Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Feb. 12, 2011

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 15 Feb 2011 08:36

arun wrote:Or is it a case of affluent singers benefiting from the "thaw" while poverty stricken fisherman have no such benefits under the “thaw”?

I vote for this one. Affluent, with influential friends.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 15 Feb 2011 08:37

Yeah. In those talks both sides will talk about mausam.

disha · Post by **disha** » 15 Feb 2011 08:48

shiv wrote:It is ironic and amusing in a sad way to find someone who purportedly represents the sentiments of the "nationalists" in America to complain about Indian preachiness and naivete because, from this side of the pond, the behavior of the "nationalists" appears preachy, rigid and unable to play the dirty games that Pakis sitting in "South Asian" groups play. And an inability to see it when the same games are played by Indians.

Touche. The words are apt, concise and to the point.

PS: Sorry for quoting you, last from me on this topic. Also big Thank you for pointing it out above.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 15 Feb 2011 08:50

shiv wrote: As someone stated earlier in this thread the behavior displayed by India the nation too is somewhat like this - preachy and unsubtle, perched on the moral high ground.

K.M. Munshi (page 153, The End of an Era (Hyderabad Memoirs))(1957) wrote:

"The antipathy of the foreign correspondents towards India was not unexpected. A certain shrewd foreigner, once questioned on the subject, gave me an interesting explanation of this.

"Our sympathies are generally against the Hindu. We can understand the Muslim. He eats with us; he looks up to us with respect. We do not understand the Hindu, however much he may try to accommodate himself to us. We always suspect that in his heart of hearts he is passing a critical judgment on us. We think his ways inferior; he thinks ours to be inferior. And we are not very sure whether in those spheres of life where we consider ourselves adepts, he does not generally beat us."

Something similar may hold with Indians and Pakistanis now.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 15 Feb 2011 09:04

Shiv and Arun, In the Raj Quartet, Peter Scott makes the protagonist say that the British felt closer to Abraham than Brahma. Its religion at the root even if its disguised on modern language.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 15 Feb 2011 09:04

The challan against Raymond Davis:
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.as ... 011_pg7_17

Dhiman · Post by **Dhiman** » 15 Feb 2011 09:13

A_Gupta wrote:Actually, listen to the clip carefully. What pro-Pakistan word does Arnab Goswami utter? How is saying "American Rambo CIA operatives shooting up people is unacceptable, anywhere around the world?" by any stretch of the imagination "defending the pakis"?

He doesn't have to utter any pro-Pakistani word as long as his logic is pro-Pakistani irrespective of whether he realizes it or not. The statement "American Rambo CIA operatives shooting up people is unacceptable, anywhere around the world?, may not necessarily be the correct interpretation here given that this so-called "anywhere around the world" is Pakistan.

What we have here is a case of American special forces infiltrating and operating deep within terrorist country in order to preserve their countries interest. Raymond Davis (or whoever his real name is), went out alone and shot up two operatives or an organization that breeds terrorism (ISI). All that this shows is that Americans have their hands all around this Pakistani problem (in their best judgement) a full 360 degrees.

A proactive Indian government may also do the same, i.e realizing that the entire Pakistani establishment is sponsors anti-india terrorists, send individual special forces people to infiltrate and neutralise targets in Pakistan who have or would cause harm against India. Would you not want those Indian special agents who risked their lives to protect you to be returned home, but rather face Pakistani courts (courts that are again controlled/influenced by terrorist sympathizers)

I mean, we are talking about Pakistan here, not Japan when Arnab says "anywhere around the world". Arnab has just caught and exploited one spin of the story, the other angle is that here is a lone ranger going bravely into the terrorist/ISI infested world of terrorism to protect his country at great risk to his life. His courage needs to be commended. If the Indian establishment had such guts, half our Paki problem would have disappeared by now.

Enemy of your enemy is your friend, so anyone shooting up ISI operatives is India's _______ (I will let you fill in the blank)

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Feb 2011 09:21

A_Gupta wrote: Something similar may hold with Indians and Pakistanis now.

That is why secularism is such a useful tool. Secularism and liberalism can be used in various ways - but Pakistanis have been far more sophisticated than India in utilizing liberalism while India has concentrated on secularism. Secular and liberal go together, but are not synonymous. Liberalism is a platform that ignores lack of secularism in a society where being secular is not important - i.e a society that has a uniform single religion or two similar religions that agree on some basics. The religion barrier need not be addressed by liberals in a monotheist environment.

In a polytheistic environment, liberalism has to include secularism. The UK is secular, despite its connections with Christianity. The US is less secular. Pakistanis have played the liberal card and made the "You and me are brothers" game well in the US and it is only after the old Islam-Christianity battles became resurgent after 9-11 that the Paki game started becoming apparent - at least to those of us who knew what the Pakis were up to.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Feb 2011 09:30

Dhiman wrote: Enemy of your enemy is your friend, so anyone shooting up ISI operatives is India's _______ (I will let you fill in the blank)

Dhiman I have many areas of disagreement with your post - and rather than arguing on a line by line basis I have just quoted the above sentence which sums up what some others have also said.

As I see it - my question is pretty simple: "Is the US a friend?"

My answer to that is "As long as the US supplies lethal weapons to Pakistan the US is not a friend, no matter what the US excuses are"

Clearly Americans killing Pakis and vice versa is a case of gang war in which two unfriendlies are taking each other out. Since these two unfriendlies call themselves allies and have helped each other out - this murderous lovers' tiff is entertainment if nothing else. Taking one side or the other is naive, if not plain stupid. The Pakis have as much of a "genuine grievance" as the Americans in this case and both can be criticised. I see no reason to be "with the Americans" on this one. i would dearly love to see such spats snowball into something bigger and would do anything to see that happen - even if it means supporting Pakistan and goading them on and telling them that Allah is on their side against tyrannical America.

Dhiman · Post by **Dhiman** » 15 Feb 2011 09:44

Clearly Americans killing Pakis and vice versa is a case of gang war in which two unfriendlies are taking each other out. Since these two unfriendlies call themselves allies and have helped each other out - this murderous lovers' tiff is entertainment if nothing else. Taking one side or the other is naive, if not plain stupid. The Pakis have as much of a "genuine grievance" as the Americans in this case and both can be criticised. I see no reason to be "with the Americans" on this one. i would dearly love to see such spats snowball into something bigger and would do anything to see that happen - even if it means supporting Pakistan and goading them on and telling them that Allah is on their side against tyrannical America.

Agree with your assessment Sir. I was just trying to put out the other "spin" of this story. My main problem was with Arnab making statements such as "American Rambo CIA operatives shooting up people is unacceptable, anywhere around the world" becuase that confuses civilized places like say "Bhutan" with uncivilized places such as "Pakistan"

Gus · Post by **Gus** » 15 Feb 2011 10:06

shiv wrote:In my personal opinion the best way to damage South Asianitis in America is to join the group and subvert it from the inside...

But but but...its so much easier to rant here...

I was active in couple of forums a few years back and used more or less the same tactic. It worked great but it takes a level of time commitment that I don't have nowadays. BR is the only forum I am regular with. A few times somebody went WKK in the company Indian distribution list and I had a hard time 'debating' with them, within the confines of company mail policies. You can even make a paki come around to your views, but these WKK US-Indian well-off, educated types are the toughest to deal with.

Gus · Post by **Gus** » 15 Feb 2011 10:13

Charlie wrote:Mard to Mard Valentines Day

Wonder if these people even know what it means. In US (and EU?) Valentine day cards are exchanged between teachers and small kids and between 'office spouses' - in non-sexual context but that is 'post-modern' thinking. Pakis are medieval, so not sure in what context they are expressing Valentine.

Either way, I see a lot of jobless people. How the heck do these people eat if all they do is going around participating in crappy rallies and protests.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Feb 2011 10:16

The Pakistani elite and army have served America as faithful servants for years and the US has reciprocated by keeping alive their raison d'etre - enmity with India.

In my personal view, if Pakistan did not have a powerful military, areas of Baluchistan and NWFP/FATA would slip further out of Pakistani control. These areas were kept in a state that could be described as "Pakistani control" - but have slipped out somewhat. The US is buttressing the Pakistani military to save the nation state of Pakistan.

Now tell me folks, which one of you on here wants to save the nation state of Pakistan? Support for the US view necessarily means support for the Pakistani army to bring its fissiparous people and outlying districts under control. If the Pakistani army was weaker, the fractious tribes of Pakistan would get a leg up. Why must we see the US's viewpoint and not "put off" the US? I believe too many people are failing to see the trees for the forest.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 15 Feb 2011 10:19

Obama admin proposes $3.1 billion for Pakistan

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 499640.cms

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 15 Feb 2011 12:24

If Qadri killed someone who was defending a Kafir blasphemous Christian, then why his fans sending him Valentine's day gifts which itself is a kafir haraam festival ?

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 15 Feb 2011 12:38

shiv:

Baluchistan and NWFP were never truly in TSP control. If TSPA was weak, it would not have been picking fights with India. OTOH it would have enough resources to take-care of internal issues.

It is clear that TSP was created to serve Anglo interests something Jinnah proudly claimed in those famous interviews; hence the Anglos reciprocating the favor is not unexpected. All this talk about if US was not the sugar-daddy how would TSP act is essentially a strawman; it is like saying how would the Gangetic plains be without the Ganga.

And if you really want to discuss on that plane, then it we should discuss what India would have been without a partition, assuming the British would have left her in one piece thanks to a weak moment when they forgot about their own interests.

An alternative discussion could be a TSP where the leaders actually started taking care of interests of the mango Abdul, instead of serving the massa. Would such a stable, scientifically capable Pakistan, with the knowledge/cultural base of the Bengalis and the negotiation skills of the West Pakistanis be less of a threat to India?

Suppose 1965 never happened, and consequently 1971 never occurred and India and Pakistan had a semi-truce kind of situation (say like India-China). Would that enmo Pakistan with a home-grown scientific and industrial base be less of a threat to India? Remember that a Pakistan without an India obsession would have to deal with much less diversity and divisiveness, and have a much better base to launch of than India. It could actually focus on what is good for her, rather than what is good for the RAPE/massa.

If anything what the past few decades has taught us that the germ of Islamism is almost impossible to extinguish. Would a Pakistan with the economic & scientific power of mini-India and with Islamism lurking under the covers, be less of a threat?

Would India have been able to get any help from the Russians (the Rupee Ruble trade, arms) if the TSP was not a Munna? Or would India be left friendless, "non-aligned" and even more irrelevant, as the big powers courted the smaller power to maintain the balance in South Asia.

All the forest-tree talk is incomplete, unless you game out the alternate scenarios. I also believe that making the same posts again and again shifts the focus to the past, when what is really important is the future.

Dipanker · Post by **Dipanker** » 15 Feb 2011 13:12

abhishek_sharma wrote:Obama admin proposes $3.1 billion for Pakistan

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 499640.cms

Blackmail does pay!

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 15 Feb 2011 13:44

Twin blasts damage railway tracks near Hyderabad

HYDERABAD: Twin blasts damaged railway tracks at Udero Lal railway station near Hyderabad early Tuesday morning.

---

Blast in Quetta targets DSP, no casualties reported

ajaytripathi · Post by **ajaytripathi** » 15 Feb 2011 14:04

http://tribune.com.pk/story/119100/myst ... ill-alive/

Mystery prevails: ‘Col Imam still alive’
However, sources told The Express Tribune that Col Imam was alive and his family is negotiating with the captors to secure his release.

ajaytripathi · Post by **ajaytripathi** » 15 Feb 2011 14:07

Rahat freed but faces currency probe

In his defence, Rahat said he was a school dropout and therefore did not understand Indian laws which require passengers flying out of the country to declare currency and travellers’ cheques in excess of $10,000.

http://tribune.com.pk/story/119153/raha ... ncy-probe/

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Feb 2011 14:16

VikramS wrote: It is clear that TSP was created to serve Anglo interests something Jinnah proudly claimed in those famous interviews; hence the Anglos reciprocating the favor is not unexpected.

I am bemused by the fatalistic statement here: "reciprocating the favor is not unexpected". Very Indic. Sorry if you don't like repetitions but I want to see an end to this Anglo-US liaison with Pakistan and not some rationalization and fatalistic explanation.

The argument that a continuous reference to the past hinders a view of the future is one that stuns me. If this is the feeling that a majority of people have it explains to me in one crushing blow why my fellow countrymen - some of whom wear the "I am a patriot" label with vulgar clarity are so nonchalantly sanguine about the continued supply of US arms to Pakistan. They are forgetting the past and looking to the future.

So we have the following statements to comfort ourselves:
1) Aid to Pakistan is "not unexpected" as a return for favors.
2) Since we must forget past episodes of arms supply and look to the future, we will never ever object to the US supply of arms to Pakistan. Let bygones be bygones. Like 26/11 I guess.

No Sir. That is not the way my mind thinks. I am not gaming any scenarios here. Merely demanding that the US must stop supplying arms to Pakistan and trying to think of schemes that will sabotage the US or Pakistan or both rather than forgetting the past have them sabotage us.

ajaytripathi · Post by **ajaytripathi** » 15 Feb 2011 14:34

US 'to name Marc Grossman as Afghan-Pakistan envoy'
BBC News, Washington

Retired diplomat Marc Grossman has been chosen as the next US envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, a US official has told the BBC.

The expected appointment follows the death of the previous representative, Richard Holbrooke, last December.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is expected to formally announce the appointment later this week.

Mr Grossman has spent almost three decades working for the US state department.

His career includes spells as US ambassador to Turkey and assistant secretary of state for Europe.

He helped direct US participation in the Kosovo war and after 9/11, marshalled international diplomatic support for the "war on terror".

He now faces an altogether bigger challenge.

This year, the first US troops are expected to withdraw from Afghanistan as the country's political leaders seek an accommodation with the Taliban.

In Pakistan, the new US envoy will be expected to restore a relationship that has been strained almost to breaking point by the row over an American official accused of committing murder there.

Back in Washington, Mr Grossman will answer to the White House, the US state department and to Congress - each with its own agenda and priorities.

The previous envoy, Richard Holbrooke, was a notoriously strong personality who, in particular, had an up-and-down relationship with the White House.

It is understood several candidates were considered to replace him.

Vivek_A · Post by **Vivek_A** » 15 Feb 2011 16:05

Nandu wrote:
A_Gupta wrote:New evidence in the Aafia Siddiqui case:
http://www.counterpunch.org/brittain02142011.html
Has counterpunch always been so Paki-centric, or is it a recent infestation?

Counterpunch is far left wing. I wouldn't be surprised if they had an article "No evidence against Bin Laden"

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 15 Feb 2011 16:29

from twitter:
http://twitter.com/#!/marvisirmed

Addl Sessions Judge Meher Nasir Hussain in Multan has ordered police to register a blasphemy case against Sherry Rehman under 295 C.

yo ho ho and a bottle of rum

Manu · Post by **Manu** » 15 Feb 2011 16:32

ajaytripathi wrote:Rahat freed but faces currency probe

In his defence, Rahat said he was a school dropout and therefore did not understand Indian laws which require passengers flying out of the country to declare currency and travellers’ cheques in excess of $10,000.

http://tribune.com.pk/story/119153/raha ... ncy-probe/

Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Off to Tihar for at least 6 months, I say.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 15 Feb 2011 16:45

Our HM's are far more sympathetic to RAPE's than AAM AADMI, an AAM AADMI Indian Citizen would be cooling his heels in Jail for 6 months. What Crap

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 15 Feb 2011 17:21

AoA
What chakkar is this hain ji?
The US ONLEE nominates kosovo - former yugoslavia - balkan-isation experts as Af-Pak envoys?

What is going on onlee?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Feb 2011 17:29

Manu wrote:
ajaytripathi wrote:Rahat freed but faces currency probe

In his defence, Rahat said he was a school dropout and therefore did not understand Indian laws which require passengers flying out of the country to declare currency and travellers’ cheques in excess of $10,000.

http://tribune.com.pk/story/119153/raha ... ncy-probe/
Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Off to Tihar for at least 6 months, I say.

Manu as far as I can tell the laws are here: I have highlighted the arrest clauses.
https://www.interactivebrokers.com/Univ ... MA1999.htm

CONTRAVENTION AND PENALTIES

13. Penalties.-(1) If any person contravenes any provision of this Act, or contravenes any rule, regulation, notification, direction or order issued in exercise of the powers under this Act, or contravenes any condition subject to which an authorization s issued by the Reserve Bank, he shall, upon adjudication, be liable to a penalty up to thrice the sum involved in such contravention where such amount is quantifiable, or up to two lakh rupees where the amount is not quantifiable,and where such contrav ntion is a continying one, further penalty which may extend to five thousand rupees for every day after the first day during which the contravention continues.

<snip>

(2) No order for the arrest and detention in civil prison of a defaulter shall be made unless the Adjudication Authority has issued and served a notice upon the defaulter calling upon him to appear before him on the date specified in the notice and to show cause why he should not be committed to the civil prison, and unless the Adjudicating Authority, for reasons in writing, is satisfied-

(a) that the defaulter, with the object or effect of obstructing the recovery of penalty, has after the issue of notice by the Adjudicating Authority, dishonestly transferred, concealed, or removed any part of his property, or

(b) that the defaulter has, or has had since the issuing of notice by the Adjudicating Authority, the means to pay the arrears or some substantial part thereof and refuses or neglects or has refused or neglected to pay the same.

(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), a warrant for the arrest of the defaulter may be issued by the Adjudicating Authority if the Adjudicating Authority is satisfied, by affidavit or otherwise, that with the object or effect of dela ing the execution of the certificate the defaulter is likely to abscond or leave the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Adjudicating Authority.

(4) Where appearance is not made pursuant to a notice issued and served under sub-section (1), the Adjudicating Authority may issue a warrant for the arrest of the defaulter.

(5) A warrant of arrest issued by the Adjudicating Authority under sub-section (3) or sub-section (4) may also be executed by any other Adjudicating Authority within whose jurisdiction the defaulter may for the time being be found.

(6) Every person arrested in pursuance of a warrant of arrest under this section shall be brought before the Adjudicating Authority issuing the warrant as soon as practicable and in any event within twenty-four hours of his arrest (exclusive of the time required for the journey):

Provided that, if the defaulter pays the amount entered in the warrant of arrest as due and the costs of the arrest to the officer arresting him, such officer shall at once release him.

jrjrao · Post by **jrjrao** » 15 Feb 2011 17:35

You cannot even think of making something like this up. Majid Nizami's (does Shrilleen still work there?) nutty nation at its nuttiest best. Posting in full because anything less will do injustice to this masterpiece:

Davis flies into fury on prayer call
By: Jam Sajjad Hussain | Published: February 15, 2011

AHORE – The inmates facing murder charges invariably display quite caution. American killer Raymond Davis, however, is a different species. Undeterred by the implications of his case, he lives in the jail the way he wants to.

Davis doesn’t like to be disturbed in any manner whatsoever. Even Azaan, the prayer call, comes as a source of disturbance for him. And distressing is the disclosure that the loudspeakers in the jail were muted when Davis complained about the prayer call Monday morning.

Davis lodged a protest with the jail authorities on “being disturbed by the morning prayer call”.

“He started shouting in a quite savage manner in the wee hours when the Azaan was in progress and the prisoners were waking up for the prayers,” said a prisoner requesting not to be named.

The inmate said that Davis started shouting, “Shut the louder or I will raise the matter with the (US) Consulate.”

“Surprisingly, jail officials shut the loudspeaker. It prompted the other prisoners to protest. In return, the officials switched the speaker back on,” said the inmate.

An official of the Kot Lakhpat Jail, pseudonym Bholi Shah, said Davis had started huffing and puffing on hearing the Friday prayer call on his first day in jail.

“Seeing four prisoners offering Asr prayers in the corridor of their barrack, Davis started grumbling in a derogatory way,” said Shah.

A jail officer, pseudonym Mohammad Abdullah, claimed the American abused Jail Superintendent Mian Mushtaq Awan who was approaching to pacify him.

Before the superintendent, Davis misbehaved with Awan’s subordinates who woke him up for the breakfast around 8am.

“You all are bloody b a s t a r d s. How dare you wake me without my permission. Now get lost,” Davis swore at Abdullah.

Abdullah said he just woke Davis up to tell him that some senior officers, transferred from other jails for the special duty, had brought him breakfast, but he flew into rage.

Then the senior official themselves gave it a try, humbly saying, “Davis Sahib, please take your breakfast”.

Davis shouted in reply, “You uncivilised fools don’t even make good servants. Is this the method to serve?”

On being informed, Mian Mushtaq Awan arrived within no time and tried his best to placate Davis, but the raging Davis just ran over him. “I am saying you should go now, b a s t a r d,” Davis shouted at Awan.

Abdullah said though they could understand what Davis was saying, they asked Awan. But Awan tried to downplay it, saying, “Davis was using meaningless slang.”

The other prisoners continue to face acute shortage of basic necessities in the Kot Lakhpat Jail. They say they see Davis’ behaviour as highly intolerable. Three to four US Consulate vehicles visit Davis every day.

Admins, I suggest that this deserves consideration for being added to the first page permanent link status.

Mahendra · Post by **Mahendra** » 15 Feb 2011 17:40

^

Ulta diplomat terrorist ko daante

Narad · Post by **Narad** » 15 Feb 2011 17:42

jrjrao wrote: “You all are bloody b a s t a r d s. How dare you wake me without my permission. Now get lost,” Davis swore at Abdullah.

AoA, Bojitibe neuj onlee!!!

Rambo acknowledging the fact which was known to us since 1947.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 15 Feb 2011 17:49

Probably not entirely appropriate for this thread:
Christopher Hitchens
http://www.slate.com/id/2285025/

....a report from Kabul began with what must surely be the most jaw-dropping opening paragraph of the year. Under the byline of the excellent Rod Nordland, the New York Times reported:

International and local human rights groups working in Afghanistan have shifted their focus toward condemning abuses committed by the Taliban insurgents, rather than those attributed to the American military and its allies.

The story went on to point out that the Taliban was culpable for "more than three-fourths of all civilian casualties" and informed us that some human-rights groups are now so concerned that they are thinking of indicting the Taliban for war crimes. "The activists' concern," Nordland went on, "would have been unheard-of a year ago," when all the outcry was directed at casualties inflicted by NATO contingents.

....

The turning point, in the mind of the human rights "activists," appears to have occurred in late January, when a Taliban suicide-murderer killed at least 14 civilians in the Finest Supermarket in Kabul. Among the slain was a well-known local campaigner named Hamida Barmaki, whose husband and four small children were also killed. One wonders in what sense this was the Taliban going too far—women are killed and mutilated by them every single day in Afghanistan. Yet let the terror reach one of the upscale markets or hotels that cater to the NGO constituency in Kabul, and suddenly there is an abrupt change from moral neutrality.

....
....
I can only too well remember attending some press conferences in Pakistan in the winter of 2001 and seeing the unbearably smug expressions on the faces of various human rights and "relief" spokesmen who were concerned lest the military operation against the Taliban should disrupt their relatively modest efforts. They failed or refused to see that the removal of the Taliban was a necessary precondition of any serious relief and reconstruction. It's heartening to learn that, almost a decade later, they are at least open to the awareness that the Taliban is the worst offender. The next stage—may it come soon—will be the realization that the Taliban does not "violate" human rights, but entirely lacks the concept of their existence.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 15 Feb 2011 17:59

i am shocked at Agent Davis' behaviour! How dare he, an American, use british slang and swearwords!! and that too without permission!
tauba x 2

Narad · Post by **Narad** » 15 Feb 2011 18:01

More Bojitibe neuj

“If (Pakistani) rulers hand him over to America then we will target these rulers. If Pakistani courts cannot punish Davis then they should hand him over to us,” said Azam Tariq, spokesman for the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan.

“We will give exemplary punishment to the killer Davis.”

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 15 Feb 2011 18:16

Detailed video of Ajmal Kasab's interrogation by Mumbai Police:

Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUOIiGzZg2o
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZj_mDYUY44
Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIjvZj02lSU
Part 4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7jAjdv8Ky0
Part 5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YAmHVZeSlE
Part 6: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9w4XljGvKkc
Part 7: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VylAi2RtnBw

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Feb 2011 18:33

Cross post

Aditya_V wrote:
Hitesh wrote: You cannot deny that fact anyway you slice. I think you are simply barking up the wrong tree when the tree should be China.
Shiv said: Sorry. I consider this the most lame cop out I have heard in recent days on this forum. Pakistan has survived on US arms and monetary aid and both are still continuing and you want to shift the attention to China which is also guilty. This subtle shifting of attention to my mind is as serious as the sidelining of 26/11 by the government. The US cannot be let off simply because some other country is also chipping in.

China is an issue that I have not even started talking about yet and I fail to see the takleef that people are having when the US's perfidy is being highlighted. What gives? If China is guilty it does not mean the US is not guilty. And by saying the US is guilty I am not absolving China. I hear so many patriots blowing hot about Pakistan but everyone goes all soft mushy and sentimental about the US.

The contortions being used to somehow "let off" or "excuse" the US just astound me. I would be laughing if the whole thing weren't so seriously weird.

Because many of us in our personal Lives have benefitted from USA, we know many decent and good people who are Americans, we have had little or no interaction with China or Chinese. Hence, we are unable to diferentiate between, America(its decent people) and few miniscule Elite who follow a Foreign Policy Agenda without a care for Humanatarian disaster it is.

Further, I have found Indians most willing to Compromise in good for society for own selfish good, this attitude can be best seen on Indian roads. An American can find himself Defending America in Afganistan or Iraq, an Indian may not want to defend India in Kashmir or his Own University if it compramises his personal benefits.

Fine. Fair enough. I have heard the following things in this thread and in the Managing Pakistan's failure thread. I post them without intent to demean or insult and I have a reason for stating things in the way I have been doing

But first the reasons for asking that we do not bother about US arms aid to Pakistan:
1) China will take over
2) China is more significant now
3) The US does things in its own interest
4) The US can be expected to show gratitude by helping Pakistan
5) We need to forget the past and think about the future where Chin will be the problem
6) The US has given many of us our lives and we are loath to rock the boat
7) The US is hardly an enemy

But excuse me - with so many Indians in the US and many being politically active, would it be so difficult for the Indian American community to press for a cessation of arms aid to Pakistan? Surely F-16s and AMRAAMs are hardly necessary. Would it be difficult to dig up the statements made by the US in the past that US arms to Pakistan would not be used against India to illustrate how those statements were proven wrong, given Pakistan's propensity for double crossing?

Instead I am hearing excuses for the US. Surely if the Indian government is ineffective, and we feel critical of its attitudes, we must use everything in our power to change US attitudes and policies to suit India? What I see is a philosophical acceptance of the US as "great" "strong" and "wise" and a scathing criticism of India as "weak" and "vacillating". Why can't the US be pressured not to give Pakistan arms aid?

China is a different issue. We currently have no relations with China the the way Indians have with the US. dealing with Chin is a different topic. If Indians claim that relations with the US is so good, why can't they work on the simple issue of stopping arms aid being used against India? The US is yet to deliver some moer F-16s. Can that not be stopped? Can maintenance contracts not be put on hold? Have all the AMRAAMs been supplied? Why spend time whining about fellow Indians and fellow Indian Americans?

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 15 Feb 2011 19:22

@@Shiv ^^: "But excuse me - with so many Indians in the US and many being politically active, would it be so difficult for the Indian American community to press for a cessation of arms aid to Pakistan? Surely F-16s and AMRAAMs are hardly necessary. "

They have on many occasions:
http://www.usinpac.com/index.php?option ... &Itemid=79

The question is has GoI pressed for cessation? All most us have heard is some vague bluster and then GoI goes silent and resumes a composite dialog with Pakistan, sacrificing justice for the 26/11 victims as they have done for so many other victims of other paki terrorist acts in India. Even a single statement like "Any company whose arms are used by Pakistan will not be eligible to sell to the Indian military", would have made a tremendous impact. You'd see Kay Bailey Hutchinson from TX and LM supporter immediately get involved..

The USINPAC and others have been far more vociferous of their own accord than anything I've heard from the GoI. If I were sitting at DoD or DoS, I'd not be too worried about Indian reaction to anything the US gave to the pakis. The worst I'd have to fear is SMK giving Esthonian UN rep's speech and having to listen.

Of course, we can explain GoI's actions as "chankyan" when they don't do the obvious or anything.

saip · Post by **saip** » 15 Feb 2011 20:11

Manu wrote:
ajaytripathi wrote:Rahat freed but faces currency probe

In his defence, Rahat said he was a school dropout and therefore did not understand Indian laws which require passengers flying out of the country to declare currency and travellers’ cheques in excess of $10,000.

http://tribune.com.pk/story/119153/raha ... ncy-probe/
Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Off to Tihar for at least 6 months, I say.

You kafir! Ignorance of man made laws (especially those made by kafirs) is fully excusable. Only the ignorance of divine laws is punishable by death. If you dont believe ask Qadri and Taheer.

jrjrao · Post by **jrjrao** » 15 Feb 2011 20:49

Declan Walsh of the Guardian is stuck in Quetta because of the PIA strike. His report:

Will revolution spread to Pakistan?

arun · Post by **arun** » 15 Feb 2011 20:49

A week ago today, the US was making bellicose statements about cutting off the flow of American aid to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan if the US “Diplomat” “Raymond Davis” who had shot dead a couple of Pakistani’s in Lahore was not released:

Lawmakers: Diplomatic issue threatens Pakistan aid

Today there is report that the US will be providing a USD 3.1 Billion handout to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan in 2012:

Obama proposes $ 3.1 billion for Pakistan spending in 2012 budget

So when was US “diplomat“ “Raymond Davis” released by the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan from judicial remand to enable Pakistan to reap this largesse?