Bharat Rakshak

It is hardly a new perspective. Similar chankian theories have been offered before.

According to the economic survey the government failed to achieve its growth targets in the previous year.

..Estimated GDP growth for this fiscal year ending in June: 3.7 per cent. The government had forecast 4.2 per cent growth for 2011/12.

Blame: floods damaged the agricultural sector and due to a weak global economy.

Dr Hafeez Sheikh said a 3.7 per cent expansion would still be the best performance since 2007/08. “If we compare it to the 3 per cent last year, then this is the highest economic growth in the last three years,” he said.

The paki currency slid 0.9 per cent to 93.8350 per dollar, which is a record low

abhishek_sharma wrote:So why did you call Lilo's proposal a "new perspective"?

The visit by Ashton, who is also Vice President of the European Commission, will also provide an opportunity to reiterate Pakistan's interest for inclusion in the GSP+ and early implementation of the package of Autonomous Trade Preferences for Pakistan, Pakistan attaches "great importance to its relations with the EU and enjoys excellent relations with all EU member countries", the statement said.

ISLAMABAD: The federal budget for the fiscal year 2012-13 with an outlay of around Rs 3 trillion will be presented in parliament today (Friday). A special meeting of the federal cabinet, chaired by Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani, was held on Thursday to consider and approve the budget proposals, official sources informed Daily Times. Decision on increase in the salaries and pension for the government employees has been left for the cabinet; however, 25 to 30 percent increase in salaries and pension is part of separate proposals. The federal government has finalised a tax collection target of Rs 2.338 trillion for fiscal year 2012-13, and this includes Rs 85 billion in revenue generation measures – Rs 40 billion worth of new taxes through broadening of tax base and generation of Rs 45 through administrative measures. The federal government will transfer Rs 1.427 trillion in 2012-13 to provinces as their share in federal taxes under NFC Award. Debt servicing and debt repayment will consume Rs 933 billion in the next fiscal. The government is aiming to contain fiscal deficit at just over Rs 1.2 trillion. Provinces will be required to create a budget surplus of Rs 112 billion to help federal government keep fiscal deficit to the projected level. Non-tax revenue target is also jacked up from earlier proposed target of Rs 562 billion to Rs 737 billion. Official sources informed that allocation for federal Public Sector Development Programme has been set at Rs 360 billion, and Rs 100 billion would be spent on development programme outside the PSDP, taking the total to Rs 460 billion for 2012-13. staff report

arun wrote:The Islamic Republic of Pakistan is claiming that Dr. Shakil Afridi, the informant who provided information leading to the execution of Mohammadden Terrorist Osama Bin Laden just outside the premises of the Pakistan Military Academy at Kakul was actually jailed for supporting Mohammadden Terrorists and NOT for the act of providing intelligence to the CIA on Bin Ladens whereabouts.

The Islamic Republic of Pakistan alleges that Dr Shakil Afridi was linked with the Mohammadden Terrorist group Lashkar-e-Islam (LI) led by Mangal Bagh and to which group he gave PKR 2 million and provided medical assistance there to the LI's commanders Said Noor Malikdinkhel, Hazrat from the Sepah tribe, Wahid from the Shalobar Qambarkhel tribe and others:

Dr Afridi convicted for militant links

It’s been 65 years since the British departed from the Subcontinent after breaking the jewel in the crown into two, leaving behind a blazing inferno of madness that raged on for months and years. Even though the official narrative puts the toll at a million on both sides, it’s estimated to be far higher. Millions were driven from their homes and their properties destroyed, not to mention the rape of tens of thousands of women in this unprecedented exchange of populations. Thousands of Muslim women were abducted in Punjab and a substantial number of them were forced to live with the shame and their tormentors.It’s perhaps because of that violent separation that the Partition debate refuses to die even after 65 years. Pundits and academics on either side of the divide never seem to have enough of it. With Pakistan tottering from one crisis to another in recent years, a new intensity has been introduced in the debate.His warning about the split of East Pakistan came true in a matter of two decades. He was spot on in his analysis about Pakistan’s siege within and competing sectarian and regional identities overwhelming the national identity. He has been prescient about the new nation being ensnared in the machinations of world powers.Questioning the rationale behind a separate homeland for Muslims, he says: “The question is when and where Islam provided for division of territories to settle populations on the basis of belief. Does this find any sanction in the Quran or the traditions of the Prophet? If we accept this division in principle, how shall we reconcile it with Islam as a universal system? The political disputes we created in the name of religion have projected Islam as an instrument of political power and not what it is – a value system meant for the transformation of human soul.”
He laments the fact that the demand for a separate country in the name of Islam has poisoned Hindu-Muslim relations dealing a deadly blow to the cause of faith: “The factors that laid the foundation of Islam in India and created a powerful following have become victims of the politics of Partition. The communal hatred it has generated has extinguished all possibilities of spreading Islam.”Azad repeatedly argues that Indian Muslims would pay the greatest price for the territorial division of the Subcontinent: “It won’t be possible for Pakistan to accommodate all the Muslims of India, a task beyond her territorial capability. On the other hand, it won’t be possible for Hindus to stay on in Pakistan. This will have its repercussions in India and the Indian Muslims. More than 30 million Muslims will be left behind in India. What promise Pakistan holds for them? The situation that will arise after the expulsion of Hindus and Sikhs from Pakistan will be still more dangerous for them.”
Almost everything Azad predicted seems to have come true, including his warning about the marginalisation of the Indian Muslims. It’s not easy even for the worst critics of the man dismissed by Jinnah as ‘the show boy of Congress’ to demolish any of his statements or facts including his contention that demanding Pakistan meant turning “our eyes away from the history of the last 1,000 years.”

saip wrote:^^

Rs 3 trillion federal budget for 2012-13 today

That is equivalent to US 32 Billion. Is this not almost same as India's defense budget?

Dipanker wrote:

saip wrote:^^Rs 3 trillion federal budget for 2012-13 todayThat is equivalent to US 32 Billion. Is this not almost same as India's defense budget?
It is less than that.

Refusing to cooperate: ‘ASF men rough up Saudi embassy official’

RAWALPINDI:

Airport Security Force personnel at the Benazir Bhutto International Airport allegedly entered into an altercation with the military attaché of the Saudi embassy on Thursday, after he refused to cooperate during security checks and abused Pakistan and called Pakistani officials his “servants” .

According to officials from the ASF, Colonel Sukhari, who was meant to fly out to Riyadh, refused to get a routine body check and started quarrelling with the security personnel at the airport. The ASF officials said that the military attaché insisted that he was not subject to a body search because he was a diplomat. ....................

Express Tribune

European Harmony

Europe in the summer of 1914 enjoyed a peaceful productivity so dependent on international exchange and co-operation that a belief in the impossibility of general war seemed the most conventional of wisdoms. In 1910 an analysis of prevailing economic interdependence, The Great Illusion, had become a best-seller; its author Norman Angell had demonstrated, to the satisfaction of almost all informed opinion, that the disruption of international credit inevitably to be caused by war would either deter its outbreak or bring it speedily to an end. It was a message to which the industrial and commercial society of that age was keenly sympathetic.

Lalmohan wrote:any need to get heavy with lilo? he is exploring an idea from all aspects

abhishek_sharma wrote:From The First World War by John Keegan

European Harmony.....
This is not OT.

Pakistan based militants deny links with Osama doctor
While Pakistani officials had earlier said Dr Shakeel Afridi was jailed for his links with CIA, a court document which surfaced on Wednesday states the doctor was actually sentenced for his ties with banned terror group, Lashkar-e-Islam.

Spokesmen of Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and Lashkar-e-Islam denied Afridi was in league with them.

TTP spokesperson Ehsanullah Ehsan said the government was staging a drama to free Afridi under US pressure. "The penalty for Afridi is death. We believe he will be in America soon. Osama was our hero and Afridi helped the US kill him. He is our enemy." Lashkar-e-Islam spokesperson Abdur Rasheed said, "We have no link with Afridi. If we find him we'll eliminate him."

The tribal court which convicted Afridi had referred to an intelligence report which said the doctor had paid Rs 2 million to Lashkar-e-Islami during his stint at a government hospital in Khyber. Refuting the charge, Rasheed said it was a fine slapped on Afridi after locals complained of fake surgeries and overcharging.

amit wrote:

Lalmohan wrote:any need to get heavy with lilo? he is exploring an idea from all aspects

That's the problem, anyone trying to think outside the collective BRF group think is immediately branded a WKK, imbecile and one who supports terrorist attacks, among other interesting adjectives. I told Lilo that this is one la la discussion which he wouldn't be even allowed to have let alone win, in terms of convincing others. I really fail to understand why some folks need to get nasty and personal with other folks with whom they do not agree.

Folks seem to forget that at the end of the day what we do is time pass and policy is not made based on what the group think of the day is on BRF.

amit wrote: That's the problem, anyone trying to think outside the collective BRF group think is immediately branded a WKK, imbecile and one who supports terrorist attacks, among other interesting adjectives. I told Lilo that this is one la la discussion which he wouldn't be even allowed to have let alone win, in terms of convincing others. I really fail to understand why some folks need to get nasty and personal with other folks with whom they do not agree.
Folks seem to forget that at the end of the day what we do is time pass and policy is not made based on what the group think of the day is on BRF.

Neela wrote:Sorry but your post is rudderless. And no this is not a personal attack.

At it's center, the problem is that there is no appreciation for the difference between 'discussion' and 'dialogue'. IN BRIEF: 'Discussion' is like a percussive back-and-forth, where there's a tit-for-tat of point versus counterpoint. For far too many people, this is the only way they know how to communicate, and because they are emotionally invested in their ideas/words, it gets nasty pretty quickly. Speaking for myself, this kind of "discourse" (in the form of a series of thread posts) is usually not worth reading.

On the other side, 'Dialogue' is what happens when people hold-out their ideas/words for others to examine and to comment and critique. IMHO, this is a much more fruitful means of discourse, in that it is mutually additive, conceptually-focussed (rather than personally-focussed), and it can advance toward a shared understanding much more efficiently and genuinely than any "discussion" ever can, in whatever form. In large part, this is because people engaged in dialogue are much more playful with their ideas/words, and they are not emotionally invested in them so that they can receive criticism without becoming defensive/ offensive. It's a more adult way of communicating.

Dr. Peter Senge's classic business book 'The Fifth Discipline' describes this concept as 'mental models', and how business teams can have more fruitful discourse by using dialogue instead of discussion -- the objective being the development of a 'shared vision' of an issue or idea, not 'one-upmanship', which seems to be the entire point of many of the 'discussions' that have appeared in BRF threads.

Neela wrote:People have run out of patience. We really need a "final" solution. [ Sue me! ]

The circumstances are such that very few here were following the discussion through out its length. So many off the cuff comments were the norm - even by experienced posters.

amit wrote:

Neela wrote:Sorry but your post is rudderless. And no this is not a personal attack.

Neela,

My post may very well be rudderless, however, your post has a big hole in it as you did not understand what I was trying to convey. It's not a question of whether Lilo, you or I am right or wrong. It's about being able to state whatever POV one has without having one's credentials, loyalty, moral compass etc being questioned.

Sure just has Lilo has his POV others may have diametrically opposite POVs and many of them have explained what these are in a civil manner. However, there have been others whose entire posts have been thinly veiled personal attacks, that's what I'm pointing to. I had also written a few posts earlier which said that this might be an idea worth exploring and I had a particular poster, whose wrath everyone has felt sometime or the other, claiming that I support terrorist attacks in India and that I don't know the fundamentals of economics (I hope my employers didn't read that )

I don't know if you've read it but sometime ago Ravi Karumanchiri made a very valid point in the feedback thread. See here

At it's center, the problem is that there is no appreciation for the difference between 'discussion' and 'dialogue'. IN BRIEF: 'Discussion' is like a percussive back-and-forth, where there's a tit-for-tat of point versus counterpoint. For far too many people, this is the only way they know how to communicate, and because they are emotionally invested in their ideas/words, it gets nasty pretty quickly. Speaking for myself, this kind of "discourse" (in the form of a series of thread posts) is usually not worth reading.

On the other side, 'Dialogue' is what happens when people hold-out their ideas/words for others to examine and to comment and critique. IMHO, this is a much more fruitful means of discourse, in that it is mutually additive, conceptually-focussed (rather than personally-focussed), and it can advance toward a shared understanding much more efficiently and genuinely than any "discussion" ever can, in whatever form. In large part, this is because people engaged in dialogue are much more playful with their ideas/words, and they are not emotionally invested in them so that they can receive criticism without becoming defensive/ offensive. It's a more adult way of communicating.

Dr. Peter Senge's classic business book 'The Fifth Discipline' describes this concept as 'mental models', and how business teams can have more fruitful discourse by using dialogue instead of discussion -- the objective being the development of a 'shared vision' of an issue or idea, not 'one-upmanship', which seems to be the entire point of many of the 'discussions' that have appeared in BRF threads.

Neela wrote:People have run out of patience. We really need a "final" solution. [ Sue me! ]

You see the bolded portion shows exactly what I mean. Why should I "sue" you? You are presupposing that just because I wrote a post supporting Lilo and earlier a few posts which said that getting a stranglehold on the Pakis oil supplies (with a huge caveat that they would never agree to this, which proved to be right) that I also don't want a "final solution" to the pestilence that is breeding on our western border.

Remember there are many ways to skin a cat and a shooting war is not the only way. Economic warfare is also a viable option and that can be waged only when there's leverage.

Anyway my last post on this issue. There's too much wind blowing in the opposite direction for a p!!sing contest.

Lilo wrote: Its as simple as that.

Neela wrote:If you read my post again - what I meant to convey was that when making such proposals ( that appear compromising) , expect all kinds of accusations. Sense the tone of forum and frame your sentences and words accordingly.

amit wrote: As for playing the victim card rest assured I'm not such a sissy. I've been called many things in my years on this forum, the more amusing ones being accused of being the son of some Congress honcho, to being a card member of that party to having lost my "moral compass". You you know what? "No, shit Sherlock, I couldn't care less!"

amit wrote: In other words you mean to say that you better not get out of the group think mode because if you do then tough luck mate, you get what you deserve!

Sorry you proved exactly what I was saying and I see you didn't understand the difference Ravi made between "discussion" and "dialogue".