pakistan or of these smaller units, the jihad problem will continue and even intensify. In a way, we have been through this before with Bangladesh.

Right. But Bangladesh is not a top problem for India today. Neither does BD share borders with another Islamic state today.

These smaller entities would be @ 40 million population compared to 150m plus BD. Each would be dependent on the other. Punjab for port hinterland access from Sindh/ Baluchistan/ India. Sindh and Baluchistan for water from Punjab which in turn is from India. And Sindh, Punjab and would be dependent on Balochistan for gas. India would have a major role to play in disputes (inevitable) between the new countries. It could solve them on the amicable side, while asking for routes to Afghanistan, which if under Indian influence would move away fromTaliban and be moderate.

We have no other options left to deal with a "stable, prosperous Pakistan". Nil. Zilch,

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 12 Feb 2010 04:22

But Pakistan became an even bigger problem, didn't it? How many people does it take to keep the problem alive? The Taliban could use a small country like Afghanistan to strike at the US. That is why any expectation that Pakistan can be broken into smaller pieces who could be played off against each other is misplaced without regime change in those parts.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 12 Feb 2010 04:50

Anujan wrote:Motorma Christine Fair has written a paper for Harvard Madrassa, completely at odds with her article in WSJ.

"Why Pakistanis Support Islamist Militancy"

Pakistanis' support for militant organizations is not correlated among different types of militant groups. In other words, just because an individual supports one kind of militant group does not mean that the same individual will support another. For example, a supporter of Lashkar-e-Taiba will not necessarily be a supporter of al-Qaida. Far from it, Pakistanis appear to distinguish among these groups rather well. . . . Whatever the common factor driving support for different militant organizations operating in Pakistan is, it is not religion per se.

I think she is trying to convey that the Pakistani support for terrorism against India and their support for global jihad are two different things.

Rangudu · Post by **Rangudu** » 12 Feb 2010 05:01

I agree with SSridhar.

What Christine Fair says is the interesting and dangerous facet of TSPA jihadi supporters that very few people actually understand.

Even though some Al Qaeda figures were hosted by LeT leaders, the group as a whole is anti-Al Qaeda because it gets money from the Saudi government affiliated "charities". The Saudi royal family supports all Wahhabi jihadis except Bin Laden and co because Osama's jihad targets the Al Saud clan.

The problem for TSPA/ISI/LeT is that even if the leaders are sophisticated and cunning enough to see this dichotomy, the mind of a mid and lower level jihadi cannot differentiate between the good and bad jihad. That is why we keep seeing more and more pigLeTs tied in with attack plots against the West.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 12 Feb 2010 05:09

India's embrace of dialogue remains limited & reluctant

Now that India has pushed for the resumption of dialogue with Pakistan, the government has begun the task of fleshing out the precise agenda that it will bring to the table when the two Foreign Secretaries meet later this month.

But if the first step represented a political challenge for Prime Minister Manmohan Singh as he struggled to get all stakeholders on board his new initiative, the second will test the skill of his diplomatic advisers.

In particular, it will have to demonstrate that there are tangible benefits for Islamabad from the meaningful dialogue which would logically follow the restoration of confidence and trust.

Even as they seek to craft a viable agenda for talks, senior officials say the latest initiative is driven by another, more pressing consideration: the need for India to step back from the edge so that it retains some flexibility in its response should another terrorist attack take place. “If you are talking, you can always suspend talks. But if you are not talking, there will be enormous political pressure to react in ways that might be counterproductive. And this government does not want to provide such an incentive to the terrorists,” an official told The Hindu on condition of anonymity.{I am really flabbergasted. I thought we were making fun of the GoI's approach here when similar theories were floated on BRf. No, GoI works exactly like that. We are now signalling Pakistan that India is ready to absorb another massive terrorist attack}

This narrow goal is a product of frustration that the headway made so far on the composite dialogue process and back-channel diplomacy has not prompted Pakistan to shut down the operation of terrorist groups on its territory. But it also a reflection of the political perception of many in the ruling Congress party that public opinion in India is still not ready to accept a return to ‘business as usual’ with Islamabad.

As for Kashmir, officials say the problem is not Indian reluctance to discuss what Pakistan once regarded as the ‘core issue’ but Islamabad’s apparent repudiation of what was achieved on the back-channel between 2004 and 2007.

"The other was whether the internally omnipotent Pakistan army was on board. The first question was never put to the test and remains unanswered. All too soon the second was answered in the negative.”

“Faced with a fragmented situation, the logical answer would be to engage those elements in Pakistan, such as the civilian democratic leadership, that may share India’s interest in opposing extremism and terrorism and in promoting a peaceful democratic periphery.” And this would mean using dialogue as a means of pushing for gains on the terrorism front. {What a completely contradicting conclusion !}

After reading the above, one can only get the feeling that there is no salvation for India.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 12 Feb 2010 05:33

But Pakistan became an even bigger problem, didn't it? How many people does it take to keep the problem alive? The Taliban could use a small country like Afghanistan to strike at the US. That is why any expectation that Pakistan can be broken into smaller pieces who could be played off against each other is misplaced without regime change in those parts.

Vera K ji, pleas check the motto of the PA. It's Jihad against India. To resurrect Islamic rule on India from the ramparts of the red fort. Ghazwa e Hind is what unites Paki's to eat grass but to wet dream that green flag on the red fort. Somehow Paki's have never realized the color is not green but black. The Taliban are reminding them of the reality.

Plus if you've been on brf so much time you must realize it was not he Taliban that struck at the US. It was the Paki's. It's the Taliban's ideology that's so attractive to Paki's as strategic depth. It's like a moth thats attracted to the beam on your car and goes under the wheel. Paki's are behaving like that moth. They know the Talibs are more pious, but for feudal politics and reasons don't want them to emulate what they do in Afghanistan. That is strategic depth.

{I am really flabbergasted. I thought we were making fun of the GoI's approach here when similar theories were floated on BRf. No, GoI works exactly like that. We are now signalling Pakistan that India is ready to absorb another massive terrorist attack}

PS: Sridharji, i also thought the same exactly on reading that article. The stream of thought where we said if there's another attack, then the GOI would have again the option of cutting off talks and acting snooty till US hangs the next bait for another PM who dreams of a Nobel.

I was thinking on the terms that Obama would like to compensate India on the 'cold shouldering' he's giving compared to Bush Jr. But if he's acting this way it's shocking. But lets hang on and speak the truth here. It's gaining voice. I've introduced at least a couple of Admirals to this forum. If they are participating i don't know. But they check it out.

sum · Post by **sum** » 12 Feb 2010 05:43

After reading the above, one can only get the feeling that there is no salvation for India.

Scary and sad reading of the situation from a BRF guru.

For all the fun we can make of S. Vardharajan as a WKK, GoI seems to be blessed with father of all WKKs at all levels with the big daddy actually heading the country!!!

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 12 Feb 2010 05:59

SSridhar wrote:India's embrace of dialogue remains limited & reluctant

Indian left are "useful idiots" to US; a hint of their MacAulite Anglicization can be found in Siddharth Vardarajan's usage of American football lingo, rarely used in Indian discourse except probably among NRIs and RNIs

with the entire exercise being quarterbacked by Mr. Menon and other officials in the Prime Minister’s Office.

JwalaMukhi · Post by **JwalaMukhi** » 12 Feb 2010 06:08

Well, the GOI is working overtime to impose cost on Indian public. The main path followed by GOI seems to be drive wedge within Indian public as a competing interests between hardliners versus peaceniks. It is also trying to project that the demand of Indian public of living alongside a Terrorist State as neighbour to - one cannot wish away one's neighbour. The focus is to convince Indian public that terrorism (hence terrorist state) is an acceptable part of living.
Only if hardliners accept the fact that terrorism has to be endured in the interest of living. Imposing cost on the terrorists has never entered into Indian response (more likely non-response). It is mostly an articulation of how India can accommodate terrorism. Terrorism is seen as one more issue, that incidentally happens to emanate from a neighbouring country, alongside a list of other issues that Indian public faces.
GOI is busy preparing the menu list to feed Bakasura. The Indian public is told: Starving Bakasura is not an option, let alone killing him. The focus is on the menu list whether to include items or remove some items.

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 12 Feb 2010 06:21

the need for India to step back from the edge so that it retains some flexibility in its response should another terrorist attack take place. “If you are talking, you can always suspend talks. But if you are not talking, there will be enormous political pressure to react in ways that might be counterproductive. And this government does not want to provide such an incentive to the terrorists,” an official told The Hindu on condition of anonymity.

If some one can talk like this what else is there. We are going on an attirition model and we may not want to solve the Pakistan problem. We are actually planning for a model where few attacks are okay as life is anyway cheap in India.

I also wrote something long time back. Even in the attacks there is something that was achieved during the last four/five years. We are not making any attack as important. A lot of attacks are like some pass-by type incedents. Train blasts, bus blasts etc. are not even being talked as Paki attacks. We don't even arrest in those cases. We just pay compensation and life moves on. We are clearly in a Gandhian way here. We are only enraged when our elite is attacked. TSP knows this and they are frustrated to too. Hence they will only make Mumbai type attacks as all other attacks are having any impact.

The model is let them attack and what are they going to achive. Few thousands dead and then what they will do? We have gone thru this in JK, Punjab and we can easily go thru this in entire India.

It may work too.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 12 Feb 2010 06:28

Well, the hardliners never really delivered; in the absence of which WKKs filled the vaccum. Now the WKKs can cock a snook at the hardliners and say, what did you do after parliament attack, after IC-814 hijack; nada zilch and terrorism continued; at least through our approach there hasn't been any terror attack since 26/11. And of course they will point to MMS's grand economic visions, 10% growth, nuke deal, slum dog oscars, you name it. So in the end it becomes a point scoring tamasha between hardliners and WKKs, while US and TSP laugh their asses off to the bank.

Guddu · Post by **Guddu** » 12 Feb 2010 06:30

RamaY wrote:
Guddu wrote:
In the photo, the policeman's body language is submissive, the talib at the right in the black jacket looks cool, hand in the pocket!.
"Chor kotwal ko dante"

What makes you think they are Talibs? They are TSPA irregulars. That is the easiest way to get/publish these pics with that hood-option.[/quote]

Talibs==TSPA Irreg==pakis

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 12 Feb 2010 06:32

Even as they seek to craft a viable agenda for talks, senior officials say the latest initiative is driven by another, more pressing consideration: the need for India to step back from the edge so that it retains some flexibility in its response should another terrorist attack take place. “If you are talking, you can always suspend talks. But if you are not talking, there will be enormous political pressure to react in ways that might be counterproductive. And this government does not want to provide such an incentive to the terrorists,” an official told The Hindu on condition of anonymity.{I am really flabbergasted. I thought we were making fun of the GoI's approach here when similar theories were floated on BRf. No, GoI works exactly like that. We are now signalling Pakistan that India is ready to absorb another massive terrorist attack}

There are at least two versions of what it means to hold power. The first version is to be able to protect your people and administer chastisement to your enemies. The second version is to never have your hand forced to do what you do not want to do. Indian politicians believe in the second.

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 12 Feb 2010 06:53

SSridhar wrote:the need for India to step back from the edge so that it retains some flexibility in its response should another terrorist attack take place.

In temples, devotees usually take a couple of steps back before falling on the ground in 'namaskar' - this particular step(s) backward can have two interpretations - (a) step back so that if there is a terrorist attack, doing nothing is seen as step forward (b) step back so that we beg TSP not to send another bunch of terrorists, saying we have already done a namaskar, will not do anything if you kill us anyway, so please spare us

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 12 Feb 2010 06:58

SSridhar wrote:India's embrace of dialogue remains limited & reluctant
After reading the above, one can only get the feeling that there is no salvation for India.

I had posted this article in previous page with similar observation. The GoI is signalling to TSP that the most it will do is to break off talks and show the Indian citizens that they are taking actions against pakistan, while putting off punishing pakistan.

I have also posted one other article in the hindu about AK Antony justifying talks even s infiltration is increasing and TSP has 42 terrorist camps in its territory

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 12 Feb 2010 06:58

So many ullu ke patthe coming out of closet.

Indo-Pak talks must cover Kashmir issue: Hizb commander
RAWALPINDI: One of the pioneers of militant opposition to India in Indian-held Kashmir (IHK) said on Thursday that talks between Pakistan and India will fail if they do not focus on the “core issue” of Kashmir.
Syed Salahuddin, commander of the Hizbul Mujahideen – the biggest separatist group in IHK – said talks would be “a futile exercise” if they did not address the dispute over the Himalayan region. India and Pakistan have fought two of their three wars over the disputed territory since their independence in 1947.“I talk on behalf of the jihadi leadership that we all stand for a negotiated settlement,” Salahuddin, who is also head of the United Jihad Council, told Reuters in an interview.“But negotiations must be Kashmir-centric ... unless this core issue is addressed and it is focused upon, there will be no result,” he added.He said the people of Kashmir must also be involved in talks.“It’s not a bilateral boundary dispute between India and Pakistan. It is a question of the right of self-determination of 30 million people,” he said.

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk\default.asp?page=2010\02\12\story_12-2-2010_pg1_7

Malayappan · Post by **Malayappan** » 12 Feb 2010 06:58

A paki recommends Reject Indian Talks Offer VIEW: The path to nowhere —Syed Talat Hussain
Should we rest our hopes on gents like these?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 12 Feb 2010 07:00

I think that GoI is aware of an impending attack and that was the reason for the haste with which it 'offered' talks lest it is put in an awkward position vis-a-vis internal pressure. Moreover, I also believe that the theory of some internal pressure group within the Congress (last time, after SeS, it was AK Antony, Pranab da and P.Chidambaram) that is 'opposed' to talks, is a carefully stage managed affair to wriggle out of embarrassing tight situations if anything develops like that.

Malayappan · Post by **Malayappan** » 12 Feb 2010 07:02

To get a sense of what all could have contributed to the thinking - Track II: Full steam ahead from today's IE

JwalaMukhi · Post by **JwalaMukhi** » 12 Feb 2010 07:03

Well, the elders of ekachakranagari have established contact once again with the Bakasura. There is hope, this time that Bakasura would not break contract and actually oblige the elders. So the family in the village that has sacrificed, does not have to fear random attack on them once again, till it is their turn. If all goes well, the elders would actually clinch a deal where in Mumbaikars will be spared next time, as they have already sacrificed this round. It is the turn of others now. Citizens of ekachakranagari are waiting with bated breath to see if elders are successful in effecting some order restored in Bakasura's pickings instead of random attacks.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 12 Feb 2010 07:30

http://jehanara.wordpress.com/2010/02/1 ... to-mumbai/
comment.

The joys of holding a Pakistani passport these days.

A former Foreign Secretary of Pakistan lamented on a recent political show in Pakistan that he and his colleagues from Pakistan were asked to form a single file after arriving in Cambodia of all places while many of the others from India who came for there for the same meeting just walked past them.

Such horror stories are quite commonplace these days. Thank god they did not subject you to a body search like they do Mr. Mitchell’s America.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 12 Feb 2010 08:02

putnanja wrote: I had posted this article in previous page with similar observation. The GoI is signalling to TSP that the most it will do is to break off talks and show the Indian citizens that they are taking actions against pakistan, while putting off punishing pakistan.

i.e., in case of a terrorist attack in India, Pakistan will find no excuse to move its troops from its border with Afghanistan. Depending on your POV, that may actually reduce the chance of an actual terrorist attack.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 12 Feb 2010 08:48

harbans wrote:Vera K ji, pleas check the motto of the PA. It's Jihad against India. To resurrect Islamic rule on India from the ramparts of the red fort. Ghazwa e Hind is what unites Paki's to eat grass but to wet dream that green flag on the red fort.

Yes. And as long as they stay in control somewhere they will keep going down this road. It does not matter what size of a country they control or if Pakistan becomes 4 smaller countries.

vera_k · Post by **vera_k** » 12 Feb 2010 08:53

SSridhar wrote:After reading the above, one can only get the feeling that there is no salvation for India.

Someone pointed out that SV is a American. Hopefully the GoI is feeding him what the Americans want to hear. And the last part about civilian leadership (

) in Pakistan is not what you'd hear from an Indian source.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 12 Feb 2010 09:43

http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=223839

It was basically the involvement of RAW in East Pakistan in collaboration with a few leaders of that region during the early 1960s that had unleashed a well-organised psychological warfare against West Pakistan, whereas the people of East Pakistan had nothing to do with the separation movement. Sheikh Mujib-ur-Rehman went to Agartala in 1965 and the case was unearthed in 1967.

...

The role played by Mr Bhutto cannot be ignored as he was the most popular leader of West Pakistan and therefore any decision taken by the dictator had to be discussed with him.

...

I still maintain that it was the politicians who dragged the military into politics. Who appointed Gen Ayub Khan as defence minister of Pakistan? Who handed over WAPDA to the army? Not the dictators. It is incorrect to suggest that throughout the history of Pakistan our defence ministers were treated as figureheads and used as rubberstamps.

...

Let us hope and pray that our politicians learn some lesson from the past and stop dragging the army into politics.

Col (r) Mukhtar Ahmed Butt

Karachi

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 12 Feb 2010 09:46

http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=223800

Although Pakistan is an attractive destination for business and investment international investors remain apprehensive of setting up businesses here in view of the current security situation, energy deficit and uncertain operating environment.

The Netherlands’ Ambassador Joost Reintjes stated this while leading a delegation, which visited the Overseas Investors Chamber of Commerce and Industry on Thursday.

...

In an atmosphere where besides local business foreign business is being hindered by the off-putting image of the country, the State Bank’s recent figures suggest a further 50 per cent decrease in FDI to just $775 million during FY10.

...

The ambassador understood the overall investment climate in Pakistan and said that Pakistan is a significant emerging market but the negative perception of the country still acts as a major deterrent to further investment.

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 12 Feb 2010 10:00

Indo-Pak parleys
Col. (r) Riaz Jafri Rawalpindi [email protected]

Probably it is due to Gen. Kayani’s recent candid assertion to the NATO commanders that his prime concern was defence of Pakistan’s eastern borders (against India) rather than fighting the war of terror on the western front, that has prompted the international community in pressuring India to resume talks with Pakistan.

Pakistan must, therefore, view the Indian offer in its correct perspective and not fall a prey to it. We certainly want better relations with India but not at the cost of Kashmir and Water. India would try to talk as usual all about the sun and the moon but not of Kashmir and water, exasperating and frustrating Pakistan to the extent of quitting the talks.

No one today is more shrewd than ZAB in the foreign diplomacy, but even he could not make Swaran Singh utter a single word on Kashmir in his 22 days long parleys in Murree in May/June 1965. At the end of the unsuccessful marathon Swaran Singh triumphantly confided to the pressmen that his sole aim was to gain time which he had done. So did Shastri to Ayub Khan at Tashkent, and made him walk away from the talks just out of frustration as Shastri wouldn’t talk about Kashmir. Kosygin sensing the abrupt deadlock asked Ayub if he was a chess player. Ayub, sort of nonplussed by such a question, said, “No, why?” “Because it is his (Shastri’s) move and that you must sit at the table till he moved”, was Kosygin’s cool reply. Ayub resumed his seat but was mercifully relieved when Shastri left to meet his Maker.

Gandhi kept on talking for hours on end on cabbage to a bewildered Mountbatten, who had invited him for the first time for a serious discussion on the future of India. Indians are past masters in the art of frustrating others during parleys and talks, and we must, therefore, make it quite clear to them that we want to talk but about Kashmir and water or else Thank You for the offer.

Rahul Shukla · Post by **Rahul Shukla** » 12 Feb 2010 10:03

Zardari calls for transfer of drone technology to Pakistan (Daily Times)

ISLAMABAD: President Asif Ali Zardari on Thursday called for the transfer of drone technology to Pakistan for use by its own security forces against the Taliban for “wider public acceptability”.

Zardari expressed these views during a meeting with US National Security Adviser General James Jones – accompanied by US Ambassador to Islamabad Anne W Patterson and other US officials – who called on him at the Presidency.

Tracing the history of militancy in the region, Zardari said that back in the 1980s, the international community chose to fight the “rival ideology” using the region as its battleground. After defeating the rival ideology, the international community abandoned the region and the militants it had nurtured, which resulted in a new wave of militancy in the region, the president remarked.

He said the dynamics of the situation led Pakistan to become a security-driven state and forced Islamabad to neglect the country’s social and human uplift. The international community now owed it to Pakistan to help rebuild the country economically and socially, Zardari said.

csharma · Post by **csharma** » 12 Feb 2010 10:04

crossposting from India US thread
Gurmeet Kanwal

http://www.idsa.in/idsacomments/USArmsS ... wal_110210

US Arms Sales are propping up Pakistan as a Regional Challenger

The American ambassador in Islamabad has said that the US Defence Department is considering the sale of 12 unarmed drones to Pakistan to encourage it to cooperate in the war on terror. It is not beyond Pakistan’s technological capability to arm these UAVs with air-to-ground missiles for use in conventional conflict.

India is justified in seeing the move to go ahead with the sale of the F-16s as an US attempt to balance its strategic partnership with India by once again propping up Pakistan as a regional challenger.

arun · Post by **arun** » 12 Feb 2010 10:07

X Posted. The dominant Punjabis of Pakistan having been thwarted in their attempt to deprive the minority Sindhi’s and Balochi’s of their legitimate share of water leave in a huff:

Punjab walks out of Irsa meeting

My own take is that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s shrill screeching about India depriving them of water is a ploy to divert attention of the Sindhi’s and Balochi’s from the water theft of Pakistan’s Punjabi’s.

Meanwhile more screeching from the Nation which hardly surprisingly is headquartered in Pakistan’s Punjab province besides being Pakistani Punjabi owned:

Indian water aggression: Pakistan on brink of disaster

Rahul Shukla · Post by **Rahul Shukla** » 12 Feb 2010 10:16

‘India doesn’t want to talk on Kashmir’ (Daily Times)

“They have agreed to talk to Pakistan, but they don’t want to talk on Kashmir,” the AFP news agency quoted Gilani as saying on Thursday. The news agency reported that India’s offer for limited dialogue on terrorism has dismayed Islamabad.

Rahul Shukla · Post by **Rahul Shukla** » 12 Feb 2010 10:30

Defense source: US to spread training in Pakistan (Washington Post)

The new centers would supplement two already operating in Pakistan, and they would be used to accelerate and expand the training of Pakistani forces considered key to rooting out al-Qaida leaders hiding along the mountainous border, the official said.

Staffing the new centers will require an increase in the more than 100 U.S. special operations forces in Pakistan for the training effort, but Pentagon officials do not yet know how much of a boost will be needed...

The plan now is to build a number of smaller training centers in the Northwest Frontier Province, closer to the Pakistani forces.

U.S. officials have said they hope to train more than 9,000 members of the Frontier Corps and slash their previous four-year training time by half.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 12 Feb 2010 10:45

arun wrote: Indian water aggression: Pakistan on brink of disaster

From the article

Former Information Minister Senator Mohammed Ali Durrani called upon the government to take up the issue of blockage of domestic use waters of Rivers Satluj, Ravi and Bias at the United Nations (UN) which was an open violation of Indus Basin Treaty.

And he is really a former information minister?

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 12 Feb 2010 10:59

http://blog.dawn.com/2010/02/11/from-maududi-to-aafia/

From Maududi to Aafia

Islamist terrorism today is clearly symbolic of the frustration the once heroically perceived ‘mujahideen’ and jihadis began to experience when, buoyed by the Soviet Union’s defeat in Afghanistan, they failed to convert other Muslim countries towards their brand of faith and jihad.
Interestingly, this failure and its violent consequences has seen the jihad brigade’s indirect spokespersons and sympathisers in cyber space and the media go back to the Maududdist drawing-board, that of initiating the Islamic revolutionary process on a social level, specifically through the media.But the problem is, as mentioned before, the world-view being popularised by the sympathisers has already mutated Pakistan’s social evolution. In other words, instead of Pakistan’s social and cultural polity taking a natural and modern evolutionary course towards developing a collective democratic mindset that respects ethnic, religious and sectarian diversity and understands the elements that make a country develop a progressive relationship with other nations and peoples, the Islamist worldview has only managed to make the society collapse inwards, hiding from imaginary demons in the shape of ‘anti-Islam’ and ‘anti-Pakistan’ forces which are supposedly obsessed by the idea of destroying the country and its religion.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 12 Feb 2010 11:00

I saw a license plate on Hwy 85: "PRD PAKI"

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 12 Feb 2010 11:10

ramana wrote:I saw a license plate on Hwy 85: "PRD PAKI"

Soon to be Allah ko Pyara before he hit 101 or 280!!!

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 12 Feb 2010 11:15

No it was she! And your post about "maududi to aafia" reminded me about this car!

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 12 Feb 2010 11:19

This true blooded Paki Amir Khan asking haram questions
http://blog.dawn.com/2010/02/11/from-maududi-to-aafia/

Amir Khan Gubodoer says:

Nadeem pleading for introspection. Dont he know introspection is considred haram in Pakistan!! Today’s reality is Pakistan was not made in the name of Islam but the advent of Islam was divinly ordained to facilitate the making of Pakistan. Pakistanis are the onlee true Muslims in the world, rest are all kaffir and Islam is what we do and not what we dont do . The tranformation is complete but what about future?

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 12 Feb 2010 11:40

Prem wrote:
ramana wrote:I saw a license plate on Hwy 85: "PRD PAKI"
Soon to be Allah ko Pyara before he hit 101 or 280!!!

That explains all the Drones flying out of Ames (j/k)

amdavadi · Post by **amdavadi** » 12 Feb 2010 11:44

ramana ji,

Dont tell me she was driving sitara.