Kufr! This may be a structural problem to you. For us bakis, it's an opportunity to print more money and pay off the debt. Problem solved. That's how our cheeni hornier than honey birathers did it.Peregrine wrote:Pakistan's Debt and Liabilities Profile
Pakistan's Total Debt and Liabilities=====: Pak Rs. 22,459.0 Billions
Pakistan’s GDP Financial Year 2015-2016 : Pak Rs. 29,597.9 Billions
Debt & Liabilities Percentage of Pak G D P : 75.88%
Either it is the legacy of British Raj to use flowery language and indirect references or the language of diplomats. The "PM Modi" is different from "pre-2014 Modi"; the "PM Modi" will be advised by diplomats and babus.Gus wrote:CRamS wrote:What does ModiJi gain or not gain by not mentioning TSP by name? Why this oblique reference? One Paki commentator on newsX was tongue-n-cheek when she said ModiJi was actually referring to India.
at least we have stopped the nonsense of 'non state actors' and openly calling 'state sponsored terrorism'.CRamS wrote:What does ModiJi gain or not gain by not mentioning TSP by name? Why this oblique reference? One Paki commentator on newsX was tongue-n-cheek when she said ModiJi was actually referring to India
Pakis solved the puzzle set by Modi in G20 summit for the rest of the world!shiv wrote:Modi naming Pakistan during the G20 summit would have been better because now the whole world will be racked by doubt wondering which South Asian country is the source of terror in the world. Capitals across the world will be abuzz with rumours, "Could Modi have been referring to Sir Lanka? Or Myanmar? No Bangladesh. Bhutan perhaps? Or India itself? " This could have been avoided by naming Pakistan - a country whose name rarely comes up in the intelligence agencies of the world when it comes to terror.
G-20 Summit: Modi singles out Pakistan for 'spreading terror' in region
Quintessential chor ki daadhi mein tinka.partha wrote:Pakis solved the puzzle set by Modi in G20 summit for the rest of the world!
http://tribune.com.pk/story/1176476/one ... -pakistan/G-20 Summit: Modi singles out Pakistan for 'spreading terror' in region
Speaking in the Lok Sabha on April 21, 2003, about his just-concluded visit to Jammu and Kashmir, Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee spelt out his perspective on the way to deal with the complex issues concerning the State. He spoke of major economic projects in areas such as the development of road and rail infrastructure and promoting employment for the youth.
Referring to relations with Pakistan he said: “We have extended our hand of friendship to Pakistan. Let us see how Pakistan responds. Stopping cross-border infiltration and destruction of terrorist infrastructure can open the door for talks. Talks can take place on all issues including Jammu and Kashmir.” He asserted: “The gun can solve no problems. Issues can be guided by the three principles of insaniyat (humanism), jamhooriyat (democracy) and kashmiriyat (Kashmir’s legacy of amity).”
Paying the price
Vajpayee’s words came after the military face-off with Pakistan following the (December 2001) attack on Parliament had ended, in October 2002. Back channel talks with Pakistan were under way, resulting in a ceasefire across the Line of Control in November 2003. In January 2004, India agreed to resume dialogue with Pakistan, following an assurance from President Pervez Musharraf that “territory under Pakistan’s control” would not be used for terrorism against India. Dialogue was resumed only after this categorical assurance.
While Pakistan broadly abided by this assurance as long as Musharraf was president, terrorism resumed in 2008, with an attack on our embassy in Kabul, followed by the 26/11 strike (in Mumbai). We ignored Vajpayee’s preconditions for dialogue and paid a heavy price. We have now asserted that dialogue with Pakistan and terrorism cannot proceed side by side. Efforts are under way for a “dialogue” with “Kashmiris”.
But this dialogue has to be inclusive. It is not meant just to accommodate the “aspirations” of the people of the Kashmir Valley, who constitute some 52 per cent of the population, while residing in around 16 per cent of the territory of J&K. Those representing the people of Jammu, Kargil and Ladakh, including from communities such as the Gujjars and Bakarwals, have to be included in any comprehensive dialogue. While the security situation has to be managed with firmness, it is time to frankly state that the essence of kashmiriyat is tolerance and respect for pluralism. Those calling for Nizam-e-Mustafa while hiding behind stone-pelting children and lobbing grenades at security forces, are not believers in kashmiriyat. They are cowards and have to be dealt with accordingly.
Regional cooperation
Should New Delhi talk to the separatist Hurriyat Conference? It has to be remembered that terrorists linked to the ISI, assassinated the two tallest leaders in the Hurriyat — Mirwaiz Muhammad Farooq and Abdul Ghani Lone. Those now in the Hurriyat are either Islamist extremists such as Syed Ali Shah Geelani, who is ideologically Pakistani, or those like Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, who is not likely to oppose Pakistani fiats.
In any case, the Hurriyat leaders are known to be in “continuous touch” with security agencies on both sides of the Line of Control. While the security situation has to be managed judiciously but firmly, it is also time to assert that the essence of kashmiriyat is respect for pluralism and diversity. It is imperative to continue efforts to develop a broad consensus between major political parties in both New Delhi and Srinagar, on measures to move ahead.
With Pakistan launching a worldwide campaign against India, the time has also come to turn the screws diplomatically on Pakistan, which has been the main stumbling block in promoting cooperation in South Asia, on issues of connectivity, economic integration and terrorism. India has been bypassing Pakistani objections by working with its eastern Saarc neighbours, Nepal, Bhutan and Bangladesh, to promote road and rail connectivity, and even energy corridors, by interlinking energy grids.
We should work with these neighbours to promote a sub-regional economic union excluding Pakistan, given its disinclination to abide by the provisions of the Saarc Free Trade Agreement in its trade with India. Bangladesh has expressed interest in moving towards an economic union, while lamenting Pakistan’s negativism on issues of regional integration which Saarc heads of government agreed to at the Kathmandu summit in 2003.
Pakistan’s negativism was also evident in its categorical rejection of India’s offer of orbiting a Saarc satellite for the benefit of all Saarc countries. India is going ahead with this proposal. Bangladesh and Afghanistan downgraded their presence at recent meetings of Saarc home and finance ministers in Islamabad. India joined Bangladesh and Afghanistan, downgrading its participation at the August meeting of Saarc finance ministers. Pakistan is now regarded as a state sponsor of terrorism by three Saarc countries — Bangladesh, India and Afghanistan. It would be appropriate if the three countries held close consultations on issues such as participation at the highest level in the Islamabad Saarc summit. What better way to globally expose Pakistan as a state sponsor of terrorism?
The Durand Line
We should, meanwhile, continue functional cooperation across the entire spectrum of Saarc activities, by maintaining contacts at the official level while participating selectively in ministerial meetings as long as Pakistan holds the chairmanship of Saarc. There are other forums such as Bimstec which should be utilised more vigorously for strengthening South Asian economic cooperation, given Pakistan’s role as a spoiler in Saarc.
The time has also now come for India to review its unquestioning acceptance of the Durand Line, imposed on Afghanistan by an expansionist British Empire in 1893. No Afghan ruler, including Mullah Omar, has accepted the Durand Line as the international border with Pakistan.
Pashtuns have traditionally held that their homeland extends to Attock, on the banks of the Indus. There have recently been clashes along the Durand Line when Afghans resisted Pakistani moves to give it the trappings of an international border.
Is any national interest served by continuing to show the Durand Line as the international border between Afghanistan and Pakistan in India’s official maps? Is it not time to internationally acknowledge that India regards the Durand Line as a disputed border? We would be respecting the memory of one of our greatest freedom fighters, Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan, by doing so.
The writer is a former High Commissioner to Pakistan
In a blunt message, the US on Thursday told Pakistan it cannot "pick and choose" the terrorist groups it goes after and has to target militants who seek to harm its neighbours by taking refuge on its territory.
The US also rejected 2008 Mumbai attack mastermind Hafiz Saeed's remarks that America and India+ have joined hands against the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor+ , which runs through Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) and the recent US-India defence logistics+ agreement is anti-Muslim+ .
"... I would dismiss it (Saeed's comments) outright," deputy spokesperson Mark Toner said in his daily press briefing.
"...we made it very clear that Pakistan can't pick and choose which terrorist groups it goes after and it has to go after those groups that seek to do harm to its neighbours and may seek refuge on Pakistani soil," he said.
Toner said the US has a strong bilateral relationship with Pakistan, "but one that is premised on counterterrorism cooperation and as - as part of that conversation, or that dialogue and that cooperation that we have on counterterrorism issues."
The US earlier said it is in constant "conversation" with the Pakistani leadership on the threats posed by terror organisations like the Haqqani network and LeT operating in the region.
The dreaded Haqqani network, which is blamed for several deadly attacks against Indian interests in Afghanistan including the 2008 bombing of the Indian mission in Kabul that killed 58 people, has also carried out a number of kidnappings and attacks against US interests in Afghanistan, the Afghan government and other civilian targets.
US defence secretary Ashton Carter had refused to give the necessary Congressional certification to Pakistan and had blocked military aid worth $300 million to Islamabad for not taking sufficient action against the Haqqani network.
Using Chuck Yeager's logic ... Chuck Yeager LOST because his plane was bombed and he couldn't do a darn thing about it!arun wrote:X Posted from the “India-US relations: News and Discussions III” thread.
An example of the closeness between the US Armed Forces and the Punjabi Dominated Military of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and why India needs to be circumspect in dealings with the US.
Journalist Shekhar Gupta’s question if the IAF shot up his plane at Chaklala AFB during the 1971 war gets US Air Force Brigadier Chuck Yeager to claim that the Islamic Republic of “Pakistan won” 1971:
https://twitter.com/GenChuckYeager/stat ... 4445783040
The start of the exchange:
https://twitter.com/GenChuckYeager/stat ... 2632882176
It carries on beyond the 2 links with others coming in.
In Charlie Sheen's language, Chuck Yeager is a winner!Using Chuck Yeager's logic ... Chuck Yeager LOST because his plane was bombed and he couldn't do a darn thing about it!
ISLAMABAD: The Jordan government has refused to purchase wheat from Pakistan, citing “substandard quality issues” as the reason to decline the offer.Pakistan has surplus stocks of wheat and is looking at potential markets to sell the commodity to.Officer in the federal secretariat shared that earlier this year the Jordanian government had expressed its willingness to purchase 500,000 tons wheat from Pakistan and the demand was put forward to the provincial governments.Ministry that set up $35b export target says it is no longer possible
Since then many correspondences have continued between the provincial authorities and the Jordanian government including rounds of negotiations held to ship Pakistani wheat to Jordan.He said that despite the refusal, Jordan is interested in purchasing wheat from Punjab on the condition that they improve the standard and quality of the product.“Stiff competition, due to surplus wheat available in the international market, has narrowed options for our grain and this is the reason that different countries either reject the high price or make different demands,” the officer added.“We had pinned hopes to create sufficient space after exporting wheat to Jordan,” said the officer.“They want wheat without dust and other ingredients. We purchase wheat from farmers in such a condition and it is not possible for the government to ensure segregated grains for export,” said Lodhi.
In an attempt to get rid of the surplus wheat the federal government had suggested that Arab countries purchase wheat in return of oil but the proposal went unheard.
For academics who thought G20 was all about coordinating global economic agendas and policies, the notion was shattered by the visuals of US President Barack Obama exiting from the underbelly of Air Force One through a small set of metal stairs sans the red carpet. The host nation had its dredger and barges positioned in the South China Sea; North Korea provided the ballistics and Pakistan chimed in with its long term defence pact with China to complete the backdrop. It was in this setting that Prime Minster Narendra Modi decided to ‘fire-bomb’ Pakistan and its sponsors.
The question that is being asked is why at G20? It is simple- it was the largest gathering of Pakistan’s past and present sponsors, including by those who had designated Pakistan as a ‘frontline’ state in fight against terrorism, even as it continued, with impunity, to use terror as an instrument of state policy regionally and globally. These states even went to the extent of designating Pakistan as a ‘frontline state’ in the war on narcotics to ensure it continued to receive external financial, military aid and tariff-free exports. What was even worse was that all of this was happening when Pakistani proxies continued to kill western soldiers in Afghanistan; people belonging to those very countries from where Pakistan was receiving financial, and even moral, succour.
Another reason G20 was the right forum because present in Hangzhou were members who were de-fanging the few meaningful outcomes such multilateral forums have produced, such as the FATF or the Financial Action Task Force. Controlling terror financing is one the few comparatively effective measures against terrorism and FATF did and was having an effect on Pakistan..
There was also this message from India to some of the members of this forum who would have found India’s diplomatic outreach to Pakistan deficient and asked India to walk the extra mile. Now it was India’s turn to ask them to ‘do more.’
On the policy front Modi has possibly indicated India’s approach to the China-Pakistan axis. First, to highlight to China and the world the duplicity of China’s ‘stated’ approach (as distinct from some western countries who do not bother with this pretence) on sovereignty, equitable rule-based global order and terrorism. Second is to highlight at every forum every misdemeanour of Pakistan and make it uncomfortable for China to own up its association and partnership with a country responsible for destabilising its neighbourhood and sponsoring terrorism elsewhere. This may not make a dent with some nations but will definitely strike a chord with countries directly affected by Pakistan’s actions – in South Asia, India’s neighbourhood.
Lastly, as Kashmir continues to be roiled amongst other reasons, due to Pakistani interference, Modi has announced a hardening of India’s policy on Pakistan and its role in the resolution of issues plaguing the Kashmir valley. It will now take Pakistan appreciable political capital to effect a turnaround in Modi’s approach to India-Pakistan relations.
? Pity that while this Rahul guy is at least more nationalistic than other filth on DDM, but he is too much of a lightweight to challenge savvy used car salesmen like Frank Wisner.Yawn! Indian media should stop publishing reports of US asking Pakistan to go after all terror groups. I have lost count of such reports. US keeps issuing such statements every now and then but I am not sure why because it has zero effect on Pakistan. Indian media though faithfully publishes these statements as if it's of great significance.SSridhar wrote:Pakistan can't 'pick and choose' terror groups to go after: US - PTI
Winning without winning..just like Bakis and Everton Football Club.venug wrote:In Charlie Sheen's language, Chuck Yeager is a winner!
India continued to keep up the pressure on Pakistan over its support for terrorism on Friday. Speaking at a conference organized by a US government-funded organization, Foreign Secretary S Jaishankar shot down Islamabad's usual 'non-state actor' defence for terror attacks carried out from its soil.
"At some stage the differentiation is not gone out on the ground. There is a connect between state actors and non-state actors. Which is why we use the word 'sponsored'. The state cannot escape responsibility by saying it's non-state," Jaishankar said.
"We have always maintained the view that acting against some groups is not a justification for giving a free pass, leave alone active support, for other groups. You can't have a segmented, differentiated fight against terrorism+ ," he added.
This was the third time in a week that India and the US have spoken in one voice on the issue of terrorism. Prime Minister Narendra Modi had made statements on this during his visits to the G20 Summit in China and the ASEAN Summit in Laos.
Each time, India has stressed without naming Pakistan that there is only one country in South Asia that is a fountainhead of terrorism+ in the region.
Jaishnakar's remarks were part of his speech titled 'India's Diplomatic Initiatives' at the 2016 International Media Conference organized by the US government-funded East-West Centre. His was the first keynote address of the conference.
Jaishankar also used the platform to bring China into the terrorism debate, saying, "There is an expectation in India that China would be appreciative of India's interests, especially when they aren't in conflict with China. Combating terrorism is one such area. Sanctioning of well-known terrorist leaders and organizations shouldn't emerge as an issue of difference," said Jaishankar said, referring to China's blocking, presumably at Pakistan's behest, India's United Nations bid to designated Jaish-e-Mohammad chief Masood Azhar+ a terrorist.
Ironically, China has for decades had trouble with terrorism networks and camps in Pakistan that it believes have been used to train separatists fighting in the restive Xinjiang region. Its was one of these groups that has been linked to the recent attack on the Chinese embassy in Kyrgyzstan+ 's capital of Bishkek.
He also called out China for its opposition to India's bid at becoming more integrated with global governance, especially its bid for membership to the Nuclear Suppliers' Group (NSG) and its support for free access to Sea Lanes of Communication in the South China Sea.
in agriculture and food security, medical and allied health sciences, energy, water, climate change, advanced digital technology among others
Meanwhile,The minister said that 10,000 PhDs educated in the best US would give spectacular results
The Higher Education Commission (HEC) is finding it increasingly difficult to lure back scholars who go abroad to complete their MPhil and PhD studies.
Around 177 MPhil and PhD scholars who availed the Higher Education Commission’s scholarships abroad have failed to complete their education, while at least 110 others did not return to Pakistan and managed to settle in their respective countries.
HEC HRD member Ghulam Raza Bhatti said over 300 to 400 cases are being pursued in courts
Serious questions have been raised by critics over the HEC yardstick for selecting and finalising students for overseas scholarship programmes. It appears that the procedure does not take into account several things, including courses offered and facilities available in the intended institutions abroad.
AoA“So such kind of failure is possible as completion of PhD is not child’s play”
“This is a landmark discovery for Pakistan as mental retardation is comparatively high in the country owing to cousin marriages,” said SZABMU Vice-Chancellor Dr Javed Akram, who was the principal investigator from Pakistan.
Quotable quote from aboveMollick.R wrote:Hope this belongs to here......
http://tribune.com.pk/story/1177701/men ... new-genes/
“This is a landmark discovery for Pakistan as mental retardation is comparatively high in the country owing to cousin marriages,” said SZABMU Vice-Chancellor Dr Javed Akram, who was the principal investigator from Pakistan.
Aur Karo cousin se shadi
So from birth itself 7.3% of Pakis are retarded !The elevated level of endogamy in Pakistan has led to increased prevalence of genetic disorders, including autosomal recessive intellectual disability (ARID) with an average of 1.1 cases of severe ID and 6.2 cases of mild ID per 100 live births .
ISLAMABAD: Minister for Planning, Development and Reforms Ahsan Iqbal claimed earlier this week that the government was planning to launch '5th Generation' cellular services "soon" for faster connectivity.
Shudhh Desi Stout !Mollick.R wrote:OT
@Peregrine Saar,
always love & envy your trademark signature.
Ground work for revolt in all parts of Pakiland except Pakjab is done now. KP is expected to rise within a year before Sindh starts it's agitation. Pakjab is long due for biggest IED Mubarak of decade with glad tiding from Jannat.
Noted historian Ramchandra Guha, in an exclusive interview with Karan Thapar, talked about what is nationalism and said "To be an Indian you don't have to speak Hindi, you don't have to be Hindu and you don't have to hate Pakistan".