Bharat Rakshak

Anindya wrote:also from the above - these guys can never give up their inherent Pakiness...

shiv wrote:

Any ideas anyone?

shiv wrote:

Anindya wrote:also from the above - these guys can never give up their inherent Pakiness...

Any ideas anyone?

……….. Maulvi Rasheed told Amanullah that his daughter was being “tormented by demons”. He said that he would exorcise the evil spirit for Rs1,500 fee.

Amanullah said that he left his daughter with the maulvi. He said the maulvi said he would “save her soul using his jinns and by reading from the Quran”. “Saving the soul” however meant severe beatings for Musarrat. The maulvi then poured kerosene on her feet and set them alight.

Upon hearing the child’s screams, several neighbours entered Maulvi Rasheed’s house and saw the girl’s feet on fire. ……………..

sadhana wrote:

shiv wrote:

Any ideas anyone?

I think there is no one as certain in his/her 'anti-Pakiness' as an Injun who willingly and in his/her innocence went up the garden path of 'India-Pak equal-equal' and discovered the game of mirrors/untruths at the end of it.

It is like developing antibodies going through this idealism-disillusionment process. So freedom, I say.

partha wrote: I am sure people who read BRF do get influenced each time Paki articles are exposed for Pakiness. But that number is small. When I talk to average Indian (average in the context of Pak knowledge) I realize how little they are informed about Pakistan. They have no clue about oppression of minorities in Pakistan (partly thanks to poor coverage in Indian media) or discriminatory nature of Pak constitution or in general the Pakiness. These Indians are vulnerable to Pak propaganda. They will easily fall for == logic.

An acquaintance of mine once told me that India and Pakistan are equal in most respects. On probing a little, he told me about a Pakistani he recently met and how that Pakistani was talking about both countries being same. That Paki had told this guy that just like IITs they have PITs

When I sent the link to the first page of TSP thread to a friend and suggested he read articles linked in the first post, he out rightly rejected the suggestion saying a forum called "Bharat Rakshak" will definitely be "biased". This I found interesting. There is a lesson here. I feel the forum itself should never be mainstream but the knowledge and ideas from this forum should be used for propaganda against Pakistan which can reach wider audience. "pak watch" blog is a good example. Then there is another famous example which we all know. These initiatives are in the right direction I think.

We should target main stream media. What can we do to infiltrate main stream media with BRF's Pak analysis?

Johann wrote:Hello,

Continuing the discussion.

1) I don't know how many people here have read Feroz Hassan Khan's 'Eating Grass,' a history of the Pakistani strategic weapons programme. Given that he was at the heart of the Pakistan Army policy process on the bomb what he has to say is interesting.

Pakistan's pursuit of nuclear weapons was always driven foremost by the realisation after 1971 that no set of alliances - whether with the US, China or Middle Eastern states were reliable enough to offset Indian conventional advantages at a time of war.

The massive pace of the expansion of the Pakistani nuclear arsenal after 1998 is a reflection of the PA anxiety over the widening conventional force capabilities gap between India and Pakistan.

Given that the PA believes it ensures Pakistan's existence, the PA leadership essentially believes that nuclear deterrence is the only thing that stands between it and being taken to pieces by India. Which means of course they will go to any length to maintain nuclear deterrence.

2) Moving beyond that. The above represents the views of a couple of generations of officers whose main operational experience is either fighting India, or preparing to fight India. Serving in GCC forces or on UN peacekeeping is much more of a matter of making some money.

What happens when we fast forward two decades to a generation of senior officers for whom the bulk of operational experience has been fighting and dying at the hands of the TTP and to a lesser extent Baloch groups? I haven't crunched the numbers, but I'd like to see the point at which PA casualties at the hands of the TTP equal those inflicted by Indian forces, and when they become twice, or even thrice that number.

This is one of the reasons its ideologically important to push the idea that India is behind these groups, because without that belief, the experience of all that fighting and dying is potentially transformative. India stops being the main threat to Pakistan's existence. I'm not sure of the extent to which junior and field grade officers believe that foreign powers are behind the TTP, but it will have profound effects on the direction of the PA, and thus Pakistan as a whole, because if the threat is internal rather than external, and you can't nuke the threat then....things become complicated.

Gus wrote:non-brf may be little informed, but I have seen skepticism of Pakistan has increased among Indians (of course, I can only talk about the ones I know). I know several friends who have come around to the brf pov, even without direct exposure to brf.

akashganga wrote:

Jhujar wrote:Pagla Kanhi Kaa; Only Truth Is Islam which Is actually pakistan

When the truth sets you free
D Asghar ShiAhmadi

Truth about real nature of islam of arabia will set these pakis free.

chetak wrote: ShiAhmadi??

shia + ahmadi ??

Is this guy trolling or what??

putnanja wrote:Top UK diplomat in Sri Lanka intervenes in drug peddling case

The interest shown by a British diplomat in Colombo, in what seems to be a high-profile case of drug trafficking involving suspects from at least three countries, has raised eyebrows here.

On April 3, the Deputy High Commissioner at the British mission in Colombo sought an appointment with the Inspector-General of Police N.K. Illangakoon to discuss a recent heroin seizure. The diplomat had said a suspect arrested in connection with the case was an informant to one of Britain’s officers in India.

When The Hindu asked the British High Commission for a response, officials there declined to comment.
...
...

In South Asia the control of the drug trade has involved the use of the Inter Services Intelligence, Pakistan's notorious spy agency established in 1948 by a serving British army officer, to godfather Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Together, they have kept Afghanistan as the lawless badlands necessary to produce opium; it now supplies over 90 percent of the world's illicit supply.

Where Britain does not maintain operational control of drug trafficking, as in Latin America, it provides money laundering facilities. Last year American authorities slapped a $1.98 billion fine on HSBC, Britain's largest bank, after investigators discovered that it had been laundering billions of dollars of Mexican drug money into the United States.

The fine made not a blip in the stock market value of HSBC shares because investors have known of its primary source of profit since traffickers established the company during Britain's 19th Century ‘Opium Wars’ to force the drug into China.

In terms of state policy, a renewed British-Indian relationship will require Britain to withdraw support from terrorist groups and insurgencies, wind up its involvement in the drug trade, and stop running the global black market.

Raja Ram wrote:shiv has a point. Indian Media is woefully misinformed about Pakistan. At least that is the most charitable explanation that we can give. In my view, the Indian media is not misinformed but are wilfully misinforming Indians about Pakistan.

sadhana wrote:

shiv wrote:

Any ideas anyone?

I think there is no one as certain in his/her 'anti-Pakiness' as an Injun who willingly and in his/her innocence went up the garden path of 'India-Pak equal-equal' and discovered the game of mirrors/untruths at the end of it.

It is like developing antibodies going through this idealism-disillusionment process. So freedom, I say.

btw, I'll guess that Ms. Fair along with other Western 'friends of Pakistan' went through a similar process (of discovering a game of mirrors and illusions) at professional level. They probably thought it a safe bet to hinge their professional credibility on the word of Pak officialdom which they had access to and were chummy with.

The Bin Laden discovery must have left a lot of those 'friends of Pakistan' with lotsa Pak egg on their faces.

kish wrote:Yeah, I agree their disillusionment is palpable. Earlier today Ms.Fair was making fun of paki Air Marshal (retd) Khurshid Anwar Mirza's farticle of how everything wrong with pakisatan is RAW's fault. RAW fully exposed

The recent capture and disclosure by Latifullah Mehsud, (second to Hakimullah Mehsud), had unequivocally confirmed RAW’s involvement along with the Khad with the support of Afghan government in perpetuating terrorist activities in Pakistan.

ramana wrote:I agree we need o bring the new reality that is Pakistan today.
As the Chinese saying goes "Calling things by the right name is beginning of wisdom!"

How about
"Pakjabistan: News and Discussion" Show emphasis on Pakjab and rest are colonies
"Kabilastan:......" Show emphasis on the armed camp nature of TSP
"Pakjabi Sunnistan...." Shows empahsis on Pakjab and Sunni facet of the IROT!

5 of 13 people found the following review helpful
2.0 out of 5 stars One-Dimensional and Flawed, April 6, 2014
By Moorthy Muthuswamy - See all my reviews
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Fighting to the End: The Pakistan Army's Way of War (Kindle Edition)
Pakistan is indeed a standout nuclear-armed nation, as it (through its military) wages a relentless war by all means to expand its territory and impose its will on neighboring nations (especially on non-Muslim India), even at the expense of weakening itself. Why is this the case and secondly, what to do with Pakistan?

This book seemingly positions itself into answering these questions of immense local and international security relevance. However, as I explain below owing to a one-dimensional and deeply-flawed analysis, this book has failed in its primary purpose. I am still giving it a two-star rating because the book has some useful new insights and is a good source of reference material.

Simply put, Pakistan is driven by a sense of injustice that goes far beyond its loss of Kashmir to India. Moreover, it sees itself as an all-conquering Islamic power - a wannabe along the lines of the Muslim armies in the aftermath of Muhammad's reign. Let me elaborate. The Muslim elite of South Asia, despite ruling Pakistan and Bangladesh have long felt a sense of injustice because they no longer rule Hindu-majority India. The following statements encapsulate this point. In a 2008 Time magazine interview, Tarik Jan of the Institute of Policy Studies (Islamabad) stated: "We [Muslims] were the legal rulers of India, and in 1857 the British took that away from us. In 1947 they should have given that back to the Muslims." In 2006, one of India's most powerful clerics, Shahi Imam Bukhari noted: "We were rulers here [in India] 800 years. By God willing, we shall return to power here once again."

The elite find it convenient to ignore the fine detail that the Muslim rule in India around 1850 was at its nadir and that Hindu/Sikh kingdoms were resurgent. Nonetheless, in its quest for what it perceives as an injustice, Pakistan is willing to endure hardships as a cost toward attaining its objectives. In this sense, Pakistan's behavior is not unusual.

Most disappointingly, the author has pointed out only Pakistan's failures in its quest for defeating India in the battle field and to retard India's rise. But she has completely overlooked the point that, aided by the likes of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan has made spectacular inroads into indoctrinating and radicalizing India's Muslim minorities into believing in its revisionist cause. This is very important, because Indian Muslims, who were 10% of the population in 1947, now constitute around 25% of the Indian children under the age of five. In 2008, India's National Security Advisor admitted that there are at least 800 terror cells operating, presumably in India's Muslim communities, supported by the likes of Pakistan. In 2006, Indian Intelligence voiced concerns that India's largest state Uttar Pradesh had become a big base for Pakistan-based Islamic terror group Lashkar-e-Taiba. Indeed, the current trends in Indian Muslim population growth, their extent of radicalization and India's dismal record in rolling back the escalating Islamist siege gives the Pakistani elite the hope of reversing the injustice.

Hence, I am not surprised that the Pakistani military elites are steadfastly staying the course on this all-out jihad, because in their mind, even though they have lost a few tactical battles with India, they could eventually win the civilizational one (and correct the "injustice"), by destroying and gaining control of India for Islam, through proxies. In 2013, a retired high level military official called Hamid Gul said this: "...a lot of people here who are waiting for the conquest of India, it will be our privilege to take part in this war." Sadly, this angle is entirely missing from the book.

The above discussion tells us that it is of utmost importance to stop and roll back radicalization of India's Muslim minorities. And this ought to be one way of putting a real damper on Pakistan's revisionist tendencies. However, in the book, the author offers no ideas on how external entities might help mitigate Pakistan's revisionist tendencies.

Christine Fair, despite again-and-again identifying ideological (Islamic) underpinnings of Pakistani military's outlook, failed to analyze the clerical role in influencing it. The ideological underpinnings necessitate that the military leadership look up to leading clerics for vision and guidance. Hence, Pakistan' military's ability to sustain its revisionist outlook is possible only if it aligns with that of the clerical cadre. For instance, easily the most transformative cleric of Pakistan, Abul Maududi was a strong proponent of Islamic conquest - that of invoking armed jihad to expand Pakistan's frontiers. In fact, the clerics played a leading role in the initial conquest of Pakistan-based infidels, by conquering Hindus/Sikhs and their properties for Islam, when over 20% Hindu/Sikh population in Pakistan dropped to single digits with most either killed, forcibly converted or driven to India. The leaders of state-sponsored jihadist groups in Pakistan are tellingly, clerics, in addition to retired military officials. This informs us unequivocally that, contrary to the author's claims, the dominant revisionist power in Pakistan is not just its military but the military-cleric combo. Such a delineation calls for a different book, unfortunately.

Indeed, the accolade this flawed book has received from U.S.-based specialists on Pakistan goes a long way toward explaining why the United States has gotten to be so wrong and so long on Pakistan.

http://www.amazon.com/Fighting-End-The- ... ewpoints=1

shiv wrote:I have yet another view on the issue. On BRF as long as we treat Pakistan as an equal nation we are only promoting that viewpoint. We need to treat Pakistan as it is - like a failed, lawless, splintered province of India that matters very little other than as a source of terrorism. Right now we still refer to Pakistan as a country - an independent sovereign state - an entity worthy of being called a rival

Question is: do we believe that? if we do, fine. If not, why are we doing this?

I am just wondering if we can start an entirely new style of thread for Pakistan - finally putting to an end this particular name for a thread. IOW a Paki thread with a new name and new subversive propaganda purpose. Yes we call it "Terrorist state of Pakistan" but that name came because we (at that time) wanted terrorism to be associated with Pakistan. That has happened now. I think it is hight time we started highlighting Pakistan as a splintered sunni Punjabistan fighting Pashtun and Baluchis or some suitable variant reflective of Pakistani reality.

KLNMurthy wrote:

shiv wrote:I have yet another view on the issue. On BRF as long as we treat Pakistan as an equal nation we are only promoting that viewpoint. We need to treat Pakistan as it is - like a failed, lawless, splintered province of India that matters very little other than as a source of terrorism. Right now we still refer to Pakistan as a country - an independent sovereign state - an entity worthy of being called a rival

Question is: do we believe that? if we do, fine. If not, why are we doing this?

I am just wondering if we can start an entirely new style of thread for Pakistan - finally putting to an end this particular name for a thread. IOW a Paki thread with a new name and new subversive propaganda purpose. Yes we call it "Terrorist state of Pakistan" but that name came because we (at that time) wanted terrorism to be associated with Pakistan. That has happened now. I think it is hight time we started highlighting Pakistan as a splintered sunni Punjabistan fighting Pashtun and Baluchis or some suitable variant reflective of Pakistani reality.

I know what you mean, but still, whenever someone says Pakistan is in some sense a "province of India" I get a conniption and have to lie down with eau de cologne soaked cloth on my forehead for some time.

The biggest danger for India (aside from the very physical one of nuclear destruction) from Pakistan is the dream to "erase" partition, either out of a sentimental "brothers-reunited" feeling, or out of its obverse, a triumphalist urge to "prove" that the Two Nation Theory is wrong, and "we" have therefore "won".

If we know what's good for India, we should be straining every sinew to keep Pakistan separate.

LokeshC wrote:If I were to name Bakistan as per my understanding:
"Pakistan: A frontier land of warring tribes that exports terror"OR
"Pakistan: a loosely held land of warring tribes that exports terror"And I mean that the TSPA, Govt of Bakistan, TTP, Shias, Sunnis are all warring against each other. They are following their path to 7th century by being caravan raiders just like the grand pbuh was.

Prasad wrote:I wonder what she commented in reply to his review. It has been deleted since.

Anujan wrote:I suggest something like "News & Analysis of Pakistan - A Volatile mix of religion, violence, exploitation and terror"

anupmisra wrote:

ramana wrote:I agree we need o bring the new reality that is Pakistan today.
As the Chinese saying goes "Calling things by the right name is beginning of wisdom!"

How about
"Pakjabistan: News and Discussion" Show emphasis on Pakjab and rest are colonies
"Kabilastan:......" Show emphasis on the armed camp nature of TSP
"Pakjabi Sunnistan...." Shows empahsis on Pakjab and Sunni facet of the IROT!

How about "Tales from ExKafiristan".