Bharat Rakshak

Pak Navy to build nuclear submarine

Yeah right, I am building Star Ship Enterprise armed with photon torpedos and which can do warp 9.

Altair wrote:

Pak Navy to build nuclear submarine

Yeah right, I am building Star Ship Enterprise armed with photon torpedos and which can do warp 9.

Well I built one a few years ago and it is parked in my garage!

The story of Anglo-US perfidy against India is complicated by the fact that the UK, via Lord Mountbatten did help get most of the princely states integrated into India. Far simpler it would have been for Atlee & Co to say the princely states were independent and that no British influence would be used to sway their decision about whether to remain independent or accede to India.

X-post

Everyone please read this detailed AP report on the builder of the Bali bomb that killed 200+ foreigners in 2002.

The bomb-maker Umar Patek was arrested in Abbotabad a few months before Bin Laden was taken out. The above report says this about how Patek was able to escape to TSP.

A police investigator said that a 37-year-old Pakistani in Indonesia, Nadeem Akhtar, helped Patek get a Pakistani visa from his embassy in Jakarta.

After Patek arrived in Lahore, a courier with links to al-Qaida then brought him to Abbottabad, possibly to meet with bin Laden.

If I recall correctly, the Bin Laden courier's contact to send messages to Iraq, was a LeT operative. Now we see another Lahore connection, indicating possible LeT links.

If this guy Patek met Bin Laden, he would have said so by now. Unkil is trying hard to keep hidden whatever links they found with Bin Laden's posessions.

I'm hoping that the Indonesian authorities are more talkative and give out details on who Patek's helpers in TSP were.

IMHO, Zaid and Kayani's Sangham provide the full meassure of Poaq intellectual weightness. Halaat must have gone much Kharab inside Zooland called TSP.

We never seem to learn - while we hold, the please-please-do-business-with-us, the Pakistanis hold a kill-Indians show.

'India Show' in Lahore, anti-India show in Karachi

Or this - Pakistanis kill 62 Indians, and we bend over backwards to appease them...
When Manmohan Singh tried to heal Pakistan ties with Ayurveda

In the winter of 2005, when a chill had set in Indo-Pak relations following the Delhi blasts that killed 62 people, an unlikely avenue was explored as a form of Track-II diplomacy. A renowned Ayurveda physician from Kerala was dispatched across the border to treat various Pakistani luminaries, including then prime minister Shujaat Hussain.

A_Gupta wrote:The story of Anglo-US perfidy against India is complicated by the fact that the UK, via Lord Mountbatten did help get most of the princely states integrated into India. Far simpler it would have been for Atlee & Co to say the princely states were independent and that no British influence would be used to sway their decision about whether to remain independent or accede to India.

A_Gupta,

A principle in international relations is that one gets compensated for their loss.

In agreeing to the Partition of British India, the Brits agreed to let the Union of India takeover the Princely States as they owed them money for WWII. While assuring the Council of Princes that the paramountcy lapsed and they could do what they want they also agreed to let Union of India take over the Princely states. VP Menon came up with the accession treaty idea and Privy Purse for the Princes. Indira Gandhi reneged on the privy purses in 1969.

If they had not worked for the takeover the INC might not have accepted the Partition and could lead to a mess.
So it was not an option.


They did double perfidy on those Princes.

The "staunchly professional" Paki army has initiated a Court Martial against a brigadier for his legitimate aspiration to become more pure and fight against the impure enemies within. Isnt their motto "Jihadi Fistula" or something? How can they arrest a person aspiring to become more pure?

http://tribune.com.pk/story/334975/alle ... -ali-khan/

Security officials claimed on Saturday that the Pakistan Army has initiated a court martial against Brigadier Ali Khan, who was arrested in May last year for his alleged ties with the banned militant outfit Hizbut Tahrir (HuT), Associated Press reported.

>> Do we join with the Christian west to overwhelm Islamic Pakistan? Or let Islam and the Christian West fight it out while we reach out to the majority dark skinned Indic people of Pakistan?

In my view, we shouldn't reach out to anyone. Let them fight among themselves.

Was seeing youtube clip of Paki headlines about the pious brigadier, when I chanced upon this priceless clip. Start watching at 1:00 onwards. Paki society is armed to the teeth!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... vHUxt-mU#!

abhishek_sharma wrote:>> Do we join with the Christian west to overwhelm Islamic Pakistan? Or let Islam and the Christian West fight it out while we reach out to the majority dark skinned Indic people of Pakistan?

In my view, we shouldn't reach out to anyone. Let them fight among themselves.

+1

We had luncheon today with Mrs. Clare Luce, the Editors of Time and Life, and their representative designate for India, Mr. Bush. I shall be glad if you will have Liaquat Ali entertain him and if you give him time when he calls. I have learnt that sweet words and first impressions count a lot with the Americans. They are inclined to quickly like or dislike an individual or organization. We again availed ourselves of the opportunity and set right many false impressions created by clever Hindu propaganda. Let us hope that Time will not be so bitterly opposed to the Muslims as it has been in the past - yet, it can only be a hope.

-a letter from M.A. Ispahani to Jinnah, dated Nov 12, 1946, from New York.

Anujan wrote:The "staunchly professional" Paki army has initiated a Court Martial against a brigadier for his legitimate aspiration to become more pure and fight against the impure enemies within. Isnt their motto "Jihadi Fistula" or something? How can they arrest a person aspiring to become more pure?

......

Its so appropriate as it describes their situation wrt Pakiban.

I tweeted your bon mot.

The forerunner of Syed Ghulam Nabi Fai. From a letter from M.A. Ispahani to Jinnah, from Calcutta, February 17, 1947

As I advised you on my return form the U.S.A. the opening of a foreign publicity department in the U.S.A. is not as easy as in the U.K. Washington is most careful; it does not want foreign money to come in through the backdoor for propaganda purposes. I think Washington is afraid of Soviet Russia. Any citizen of U.S.A. who participates in foreign propaganda has to answer too many questions and produce, if required, his books of account. You will agree that no businessman wants or has the time to reply to all kinds of enquiries that may be made from time to time by Washington. In the circumstances, we have to see if arrangements cannot be made whereby the monthly expenses incurred by our Centre for its maintenance and publicity cannot be remitted to the persons directly in charge of the Centre. Liaquat Ali, our Finance Minister, is in a better position to guide us in the matter than anyone else. I shall be obliged if you will let me know what I should do. I shall be leaving for Delhi on the 19th of this month and I shall make it a point to discuss this matter with Liaquat Ali.

The Brits in their entirety were not supportive of princely accession to India. Churchill and the conservative party was staunchly opposed. Even Attlee tried initially to allow some leeway to the princes. As to why they switched - the cabinet discussions through the second half of 46 should make it amply clear. It was part of the bargaining to get the congrez to agree to Partition. Initial plans were a "moth eaten" India with large holes deliberately left for the princes.

Contrary to the speculative claim here that the Brits could have "claimed" to have refused to "intervene" implying that they didnt, voices from within the ruling circle indeed claimed so. The "moth eaten" version was carefully+casually "shown" on an "impulse" to someone who was perhaps shrewdly calculated to be most outwardly reactive in the right direction, to such provocations.[Right direction is important - for, someone like MKG would have rejected the whole thing, lock stock and barrel - but someone would be needed who would then immediately think of bargaining and compromising and thereby facilitate the intended outcome anyway].

^^^ As I said, it is a complicating factor to whatever theory you make.

Anyway, it is interesting to read Ispahani's letters to Jinnah.

January 8, 1948

The Security Council met at 2.45 pm on Tuesday last and decided to admit India and Pakistan to their table and permit them to take part in the discussion without having the right to vote.
...
January 22, 1948

We are busy with the Security Council and Government is being kept informed by telegram of the developments. India is obstinate and Inshallah she shall be made to learn the lesson of her life. Zafrullah Khan is working like a Trojan; his presentation of our case before the Security Council was masterly and his negotiations across the table with the Indians are a feast for us who sit on his side. Every time he beats the best talent of India arrayed opposite us.

February 27, 1948

The other evening we had the pleasure of hearing Sheikh Abdullah making an ass of himself. He lost control of his tongue with the result that he even blasphemed by uttering that 'not even God Almighty, if appointed to take charge of the Interim Government, would remain neutral. Yesterday, Zafrullah Khan tore Abdullah to shreds.

March 27, 1948

The sudden turn of events at Lake Success must have shocked you. In spite of what Attlee told Zafrullah Khan in London, I did not think that the UK would dare commit such a volte face. She has, however, done it and managed to talk the USA, France, Canada and Belgium into following suit. China, who from the outset pulled in favour of India, served as an excellent tool. It is no longer a secret, in spite of the earlier denials by Britain that the Chinese resolution now before the Security Council was in fact sponsored by Britain and approved of by the USA......I am convinced that threat and blackmail on the part of India gave Attlee cold feet. It is both urgent and necessary therefore that the UK and the USA should be advised that we are determined not to swallow a pill that they are out to manufacture for us, which pill we know will cause us incalculable and irreparable injury....


March 31, 1948
It is really tragic to witness such a sudden change in the attitude of the majority of the Security Council. The very points they turned down as unfair, they now seek to justify as fair. Britain, of course, is behind the move. I think that the present international situation - USA/USSR tension - must have influenced the US through British pressure, to keep on the good side of India. So, an attempt is being made to throw us to the wolves.

April 5, 1948

At this stage it can be said that he [Zafrullah] received a fairly sympathetic hearing and it is hoped that Pakistan's viewpoint will not be disregarded totally. Much will, however, depend on the stand England takes, and so far, it seems that both Attlee and Cripps are out to appease India and to back her unreasonable views. They seem concerned about what India will accept and not with what is fair. We have had clear intimation from the British Delegation recently that they are unable to support our point of view......

Noel-Baker who sided with us and who still appears sympathetic, seems helpless. He has been sent back with a mandate to press us and to back India.

April 20, 1948

It seems that the Kashmir dispute will eventually have to be settled in Kashmir and not at Lake Success and that unless India faces a military reverse, there cannot be any hope for her seeing reason.
....[Zafrullah] quoted from the earlier speeches of the sponsors of the 'final resolution' to show how they had suddenly changed their stand and how they were now labouring to make us accept what they themselves not long ago, considered to be unfair and unjust. He made a clear analysis of the resolution and submitted our amendments to it which, as he said, were in line with the principles propounded by the nations before they were cast into the Hudson for some 'unknown' reason. Most of the representatives were unable to hide their discomfiture but that is hardly a consolation to us.

June 6, 1948

During the last five or six weeks, it has grown more and more patent that the members of the Security Council are no longer interested in the Indo-Pakistan dispute. Furthermore, they have shown themselves unwilling to arrive at a decision that will not be well received by India. Particularly the big powers are out more to appease India than do justice. It took me three weeks to get the President of the Security Council to call the meeting of May 27th. It was my constant pressure and protest that eventually persuaded the President, Parodi of France, to summon a meeting of the Council on the 27th of May....

No complication at all : both sides wanted something badly, and the common solution was Partition. Both had thought of and amply considered Partition way before it actually was tabled as a proposal - and both pretended that they did not want it, so that it could become the showpiece inevitable minimal price to be paid - against which real targets and bargains could be achieved.

So incorporation of the princely states where they would strengthen the buffer zone around the seat of power in UP and not leave any big holes in the troublesome south for external manipulation - would be part of that power sharing bargaining.

Kamboja wrote:1) Your contention that the average Paki is not hostile to India or predisposed to militant Islam seems to echo the very claims of many TFTA RAPEs that Pakistan has a 'moderate majority' which is why Islamic parties have only ever won 0.000006% of the votes in any election. These are claims that have been derided by many, including yourself, by pointing out that there is already so much Islamic orthodoxy built into the existing constitution and politics of 'secular' parties that there is hardly a need for overly Islamic parties to take power to have an Islamized polity. There are also the polls (Gallup?) conducted a few years ago which showed that something like 85% of Pakis support the death penalty for apostasy, and stoning for adultery, among other brutal 'pure' Islamic punishments. Not to mention the fate of Qadri, who has been feted and has a popular following, or the JuD/LeT roadshow that is currently attracting so many fans, or the ongoing devastation and victimization of Hindus, Christians, Ahmedis or Shias, all of which suggests a highly radicalized population that is hostile to India externally and assorted kafirs internally, not only because of a government policy of instilling this hatred (although that may be how it began), but because at this point that hatred is 'organic', i.e. part of the common wisdom and popular understanding of the country, just as Jews were known to be slimy vermin deserving of marginalization if not outright death in late 1930s Germany.

Are you now suggesting that those claims of the RAPEs repeated ad nauseam that the vast majority of Pakis are moderate, that you have yourself derided in the past, is actually true?

Good point!! One of the things that has bothered me from back in 2002 when my ebook was not even conceived was how anyone can actually poll the (then) 140 million (now 175 million) Pakis about their real attitudes. You see in the absence of real accurate polls (ideally democratic elections/national referenda) we have to depend on
a. What some Pakis claim
b. Make a judgement from actual Pakistani behavior

Now what the Pakistani "liberal RAPE class" claimed was that only 6% (or some such figure) of Pakis were supporters of extremism. I did not believe this figure, but I saw the claim as an obvious move to garner Western money and support for Pakistan that would keep the rich wealthy and turn attention away from extremism that was hitting India. So I found is convenient to trash the claim using sarcasm. In my view it was important that Indians and Indian Americans who came to BRF did not buy the 6% argument. You see if the US judges that only a 6% minority of Pakis are extremists and the Paki army is moderate, then guess which way the aid flows?

But the question still remained (as it remains today). If the support to Islamists is not as lo as 6%, is it as high as 100%. Where does the actual support line lie? While it can be anybody's guess - we will have to judge from the few possible biased polls and evidence of behavior of Pakistanis. The figure is not 6%. It is probably not 100%. Is it 25% support for extremists? Is it 60% support for extremists? Is it 90% support for extremists?

In my view if it is anything less than 70 % support for extremists - we have a huge population to work with. My suspicion is that given Pakistan's 30% poverty, 50% illiteracy, 40% under 15 years, and 20% shias and other minorities, ethnic divisions between Pakjabis, Seraikis, Sindhis, Baluchis, Pasthuns and Balwaristanis, Banglas, and perhaps 5% of Pakistanis with an India connection - it is unlikely that more than 50% of all Pakistanis actually support anti-India extremists. This is a guess. 50% is huge number, but if true it means 50% can be turned our way.

If I dig deeper the figure could possibly be made to look more positive for India. The "extremists" of Pakistan get support from the middle class. All my digging over the years has given me a Paki middle class figure of 5 to 15%. But even taking it as 20% you find that over 75% of Pakis fall below middle class and their ability to fund jihad is limited, although they can supply cannon fodder.

Finally I have stated (fairly recently) that the only people in India who may really have some idea of "grass roots" support for India in Pakistan are the diplomats, intel agencies, media people and the Aman ki Ashas. What are they saying? What is the impression they are conveying?

India may have several million Pakistanis to influence and win over, but more of that in reply to your next question.

Kamboja wrote:2) On a related note, you are essentially scapegoating the TSPA in your argument as the origin of all the misguided hatred of India and Hindus and the Indian heritage in Pakistan. You place the blame on them and suggest that without their inculcation of hatred in the common people there would be no such hatred. In this it seems to me that you put the cart before the horse -- the TSPA is not an entity that exists in isolation, without any connection with the Paki people. I would argue that the TSPA is a reflection of the country overall, even though it may be controlled and officered by the elites among that society. This means, again, that it is not the TSPA that is the source of the hatred of 'Hindu' India and delusions of conquering India, but that this hatred and delusion comes from the masses, from the popular thinking in Pakistan -- and is reflected in the TSPA because the TSPA is a reflection of the country (albeit a particularly nationalistic one).

This means that removing the TSPA from power is no guarantee that the hatred of India in TSP will disappear over time. This hatred is a self-sustaining ideology at this point, TSPA or no TSPA. The machines of hatred are the tens of thousands of madrassas, the jihadi tanzeems, and the Saudi money that fuels them. This also means that removing the US and UK from the region does not necessarily translate into an evaporation of this hatred -- it is not as though the US/UK created this hatred, although they have encouraged it and egged the Pakis on, to our mutual detriment.

Kamboja let me illustrate my thoughts with a simple example. You have an armed gang of 20 men and are tasked with winning over a village of 100 people. Your main opposition is the village defence group of 15 armed men. You can defeat them but you may lose 10 men. At worst they will drive you back. But if those men had no arms, or if they only had swords to your guns, your task is that much easier. the Pakis army is the biggest threat. Make that army weak and everyone else can be straightened out. Ideology is no substitute for tanks and artillery. We on BRF confuse ourselves with a very silly argument. We say "Oh all Pakis are against us so what the use?". All Pakis may be against us (or 50% or more as I stated above) but the biggest hurdle is the army. get the army out of the way and we have a population to work on. Hatred does not kill. Guns kill never mind the American rhetoric about guns. Tanks, artillery and F-16s kill even more efficiently than AK-47s.

Kamboja wrote:3) You say that now is not the time for India to display hostility because Pakistan is more nervous than ever about collapse and Indian intentions. Yet SSridharji and others have eloquently argued before that this Pakistani fear of India is fake, a contrived argument designed to justify the armed forces' outsized share of national resources. India has never entertained thoughts of 'conquering' Pakistan because it is a hellhole, and steadily getting worse. Yet this has never mattered to the Pakis, who will fear us and hate us simply for existing -- because we present a contradiction to the ideas that underpin their entire country. 'Why Partition, if India is not the Muslim-hating nightmare that we were told it was?' is a very real question for a country that bloodily tore itself from its origins within living memory, and all that bloodshed cannot easily be accepted as based on the false premise that India and a Hindu majority were never a threat to Muslims in the subcontinent -- and therefore it seems to me that Pakis will continue to hold on to their cherished belief that India is 'out to get them', because this is the only possible reason for all the sacrifice and useless pursuit of foreign patronage, arms and ideologies all these miserable decades.

See? You have said it. Sridhar has said it. It is the army that matters most. It is the army's hatred that is of greatest significance. Get the US to stop funding that army. Hatred can be handled. Islamic extremism is nothing = it is just a dove when it's ability to kill is removed. It is just hot air. it will negotiate.

Kamboja wrote:The only solution is absolute collapse, i.e. political, social and military failure, so that the utter bankruptcy of the prior policy of hatred is demonstrated beyond a doubt

IMHO this kind of absolute failure of the prior ideology is necessary for the India/Hindu-hating thinking to be comprehensively dismantled in Pakistan. Without this failure, that thinking will survive and remain as a strand of popular thinking, and will ultimately reassert itself. In other words, there can be no peace with Pakistan unless it goes through a through drubbing in one form or another, and this defeat is widely understood as resulting from the failed social and religious policies of the country leading up to that point. Only after this demonstration, and the rejection of the prior poisonous ideology of hatred (which will not occur otherwise), can normality and peace return to India-Pak relations.

I think we could keep on discussing the exact stage at which "absolute collapse" occurs. It may not occur but assuming it does, one of the routes is to allow any country other than India to occupy parts of Pakistan. This is what Pakis are doing, inviting both the US and China in. We should not behave like a blinkered apologetic slave power. We need to reach into Pakistan like the US and China are doing and trip up the plans that the US and China have. Neither the US nor China love Pakistanis.

abhishek_sharma wrote:>> Do we join with the Christian west to overwhelm Islamic Pakistan? Or let Islam and the Christian West fight it out while we reach out to the majority dark skinned Indic people of Pakistan?

Let the Islamist elements be overwhelmed. At the same time, let the more pro-Indic forces like the ANP grow. Also, let new Indic leaders emerge from the masses.

I recently read that Churchill was quite displeased with Mountbatten, and refused to meet him after he got back to england. Apparently he felt Mountbatten was guilty of having "gone native".

Anujan wrote:T Isnt their motto "Jihadi Fistula" or something?

Simply brilliant - and very very usable!

Pranav wrote:I recently read that Churchill was quite displeased with Mountbatten, and refused to meet him after he got back to england. Apparently he felt Mountbatten was guilty of having "gone native".

It is there in Sarila's book.

Yes its in Sarila's book.

Pranav wrote:

abhishek_sharma wrote:>> Do we join with the Christian west to overwhelm Islamic Pakistan? Or let Islam and the Christian West fight it out while we reach out to the majority dark skinned Indic people of Pakistan?

Let the Islamist elements be overwhelmed. At the same time, let the more pro-Indic forces like the ANP grow. Also, let new Indic leaders emerge from the masses.

What are the more pro-Indic policies of ANP? In particular, what are their views on J&K issue?

Telegrams from Governor-General's Camp, Quetta, September 8, 1948, to Ispahani, in New York

Doctor Ilahi Bakhsh and Riaz Ali Shah consider immediate consultation with lung specialist and top general physician imperative Stop They recommend Doctor Hinshaw of Mayo Clinic Minnesota but of course final choice rests entirely with you Stop Please arrange immediate specialist to reach Quetta repeat Quetta by quickest repeat quickest air-route Stop Wire arrangements Stop Amin

---
Continuation my telegram of September 8 kindly intimate immediately names of specialists selected by you Stop Needless to say they should not repeat not be Jews Stop

By the way, being poor/illiterate/Shia/Pashtun does not imply that they are not anti-Indian/extremists.

abhishek_sharma wrote:By the way, being poor/illiterate/Shia/Pashtun does not imply that they are not anti-Indian/extremists.

Never said that. We have no proof either way, but the more important reason is that Paki middle class have the funds and leisure to be anti-Indian. If your life revolves around finding your next meal or dodging the Paki armed forces, your anti-Indianness is more likely to sit in a corner waiting for better days.

Man at Sleep
Holy prophet never declared himself above the law: CJ

ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry Saturday said the holy Prophet (PBUH) never declared himself above the law and his practice was, therefore, not mere private conduct but a detailed interpretation and application of his teachings.Addressing a conference at the Supreme Court premises arranged by the Supreme Court Bar Association to celebrate the arrival of the last of the great messengers of Almighty Allah he said, “I could recall that in one of our regular interactions with the Supreme Court Bar Association’s cabinet when the idea of holding of such an event was floated for the first time, I was impressed by this foresight and vision of the present bar leadership for celebrating this divine day and for highlighting the various facets of the life of the greatest lawgiver of all times i.e. Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).”
He further said the emergence of Islam was a great leap forward for mankind, a great setback to ignorance, a big bang of enlightenment, a practical realisation of the ideals and a reform movement the fruits of which have benefited every soul. It was a miracle, brought about by one man with the revelation which Allah had revealed to him. “Arabs, who were previously fighting with each other, became the founders of a unique civilization unparalleled in human history, a civilization based upon the belief in “One God, and One Humanity,” he added.
He said in less than 20 years after the demise of the Prophet of Allah (PBUH) the new order founded by him had already enlightened half of the world. As for today, not even a micro second passes on earth when somebody, somewhere, on the globe does not reaffirm his faith by pronouncing, “There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah. A call which keeps the atmosphere vibrating all the time.”

Kamboja wrote:
1) Your contention that the average Paki is not hostile to India or predisposed to militant Islam seems to echo the very claims of many TFTA RAPEs that Pakistan has a 'moderate majority' which is why Islamic parties have only ever won 0.000006% of the votes in any election.

Average Pakjabi is hostile to India because of the last 60 years of continuous false propaganda they have been fed. The contradiction that they are "better than SDREs" gets affirmed every time a terrorist attack succeeds in India.

so!! all we need to do is show them that

1. Pakjabis have never won a single war in their control of Pakistan.
2. Pakjabis have never won a single war in their history.
3. Pakjabis are those people who submitted to foreign invaders.

and as we expose lie after lie they will get closer to Cognitive Dissonance. Then!! move in to get them back to their original faith.

Pawkkistan;A weak state
Isko Paida kiya Sansar mei dho badmasho . Churchil orr Djinna ke tamasho Nei

It is hard to dispute The Economist’s view that Pakistan is a weak state where the government has little interest in enforcing the law. Leaving aside the blatant defiance of judicial verdicts, for which the authorities themselves are responsible, there would hardly be a sphere of life where law in the real sense would be prevailing. The target killings; and even murders of rivals on the premises of a court of law; the police brutalities; the daylight robberies and thefts; the widespread prevalence of graft; the currency of substandard and spurious goods, not excepting the life-saving drugs; and the unchecked rise in prices manipulated by the manufacturer-shopkeeper combine – the list covers varied fields where law is openly flouted with impunity.
The British paper, apparently referring to the term of the present political setup, said that 30,000 people lost their lives to acts of terrorism during the past four years and 300 were killed in Balochistan and 7,000 in Karachi in 2011 alone. It also points to the death of 11 journalists in Pakistan last year. Besides, the paper quotes from a report of the human rights commission to reinforce its accusation of the prevalence of lawlessness in the country and says that 675 women were killed in the first nine months of 2011.
However, in a sarcastic allusion to the common perception in Pakistan

Teen pending Kaam,AzadSindh, Pushtunistan and Free Baluchistan
Stoking the Balochistan fire

What is even more disgusting is the fact that the US actually funds and creates conditions in targeted countries that are conducive to human rights abuses, thus giving it an excuse to meddle in their affairs. The list of countries where it has funded and armed dissident groups, fomenting unrest and militancy, is long. This diminishes the chances of any political solution to the grievances of these dissident groups, forcing the targeted countries to tackle them militarily. In Balochistan's case, the Pakistan government has been protesting to the US over the support extended to militant groups from US-occupied Afghanistan. Activities of Mossad under CIA cover in Balochistan, involving the funding and arming of militant groups, have been reported. Militant Baloch nationalists have been given refuge by the US allies and moderate nationalists working for a political solution within the state of Pakistan eliminated. The same US Congress that is now shedding crocodile tears about the woes of Balochistan allocated over $400 million for promoting freedom in Iranian Balochistan. One wonders, how much of it was used on our side of the border and what was it used for? Were some of those millions used for arming dissident groups and funding hyper-nationalism? Can we be sure that money was not paid to mercenaries to target the non-Baloch ethnic groups to create divisions, something that has been condemned by even the most diehard Baloch nationalists. The recent campaign is clearly the phase two of a strategy that has been in place for years. After all, Balochistan is not only important for its treasure of natural resources. Fomenting unrest in the province would also stop China from using Gwadar and bury the Iran-Pakistan pipeline project that the US can't stand.
While there should be no doubt about the US game plan in Balochistan,

In my view if it is anything less than 70 % support for extremists - we have a huge population to work with. My suspicion is that given Pakistan's 30% poverty, 50% illiteracy, 40% under 15 years, and 20% shias and other minorities, ethnic divisions between Pakjabis, Seraikis, Sindhis, Baluchis, Pasthuns and Balwaristanis, Banglas, and perhaps 5% of Pakistanis with an India connection - it is unlikely that more than 50% of all Pakistanis actually support anti-India extremists. This is a guess. 50% is huge number, but if true it means 50% can be turned our way.

Did you mean "monetary support" in the bolded part shown above? I disagree if you meant general support (i.e., sympathy, agreement with general goals) for anti-Indian activities.

If your life revolves around finding your next meal or dodging the Paki armed forces, your anti-Indianness is more likely to sit in a corner waiting for better days.

Yes, the poor will probably try to find food and water. But I don't think an average Paki (poor or rich, shia or sunni) with work with India against Paki army despite their internal problems/divisions.

In particular, what %age of Pakis disagree with their official position on J&K?

SBajwa wrote:

Average Pakjabi is hostile to India because of the last 60 years of continuous false propaganda they have been fed. The contradiction that they are "better than SDREs" gets affirmed every time a terrorist attack succeeds in India.soand as we expose lie after lie they will get closer to Cognitive Dissonance. Then!! move in to get them back to their original faith.

It was 47 Chitter parade which brought them to Jameen from Jannat. Listening to Djinnah, they completely forgot that they were tolerated and allowed to live in Punjab by MRS. Pakjabi assumed themselves as the product of Moghul /Arab Muta Nikah but the unexpected furry from this side just cleansed the whole myth in few months . They want revenge but every time they try they get slapped and put down. The anger and disappointment is consuming them slowly and this fire in their stomach must burn all the time so they never get a chance to think of nation builiding.

abhishek_sharma wrote:
Did you mean "monetary support" in the bolded part shown above? I disagree if you meant general support (i.e., sympathy, agreement with general goals) for anti-Indian activities.

Yes, the poor will probably try to find food and water. But I don't think an average Paki (poor or rich, shia or sunni) with work with India against Paki army despite their internal problems/divisions.

In particular, what %age of Pakis disagree with their official position on J&K?

I think "general anti-India support" is huge. But I would classify the supply of soldiers. lives and money and time as being of greater value.

But it is wrong to try and discover support beyond a point. Any existing support is useful as a starting point but beyond that support has to be created. Widespread support is not going spring up the way support for the US springs up among Indians. Exactly how much support there might be to start with was what my speculative post was all about.

I am gradually veering around to the feeling that "Kashmir" is a bogey. It was a convenient bogey because it is next to Pakistan and has a Muslim majority and could be exploited. Many recent reports have shown how Pakistan after partition was saddled with a restive border with Afghanistan which the Afghans did not accept. Setting those Pashtun tribes off against India to capture Kashmir in 1948 was part of a Paki military ploy to keep those tribes occupied. I have also read that Pakjab had a special closeness to Kashmir and Pakjab saw the worst bloodletting in partition and they had a special stake in trying to retake Kashmir.

But Pakistan itself became unstable within a few years of partition. Mohajirs who formed the bureaucracy had no local poltical base base and needed an issue to justify their power. Ethnic tensions meant that the country started falling apart way back then and the "Muslims and Kashmir" issue was a uniting factor that lasted until 1965. The phase 1955-1965 was probably a phoney development phase for Pakistan. Pakistan was actually politically unstable but once Ayub Khan took over he had plenty of military and development aid and the late 50s was a time when Pakistan was a success story and India was a basket case. Pakistan saw India's re arming after the 1962 war with alarm and felt that they had one last chance to take Kashmir. Thsi was surely te Kabila mentality. You capture and loot and use the loot to keep your people united and happy for a while. But 1965 failed and Pakistan itself unravelled between 1965 and 1971.

After 1971 - Kashmir per se could not keep Pakistan united. Bhutto and Zia had to invoke Islam and India as the mortal enemy. By 1979 the cold war came to Pakistan's rescue and gave them a new lease on life. Between 1980 and 2001, Pakistan not only kept up a continuous assault on Kashmir, but it also sponsored and supported the Khalistan movement, Dawood Ibrahim, counterfeit currency, and terrorism aimed at all parts of India. I think Kashmir gradually gave way to a general anti-India fear because the post-Zia education system to indoctrinate Pakis had kicked in after 1973 and by 1993 any Pakistani under 20 had been brought up to look at India as anti-Muslim (if he had access to education). If not then he was probably spared and even back them literacy was less than 50% . If your education system brings in indoctrination, that indoctrination is reaching only those who get an education, school or Madarsa. So not every Paki could have got indoctrinated.

Kashmir is out of reach now. Pakis can do or say what they want. The battle is not Kashmir. The battle is inside Pakistan now.

http://tribune.com.pk/story/335268/econ ... mf-report/

Economic woes: Finance secretary changed in wake of IMF report

IMF has unearthed that, in a bid to hide the real budget deficit, Pakistan’s expenditures were understated by Rs317 billion and revenues overstated by Rs215 billion.

Jhujar wrote:Man at Sleep
Holy prophet never declared himself above the law: CJ

From the same link: (1 ? == 1 WTF?)

No one on earth has influenced mankind more than Muhammad (PBUH). He is the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular level. Had he not been there, our world would have been very different, and, if we ignore his teachings, life will not be worth living. The principles of freedom ?, human dignity ? and equality ??, {ayesha} love and brotherhood, respect for each other?, quest for knowledge?, science ? and {djinn} technology, rule of {sharia} law and justice ?, human rights? and welfare of the people, concern for the cleanliness ??? and upkeep of the environment, and all other great ideas which we cherish so much, originated and practically demonstrated by Muhammad, the last of the Messengers of Allah on earth, (may xxxx by upon him),

This Charsi chodree has gone totally mad. Reading the above almost made me puke.

Anujan wrote:http://tribune.com.pk/story/335268/econ ... mf-report/

Economic woes: Finance secretary changed in wake of IMF report

IMF has unearthed that, in a bid to hide the real budget deficit, Pakistan’s expenditures were understated by Rs317 billion and revenues overstated by Rs215 billion.

This is not the first time the Islamic Republic of Pakistan has lied to the IMFand they have been rapped by the IMF Executive Board in the past though that has not stopped the IMF from continuing to lend to Pakistan .

Excerpt from an IMF News Brief dating back to 2000:

The Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) reviewed today data revisions and misreporting by Pakistan, along with the authorities' commitment to promptly repurchase SDR18.95 million in outstanding debt to the IMF, and to voluntarily repurchase another SDR 22 million by May 31, 2000.

Following the Executive Board's discussion on Pakistan, Eduardo Aninat, Deputy Managing Director and acting Chairman of the Board, summarized the discussions. Mr. Aninat stated:

"Executive Directors expressed concerns over the misreporting of fiscal data to the IMF between 1997 and 1999. Following their discovery of discrepancies in the fiscal data in late 1999, the authorities informed IMF staff and requested technical assistance to help with the data revision process. In response, a mission from the IMF's Fiscal Affairs Department went to Islamabad in January 2000 to assess the magnitude of the discrepancies, and the factors responsible for the discrepancies. As a result of subsequent data revisions, Pakistan's budget deficit for 1997/98 was revised upward by 2 percent of GDP to 7.5 percent of GDP, and the deficit for 1998/99 was raised by 1.4 percent of GDP to 5.9 percent of GDP. The technical assistance mission, with the full cooperation of the authorities, found that the discrepancies had arisen principally in the domestic nonbank financing data, where the amount of sales of National Savings Schemes (NSS) instruments had been erroneously recorded in the fiscal reports. External and domestic bank financing data also required revision. The corresponding adjustments to expenditure data, which have so far only been completed for 1998/99, had been mainly to interest payments--corresponding to the higher-than-previously reported domestic nonbank debt--and defense spending. In addition, some unbudgeted spending was identified.

"In their discussion of the issue, Directors expressed serious concern that the erroneous data had misled IMF staff and the Executive Board about economic performance; prevented the formulation and implementation of timely corrective measures; and resulted in the design of an adjustment program that was partly based on inaccurate information. They also noted that the provision of inaccurate data had allowed Pakistan to make substantial purchases under the extended arrangement and the Compensatory and Contigency Financing Facility, and under the Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility, that otherwise may not have been available. ……………………..

Read it all:

IMF Executive Board Reviews Pakistan Misreporting, Remedial Steps

Afghan forces raid Pakistani village, kill 2 ‘Taliban suspects’

Yawn reports the incident as well

Afghan forces allegedly cross into Balochistan

Where is TSPA whose chain of command was suspended by General Ass-phuck Kiya-nahi in case there is another Salala type incident?

ArmenT wrote:Pak Navy to build nuclear submarine

What is a puny nuclear submarine when they can place a man on moon in five year.

Anindya wrote:We never seem to learn - while we hold, the please-please-do-business-with-us, the Pakistanis hold a kill-Indians show.

'India Show' in Lahore, anti-India show in Karachi

Or this - Pakistanis kill 62 Indians, and we bend over backwards to appease them...
When Manmohan Singh tried to heal Pakistan ties with Ayurveda

In the winter of 2005, when a chill had set in Indo-Pak relations following the Delhi blasts that killed 62 people, an unlikely avenue was explored as a form of Track-II diplomacy. A renowned Ayurveda physician from Kerala was dispatched across the border to treat various Pakistani luminaries, including then prime minister Shujaat Hussain.

The only Ayurveda cure that could possibly cure anything in a Paki consists of grinding green chilli to fine paste, adding some black pepper to it, and then using it as a suppository. With some pindi channa gas this will surely make porkistan the new space superpower, no need for rockets.