Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 15 Jan 2012

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 16 Feb 2012 10:06

If US withdraws from the sub-continent, it will degrade Pakis conventional war fighting capacity. In any case, I don't think Pakis intend to fight a conventional war with us. They don't need Christian money/technology to plan/execute attacks like 26/11. And Paki hatred for us is independent of all other factors (including American/European hatred for Indians). Paki tax receipts are sufficient to fund bomb blasts.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Feb 2012 10:07

abhishek_sharma wrote:Surely, Pakis were more responsible than US for 26/11?

In what way? The US armed Pakistan against India in the 50s and 60s; openly supported Pakistan in 1971; shut its mouth when Pakistan got nuclear weapons; Reagan feted "freedom fighters" in Kashmir and Afghanistan and now you say in 2012 that Pakistan was "more" responsible fro 26/11? What exactly makes you want to clear the US's name in this one case?

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 16 Feb 2012 10:09

I just got an idea: The forum already has a BENIS thread. Why not start a 'superior white christian west' thread that tells the story from the perspective of the 'superior white christian westerners' just as BENIS tells the story from the perspective of pakis?

I am not saying that most common westerners have racist ideas of being 'superior white christian west'. But, one can see these ideas being subtly played out in the analysis of the 'experts' especially when they talk about India. One can see these ideas in media projections. One can even see these ideas in official reactions of countries.

So, why not start a thread to reflect this? Humor can be powerful for this purpose.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 16 Feb 2012 10:11

Because the ideology behind 26/11 was there before US entered the sub-continent in 1950s. And Pakis had enough weapons/money to plan/execute an event like 26/11 (without any US aid).

member_19686 · Post by **member_19686** » 16 Feb 2012 10:17

Anyone knowing the basics about 1857 would know that the prime group who set off the rebellion and were its backers were Purbiya-s (leadership being provided by the Maratha-s) and that "Bengal Army" was a bit of a misnomer because most of the actual recruits had little to do with present day Bengal.

So whatever bji was saying was right.

Many Hindus of those times saw Islam for the monstrosity it was including many in the Bhadralok class and thought of the British as better than Muslims.

Many other Hindu groups in 1857 either stayed away or sided with the British. In this glorious chapter of Hindu-Muslim "unity" being peddled, what is hidden is the normal course of raping, killing etc indulged in by the Muslims against the Hindus even as the rebellion was ongoing.

Documented here:

While in avadh the uprising took the form of what could perhaps be called a people’s movement[16], Hindu-Muslim tensions nonetheless played their part. Raja Man Singh appealed to thakurs and talukdars not to join the mussalmaan-s since the uprising, if successful, would only end up putting power into their hands. He invoked Muslim destruction of Hindu temples, the murderous massacres of entire populations, rape of women and putting them in harems as sexual slaves, religious taxation on Hindus, forcible conversions, etc. to support his appeal.[17][18]. He also raised the matter of Islamic religious leaders Ghulam Husain and Amir Ali attempting to destroy the hanumAn-garhi temple in avadh not too long ago.[19]. Ahmadullah Shah, an Islamic religious leader openly displayed religious bigotry against Hindus in avadh...

http://www.tattvaanveshanam.org/2011/06 ... dence-1857

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 16 Feb 2012 10:35

To me it would be interesting to understand the dynamics involved in the formation of the Deobandi school or the seed source of the jihadi fistula.
Deobandi movement/school was formed in 1866 after Brutes put down the 1857 rebellion with heavy hand. Whether the Deobandi movement formed as a response to Brutes by the islam pasand people nostalgic of lost Mughal empire and other muslim kingdoms or was there generous helping hand by Brutes towards that.
Motivation being to permanently divide Hs and Ms in the subcontinent and preventing such strong and surprising rebellions in future.
It would be interesting also to know if Deobandi folks put up any meaningful opposition to Brutes prior to Independence. If they have not put up any resistance how was their setting up the movement measured successful? Or was it just to create division and taking care of Brute interest in the name of religion?
This would be interesting from pisko perspective too.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 16 Feb 2012 10:39

Actually some would argue that US is more responsible than Pakis for 26/11. The argument would look like:

1. Pakis executed 26/11 because they knew there would be no consequences due to nuclear weapons. (Whether this is correct/false is a different question.)
2. US played an important role in Paki acquisition of nuclear weapons.
3. Without American help, Pakis would not be able to get nuclear weapons.

I am sure many people would disagree with these assessments. I too have doubts.

Having said that, Paki jehad had started even when they had no nuclear weapons. So I am confused onlee.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 16 Feb 2012 10:54

Well, if I may, what Shiv's POV means is that if you take USA out of equation between India and Pakistan, Pakistan "reaches" its true level - that of a third world country which does not have finances to manage and sustain the offensive power that it has - the tanzeems not-withstanding. This is how I see it - USA+Pakistan=India in the subcontinent. Especially, in the armed forces context. You take USA out of equation and India=10XPakistan. There won't be F-16s and M-109s and the money to buy and modernize anything else.

A Pakistan in above situation has that much lesser manuevering space than it has today. China will go only that much further and not more.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 16 Feb 2012 10:57

Well, I don't think anyone would argue against that POV. (except some MUTUs).

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 16 Feb 2012 10:57

abhishek_sharma wrote:Actually some would argue that US is more responsible than Pakis for 26/11. The argument would look like:

1. Pakis executed 26/11 because they knew there would be no consequences due to nuclear weapons. (Whether this is correct/false is a different question.)
2. US played an important role in Paki acquisition of nuclear weapons.
3. Without American help, Pakis would not be able to get nuclear weapons.

I am sure many people would disagree with these assessments. I too have doubts.

Having said that, Paki jehad had started even when they had no nuclear weapons. So I am confused onlee.

Saar,
this whole line of thinking is a trap. Both the entities are evil, as far as Hindus are concerned. There is no point in trying to decide who is bigger evil. Because, both of them have screwed, can screw and will screw given a chance. The only thing that stops from going all out is the circumstance. So, one should not fall into this line of thinking.

The better line of thinking would be: who can we handle right now? We know both are bad guys and ultimately have to be taken out. But, who is immediately vulnerable? The simple answer is paki. Paki can be taken out IF and WHEN US stops supporting and funding it. So, the immediate goal must be to get US to stop funding and supporting Paki. IMHO, US and Paki have gone against each other from the time US physically came to sub-continent. So, I welcome US' physical presence in sub-continent. Otherwise, earlier, US was physically detached from the place and faced no consequence of their support to paki. Now, with their physical presence, that is not the case(which is good for us).

Once, the Pakis lose the support of US, then they can be taken out. Then, we would be in a position to force US out of the region. After that, when the region is with us, we can directly challenge the US at global level.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 16 Feb 2012 11:10

Meanwhile, a sixer by guru dronacharya in Mir Ali, Pukistan.

ArmenT · Post by **ArmenT** » 16 Feb 2012 11:55

^^^
US drone strike 'kills at least five' in Pakistan

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 16 Feb 2012 12:10

^^^U.S. drone strike kills 6 people in Pakistan

Roperia · Post by **Roperia** » 16 Feb 2012 17:31

Pak-jabis are feeling the heat in Balochistan. The Balochs are using every platform (national/international) to convey that they never wanted to be and do not want to be part of Pakistan. The Balochs are convinced that the Punjabi Army is exploiting the resources of their province and killing their brethren.

Watch from 25 minutes, the pak-jabi gets really angry at the fellow from Bugti tribe and starts abusing him on live TV when the latter calls a spade a spade.

Pak-jabi is so infuriated that he threatens to kill the fellow from Bugti tribe.

Front Line - 15th February 2012

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 16 Feb 2012 17:55

The reference says that unlike the Bombay and madras armies, the east India compay's Bengal army was mostly comprised of locals.

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 16 Feb 2012 17:57

Foreign investment falls by 66 per cent

Foreign private investment in Pakistan fell by 66 per cent in the first seven months of the current fiscal year, raising alarms in the wake of rising current account deficit and shrinking foreign exchange reserves.

foreign private investment fell to $445 million during July-January against $1.306 billion during the corresponding period of last year

The risks to external position have also increased due to worsening terms of trade, fragile global economic conditions and continued paucity of financial inflows.

The limited focus of the remaining FDI is also concerning.

What limited focus? Which sector(s) is the $445M being invested in? And, more importantly,

About $1.1 billion are scheduled to be repaid to the IMF in the second half of the current fiscal year.

What was that? You asked "what about the taller then the tallest mountain...sweeter than honey friend?"

Chine improved its investment to $46.4 million from last year’s investment of just $5.8 million.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Feb 2012 19:10

The US is unlikely to leave the region very soon (IMO)

Under the circumstances what I would like to see is a wide dissemination in Pakistan of the info of how Britain boasted of having toppled the Islamic empire of India and later realised that Muslims would be useful fools in the Great game so they praised them as "martial" and got them Pakistan and the great powers are now using Pakistan to fight Muslims. The White Christian Supremacy factor that comes through in many British works of the day and how they screwed the brainless mussalmans and took them for a royal ride and kept Pakistan as a beggar, vassal state should be seen at least by the 0.001% of Pakistanis who are literate.

It would be great to see the US sitting right inside Pakistan with the Pakis seething with anger and totally impotent to do anything about the US. The slave army of Pakistan should be seen serving US interests. the current ongoing drone attacks are a clear indication of Pakistani army complicity with the US or incompetence.

Now Pakis need to learn the true history of how they have been "had" by the White Christian West. If Pakistanis have any honor, the US should be kicked out, but they will not be able to do that because they will become weak beggars when the US leaves. Pakis too need to learn their history.

member_19686 · Post by **member_19686** » 16 Feb 2012 19:27

A_Gupta wrote:The reference says that unlike the Bombay and madras armies, the east India compay's Bengal army was mostly comprised of locals.

Because "Bengal" of those days was not the Bengal of today and included in it Orissa and Bihar.

In any case you seem to have missed what your own link says:

The real creation of the Bengal army was after Plassey when Warren Hastings wished to create a standing army of natives that would serve as a safe guard against hostile kingdoms and create a support base for the Company. To this end his Orientalism, which was led by the notion of a martial race of Brahmins and Rajputs, influenced the structure and composition of this army. The aim was to create a high-caste army who would not only be loyal to the Company due to its homogenous nature but also because it had political significance by making the Company’s rule legitimate. This model of a homogenous army based on kin and clan allegiances was adopted by the Company from Cheyt Singh who had used this system to create a strong army which opposed the Company with its allies for a while. In trying to create an army that would serve the purposes of the Company and respect what was perceived to be the ‘natural order of things’ in India recruiting centres were set up in the wheat growing areas to the west of Bengal. This was due to strict Company policy of only recruiting natives over the height of 5’6” and of good physical build. This followed the traditional British policies of recruiting highlanders from Scotland as clan/kin ties combined with the fact that it strategically dislocates and incorporates a potential threat...

The other major benefit that locals derived from joining the Company was that it consolidated their high-caste position. This was particularly the case with the Rajputs and the Bhumihar Brahmins who had their high-caste status questioned by other castes for going into agriculture. By enlisting in the army or having one of their sons in the army the family and the caste could consolidate their high-caste status. This meant that as the Company was using the high-caste stock of its native army to legitimise itself to the people of India.

http://www.the-eastindiacompany.org/EIC_Army.html

Since when did Bengal proper have tons of Rajputs and Bhumihar Brahmins?

Why don't you go back and read the primary sources, see how many Bengali sepoy names you can find there in the Awadh chronicles or Delhi chronicles.

Check for example where Mangal Pandey comes from.

The groups prominently mentioned are Purbiya's and Tilanga's (Hindu ryots from Telangana recruited as cavalrymen and diverted to postings up North).

Multatuli · Post by **Multatuli** » 16 Feb 2012 19:58

Shiv wrote:

In what way? The US armed Pakistan against India in the 50s and 60s; openly supported Pakistan in 1971; shut its mouth when Pakistan got nuclear weapons;

Actually the US did more then shut it's mouth when Pakistan acquired nuclear weapons technology. It's well known that the Pakistani nuclear spy Abdul Qadeer Khan stole the blueprints of the centrifuge technology in the Netherlands. Well, after the Dutch government discovered this theft/espionage, they wanted to issue an international warrant of arrest for A.Q. Khan. Guess what happened next? The US intervened and in effect told the Dutch to leave A.Q. Khan alone. The official reason the US gave was that they wanted to track the activities of Khan. This is ofcourse a red herring: the US subsequently did nothing to stop Pakistan from importing tools/components from Germany/other European countries and even from the US itself!!

My conclusion is that the US very much wanted Pakistan to acquire nuclear weapons to "cancel out" Indian nukes.

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 16 Feb 2012 20:05

Bakis will trouble India irrespective of khan help. let there be no illusion.
However what matters most is the potency of these strikes with khan backing. India is unable to respond offensively other than defensive measures.
Hence in that respect 26/11 type terrorism occurred due to khan backing in indirect way.
It is also a slow blow back to khan, now that its own citizens are caught in it considering its miniscule ROP population. it is also spending disproportionate resources on security.
This cannot go on forever unless economy is strong.

Jeehadis are like monkeys with a gun, they knew how to shoot but not take proper aim.
support is given by uncle in the form of political backing,armanents and finance in various forms.
Initial targets were firing in the east raising the raison d'e etre of India.
Due to effective defensive posture by India along western borders, the monkeys are firing inside pakhanasthan.
Some mutated and are rediscovering that there are some impure forms inside that need to be exterminated.
Hence the call for the return of desert lands.

Now with the failure of khan to subdue the same vermins it went to war, it is co opting them , as India will gain in strength otherwise. This is the best shot it can do to keep things on the boil under the present circumstances. Leave the area physically with tail under its legs but try to light fires which can fall on India. By eliminating physically itself form the scene, the khan ensures that the monkeys with gun will be redirected to fire on eastern borders in whatever fashion they want.
(Note India is a always and will be a local super power but with khan support , TSP+Khan = India irrespective of pandas.)

It is a way of keeping India on the backfoot by the above policies of khan to co opt TSP pasand groups in afghanisthan. This will free the TSPA to continue its renewed focus on India as it will be quiet on Af-Pak region.

Khan is following the same trajectory as left behind by british. Keep India under check by whatever means possible.
Uncle initially in its bravado thought of subduing Afghanisthan/Iraq etc over reached itself . It showed its limitations as a hyper power.
To prevent further loss of its power it has to ensure that no other power comes close to itself.
It has plans for china and India as these are the closest competitors to it. Oirope is in its present form is no competitor, hence no worries.

wondering if india is facilitating kabila model and khan trying to prevent it.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Feb 2012 20:27

A pisko point.

I am hoping that enough Indians demand that the US leave Pakistan, so that Pakis demand exactly the opposite.

While India keeps up the offensive about white Christian domination of pious Islamic Pakistan

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 16 Feb 2012 21:16

^^^^

baki=anti India.

India should publicly say it then bakis might jump saying the opposite.

But however uncle will likely leave the area physically but still prop the proxytute through other means as it is low cost option of keeping India tied to its area.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 16 Feb 2012 23:25

Report on Duffer-e-Pukistan
By Myra McDonald - author of "Heights of Madness", a book about the Siachen war between India and Pakistan. Now based in London.

Pl read the report in full

The alliance, which has held rallies in the cities of Lahore, Rawalpindi, Multan and Karachi since late last year, is unusual in bringing an intense dislike of India and anger at the United States onto the same platform. {note the words here}

But in recent years, Pakistan’s approaches to India and the United States have been viewed separately (in part due to a determined policy of “de-hyphenation” of India and Pakistan in Washington). The United States was the strategic partner with whom Pakistan threw in its lot after the Sept 11, 2001 attacks; India was the country with which it nearly went to war in 2001/2002. Much later, as relations with the Americans soured, they improved with India – so much so that a populist tendency to blame the United States for all of Pakistan’s problems almost completely ignores the traditional enemy India (except in the ranks of the India-focused military.)

The Jamaat-e-Islami has its roots in British colonial India and has tended to work within the electoral system. The Lashkar-e-Taiba/Jamaat-ud-Dawa had its origins in the jihad against the Soviets in Afghanistan, sharing a common mentor with al Qaeda in Islamic scholar Abdullah Azzam, but has focused on Kashmir and India. The JuD says it has no interest in joining mainstream politics, while the LeT – with which the JuD has dissociated itself after the November 2008 assault in Mumbai - has eschewed attacks within Pakistan. The sectarian Sipah-e-Sahaba’s militant offshoot, the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, has been blamed for a string of attacks inside Pakistan and has often been linked to al Qaeda. The religious leader Sami ul-Haq, a leading light in the DPC along with JuD leader Hafez Saeed, is closely associated with the Afghan Taliban. But only the JuD shares the Salafist tradition of al Qaeda; the others are mainly Deobandi.

Yet, however unpalatable to its critics, the Difa-e-Pakistan Council probably tells us what we already know. No amount of exhortation to improve the U.S.-Pakistan partnership or build trade ties with India – both nation-state, pragmatic, and essentially secular principles – will affect the trajectory of Pakistan. Its future will be decided at the axis of religion and power.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 16 Feb 2012 23:58

More on Duffers of Pakistan

15 Feb 2012

Pakistan: In the past three days, several Pakistani and western news services have reported the formation of the Difaa-i-Pakistan Council, the Defend Pakistan Council. This coalition of Islamist groups and parties, many of them officially banned, held a large anti-US rally in Karachi on 12 February. It announced its intention to stage a large anti-US demonstration outside the National Assembly in Islamabad on 20 February to protest the reopening of supply routes to trucks carrying supplies for NATO forces in Afghanistan.

Comment: Pakistani news services reported that this new ultra-nationalist and Islamist coalition was formed after the 26 November killing of 24 Pakistani soldiers in a US airstrike. It is virulently anti-American and anti-Indian and strongly supports the Afghan Taliban.

This group could not organize and demonstrate in public without substantial official support. The most likely backers are elements in the security establishment, including the Pakistan Army leadership.

Every Chief of Army Staff who had political ambitions, especially Musharraf, formed political alliances with the Islamists to undermine the influence of the landed gentry and the urban mercantile elite. During Musharraf's tenure in the 2002 elections, Islamists won outright control of the government in then Northwest Frontier Province, led the coalition government in Baluchistan and were the swing vote in the National Assembly.

The Defend Pakistan Council is emerging as a revived Army-Islamist political coalition to prepare for political change. Parliamentary elections are not due until 2013, but many politicians expect early elections in 2012, in connection with the possible contempt conviction of Prime Minister Gilani. This is a serious political development.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 17 Feb 2012 00:07

anupmisra wrote:Foreign investment falls by 66 per cent

This FDI is Feigned Drug Income which comes from selling Heroin andHashish etc.Domestic Consumption must have gone up to put damp in foreign sale.

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 17 Feb 2012 00:29

Code: Select all

[url=http://www.dawn.com/2012/02/15/can-pakistan-survive-without-us-aid.html] can survive without uncle aids[/url]

blog from yawn.

Several policy-makers, politicians, and development professionals in the west believe that the economic survival of Pakistan rests on handouts from the United States. Often American legislators ridicule Pakistan for willingly accepting American dollars in charity, but not delivering on American demands in return.

The US economic and military assistance to Pakistan indeed has a long history stretched over decades during which several American governments have poured billions of dollars into Pakistan. The question, however, is to determine first why Americans aided Pakistan and second what was the money intended for. And even more importantly, one should determine if indeed Pakistan’s economic survival rests on American aid.

The economic assistance to Pakistan peaked in the early 60s when in excess of $2 billion annually were provided to Pakistan.

In fact, since 2002 the US military assistance to Pakistan at $13billion dollars is two-times the economic assistance it provided to Pakistan. The dramatic increase in military assistance to Pakistan in the recent past has contributed to the weakening of democratic and civilian institutions in Pakistan, while it has helped strengthen military’s grip on the socio-political spheres in Pakistan.

Notice in the above graph how the US assistance has largely been absent in the 1990s when parliamentary democracy prevailed in Pakistan.

n 2010, the US economic assistance to Pakistan equalled $1.8 billion. While the amount is indeed large, however on a per capita basis, this translates into a mere $10.3 for the 180-million Pakistanis. Should we believe that Pakistan’s survival has rested on a mere $10.3 per person in civilian assistance from the United States?

Some fact-checking is indeed in order. Pakistan is a $175 billion economy. Since 2002, the US has provided on average $825 million annually in economic assistance to Pakistan. On the other hand, Pakistani expatriates have remitted on average $1 billion each month in 2011, making remittances an order of magnitude higher than what the US has been providing to Pakistan. I would argue that Pakistan’s economy owes much more to what the expatriates contribute than what comes in charity from the United States.

And who to account for the 36,000-plus Pakistanis who have perished as a result of the Nato’ war efforts in the region. A fair compensation would require the US to engage the United Nations to verify Pakistan’s claims and then reimburse Pakistan in full for proven claims.

madrassa maths in full display

Refusing aid and other assistance is a prerequisite for Pakistan’s economic recovery. The billions of dollars in aid have distorted markets in Pakistan and have subsidised the civil and military elite. Pakistan’s foremost economists, such as S. Akbar Zaidi and others at the Planning Commission in Islamabad, have argued for a secession of aid as a precondition for restructuring Pakistan’s economy to make it self-sufficient over time.

Pakistan’s elite and middle class have to rise to the occasion to help resuscitate the faltering economy. Pakistanis have to pay taxes so that their government can refuse aid from others. Unless Pakistanis demonstrate the willingness to carry their own weight by paying taxes, there is no hope of an honourable existence for Pakistan in the community of nations.

it is all khan's fault.
will be in blue eyed pathan boy kitchen cabinet for sure.

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 17 Feb 2012 01:08

Read this
World on the Edge by the Numbers – Growing Goat Herds Signal Global Grassland Decline

One indicator that helps us assess grassland health is changes in the goat population relative to those of sheep and cattle. As grasslands deteriorate, grass is typically replaced by desert shrubs. In such a degraded environment, cattle and sheep do not fare well. But goats—being particularly hardy ruminants—forage on the shrubs. Goats are especially hard on the soil because their sharp hoofs pulverize the protective crust of soil that is formed by rainfall and that naturally checks wind erosion. Between 1970 and 2009, the world’s cattle population increased by 28 percent and the number of sheep stayed relatively static. Meanwhile, goat herds more than doubled.

Growth in goat populations is particularly dramatic in some developing countries. While cattle herds in Pakistan doubled between 1961 and 2009 and the number of sheep nearly tripled, the goat population grew more than sixfold and is now roughly equal to that of the cattle and sheep populations combined. These livestock have grazed the countryside bare of its rainfall-retaining vegetation, contributing to the massive flooding that ravaged Pakistan in the summer of 2010.

why do bakis luv their goats--
make up your mind you kuffrs it is not dirty.
they want to become closer to desert lands.

krithivas · Post by **krithivas** » 17 Feb 2012 01:19

Creation of "Defend Pakistan" Council echoes "Pakistan Rakshak": Pakistanis are slowly finding their inner Bharat?

Pakistan: In the past three days, several Pakistani and western news services have reported the formation of the Difaa-i-Pakistan Council, the Defend Pakistan Council. This coalition of Islamist groups and parties, many of them officially banned, held a large anti-US rally in Karachi on 12 February. It announced its intention to stage a large anti-US demonstration outside the National Assembly in Islamabad on 20 February to protest the reopening of supply routes to trucks carrying supplies for NATO forces in Afghanistan.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 17 Feb 2012 03:37

All quiet on the jihadi fistula front?

Too quiet.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 17 Feb 2012 03:48

Badnaam Hona bhi ek Naam Hai
Pakistan, Indonesia join money-laundering blacklist

PARIS: An international money-laundering watchdog added Pakistan, Indonesia, Ghana, Tanzania and Thailand on Thursday to its blacklist of nations that fail to meet international standards.The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) has found that those five countries were flaunting recommendations made to them toward fighting money-laundering and financing terrorism, its executive secretary, Rick McDonell, told journalists.
No countries were taken off the blacklist, but Honduras and Paraguay were removed from an intermediary "grey-list" of countries found to be falling behind on international standards despite having committed to them."We are looking exclusively at the implementation of the standards," McDonell told journalists at a FATF meeting in Paris. "Countries that we look at wind up on the list because they have not implemented them."The body can make recommendations to any of the 36 countries that have signed a membership charter, as well as other nations, but it has no power to carry out sanctions.
The FATF, whose recommendations reach more than 180 countries through regional networks, estimates that money laundering and related financial crimes cost between 2 percent and 5 percent of global gross domestic product.In its report, the FATF also called on governments to consider tax evasion as a money-laundering offence. The agency is also extending its focus to target the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction
The FATF blacklist now includes 17 countries. Aside from the five new ones, they are: Bolivia, Cuba, Ethiopia, Iran, Kenya, Myanmar, Nigeria, North Korea, Sao Tome and Principe, Sri Lanka, Syria and Turkey

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 17 Feb 2012 06:36

Satya_anveshi wrote:Report on Duffer-e-Pukistan
By Myra McDonald - author of "Heights of Madness", a book about the Siachen war between India and Pakistan. Now based in London.

[/quote]

The Difa-e-Pakistan criticises the United States and India equally. It is demanding that Pakistan refuse to reopen supply routes for NATO forces in Afghanistan, closed after last year’s NATO airstrike which killed 24 Pakistani soldiers on the Afghan border; and that the government withdraw its decision to offer Most Favoured Nation (MFN) trading status to India.

What is important is the narrative which unites them both.

In “Secularizing Islamists”, a study of the Jamaat-e-Islami and Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD), author Humeira Iqtidar writes of a woman leader in the JuD who had sent two of her sons to fight and die in Kashmir. “Of course, who wants to send their children under a rain of bullets? The same children that we protect from ills and injuries when they are home?” Iqtidar quotes the woman as saying. “Have we been left with any other option now (as Muslims)?… Shahadat (martyrdom) is the only weapon we have to fight American control of our societies.”

“To her,” adds Iqtidar, “the connection between Indian control of Kashmir and American control of Pakistani society was the global market.” The Americans, so the argument went, were willing to overlook Kashmir in order to win access to Indian markets; at the same time they controlled Pakistani markets by propping up “puppet regimes” with the help of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank.

Or as Stephen Tankel writes in his excellent book on the Lashkar-e-Taiba, “Storming the World Stage“, ”anger at perceived American meddling in Pakistan and the occupation of Afghanistan, as well as alleged favouritism towards India, were recurrent themes in every interview the author conducted with Lashkar members.”

Actually the D-e-Pakhana represents the "patriotic Pakistani" They are correct. I support their right to hold their viewpoint.

The duffers are saying "The US must let go of Pakistan and India must let go of Kashmir. Because these enemies together are powerful, shahadat is the only way forward" I have so many areas of agreement with this viewpoint that I don't know where to start.

Pakis must welcome shahadat? Yes of course. I think we can offer that readily on a platter. This is something we can give them. It is the US that is playing a double role in preventing Indians from giving this with all our heart. We want to give shahadat. Not take. The generosity of mother India in this known no bounds. Look at out own children embracing shahadat in infant mortality itself. We will give readily to Pakistan.
The US must leave Pakistan alone? Yes of course. The US represents a continuation of the British colonial tradition of White Christain Supremacy needing to guide and govern inferior races like the Muslims of Pakistan. Once the Muslims of Pakistan understand their inferiority, they do not need the US any more for guidance.
Kashmir? Here I have some disagreement. India is innocent. Kashmir has seen too much violence and the matter can be discussed further after the first two points, shahadat to Pakistanis and the exit of the US are in progress.

By the way is this info correct?

The Lashkar-e-Taiba/Jamaat-ud-Dawa had its origins in the jihad against the Soviets in Afghanistan, sharing a common mentor with al Qaeda in Islamic scholar Abdullah Azzam, but has focused on Kashmir and India.

Ambar · Post by **Ambar** » 17 Feb 2012 06:46

shiv wrote:
By the way is this info correct?
The Lashkar-e-Taiba/Jamaat-ud-Dawa had its origins in the jihad against the Soviets in Afghanistan, sharing a common mentor with al Qaeda in Islamic scholar Abdullah Azzam, but has focused on Kashmir and India.

Well,yes and no. A whole bunch of splinter jihadis organization were under Azzam, LeT was just one of them. They were ripe for Paki pickings thanks to south Punjabis in the organization who were rabidly anti-Indian to start off with.

Shaashtanga · Post by **Shaashtanga** » 17 Feb 2012 06:49

Mushy talking about his assets.
As per him it is noones bijness to ask him about his assets or who his donors maybe. Just like no one can question Proxytute how they acquired their clown jewels.
Who are the idiots that are paying him $250k per lecture? Who in India paid him $250k to come and vomit on the sacrifices of our soldiers who lost their lives in kargil?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 17 Feb 2012 06:55

krisna wrote:Read this
World on the Edge by the Numbers – Growing Goat Herds Signal Global Grassland Decline
One indicator that helps us assess grassland health is changes in the goat population relative to those of sheep and cattle. As grasslands deteriorate, grass is typically replaced by desert shrubs. In such a degraded environment, cattle and sheep do not fare well. But goats—being particularly hardy ruminants—forage on the shrubs. Goats are especially hard on the soil because their sharp hoofs pulverize the protective crust of soil that is formed by rainfall and that naturally checks wind erosion. Between 1970 and 2009, the world’s cattle population increased by 28 percent and the number of sheep stayed relatively static. Meanwhile, goat herds more than doubled.
why do bakis luv their goats--
make up your mind you kuffrs it is not dirty.
they want to become closer to desert lands.

The solution is vegetarianism. You don't kneed so many goats or cattle if you don't need to eat them.

I mean the hypocrisy of development and environment shines through here, although this is OT

Step 1: Increase human populations by decreasing death rate
Step 2: Increase cattle/goat populations to feed humans
Step 3: complain that goats are eating too much and do not allow cattle or humans to survive.

To quote Shrimati Mayura Maconald from here dufferpak artical : Whisky Tango Foxtrot?

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 17 Feb 2012 07:21

Pak, Iran discuss gas project amid US pressure

Pakistan has said it is committed to the early implementation of the troubled gas pipeline project with Iran. Questions have been raised about the viability of the project following sanctions imposed on Iran by Western powers over its nuclear programme.

The US has mounted pressure on Pakistan not to go ahead with the gas pipeline project. Ahmadinejad arrived in Islamabad shortly after Afghan President Hamid Karzai flew in with a high-level delegation.

proxytute straining the leash of uncle trying hard not to snap it.

But enjoying the discomfiture it is causing the uncle.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 17 Feb 2012 07:47

For learned BRFites who talk of history and the fact that recorded history in India handed down as narratives goes back over 3000 years, I want to point out that the culture of claiming moral, religious and social superiority of the White Christians of Europe was clear and present just 150 years ago. In fact things reached a climax a mere 75 odd years ago - your grandfather or father's age when world war 2 represented the epitome decision making on who had racial, cultural and religious ascendancy. WW2 was a war of racists against fellow racists with each side using their vassals and colonial subjects over whom they had clearly and proudly demonstrated their own cultural, racial and social superiority.

When Indian culture can survive 3000 years, does anyone seriously believe that a culture that was exerting its supremacy just 80 odd years ago will just vanish?

That brings me to the point about Indian subcontinent which represents the meeting point of a White European Christian supremacist power (USA), pious Sunni islamic groups (Pakistan) and India representing Hindu culture - the oldest and most abused and spat upon of the three - having been abused and spat upon both by White Christian Supremacists and Islam.

It is possible to make all sorts of comparisons but let me start with attitudes to death.

The White Christian Supremacist view of death is the one that was inherited from European history and the Crusades. The fundamental Christian viewpoint of "Life being precious" is there, but that has the overlay of "Christian life is precious". Non Christians can die or be killed. No problem

The Islamic view of death is that it is up to Allah to give life or death, and dying in the name of Allah is good. But killing Muslims is not OK. Non Muslims can be killed.

Hindus believe that killing is bad per se. All life, including animal life is precious and represents one aspect of God. One must not take life. The question of killing in the name of God does not arise because living beings represent god. But Dharma dictates that we fight and kill if we are attacked"

If you put these three cultures together you gets some interesting attitudes.

The White Christian supremacists say. "We don't want to be killed. We don't care if you or other non Christians kill each other."

Muslims of Pakistan say "We will kill non Muslim enemies and we don't mind dying in the process."

Hindus say "Stop killing. We won't kill you. You stop killing us. We can kill you only in a head on battle"

In fact this explains the last 60 years beautifully.

The White Christian Supremacist USA has told Pakistan "Here. Kill all your enemies. But do our work you vassals/slaves. We don't care whether your kind die or Hindooz die. Just get our work done. And here's some money fresh from our mint. "

Pakistan has said "Kill Hindus. Kill Hindus. Kill Hindus". Killing Hindus is no skin off White Christian American balls.

But islam has suddenly had an "duh-aha" moment and said "White Christians are not helping us kill Hindus (or Jews) . Let us kill them too" Hence 9-11

Now the White christians are saying "You killin' us? We will kill you, but we still don't care if you kill Hindus. That is your business"

This is where we are.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 17 Feb 2012 08:09

India may bend FEMA to allow FDI from Pakistan

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 17 Feb 2012 08:51

A_Gupta wrote:^^^did we have an Aryan-Dravidian divide before the British?

-- re 1857, I thought that the distrust of the Bengali recruit because of the mutiny is what led the British to the martial races, and their deeming the Banglas as non-martial only.

Yes, the east India co's bengal army was recruited within Bengal.
http://www.the-eastindiacompany.org/EIC_Army.html

And it was the Bengal army that rebelled. Wiki for instance tells us
In 1857, the Bengal Army had 86,000 men of which 12,000 were European, 16,000 Sikh and 1,500 Gurkha soldiers, out of a total of (for the three Indian armies) 311,000 native soldiers, and 40,160 European soldiers as well as 5,362 officers.[62] Fifty-four of the Bengal Army's 75 regular Native Infantry Regiments rebelled, although some were immediately destroyed or broke up with their sepoys drifting away to their homes. A number of the remaining 21 regiments were disarmed or disbanded to prevent or forestall rebellion. In total only twelve of the original Bengal Native Infantry regiments survived to pass into the new Indian Army[63] All ten of the Bengal Light Cavalry regiments rebelled.

--- so Brihaspati, you were saying?

I see that Surasena ji has already pointed out that the very reference that you quoted at least indicated the composition. I could be wrong but I think you do not collate all possible/available refs on an issue before you put up your conclusions. There are many more sources for the composition and recruitment practices than this write-up you quoted which is obsessed about showing the "Hindu-bias" of the pre-1857 EIC army.

You are probably not also taking into account the history of Bengal at the time. Many Rajput and upper GV families or clans had come over with the advent of Mughal army under Man Singh. These were settled and continued to be employed around the Mughal power centres of Hooghly, Behrampore and Murshidabad district in general, Munger. Thus they and their continuing clan connections right up to Rajasthan [even now there are such people in Jiagunj] would provide the recruits as per criteria of the recruiting ideology.

"Natives" were not predominantly or necessarily "natives" of Bengal proper. There were of course some elite families from the Bengal subah who had their sons in EIC. But these came more from the western fringes of the then Bengal province which extended further to the west compared to now.

You also need to do much more exploration of the literature/docs/social evidence that would have shown which sector of Bengali society did not get involved or had reasons to support the British regime. One section saw the Brits as a strategic tool they could use to counter the vestiges of Mughal and Islamic stranglehold on Bengal society. One of my ancestor's communications [they were settled in the western fringes and he was one of the few from "natives" to be in relatively higher rank in the EIC army] clearly mentions the insecurity of women in the countryside from rampaging Mughal soldiers or "dervishes" who frequently came across in gangs demanding loot and women.

Getting rid of the Nawabi admin was a strong motivation in a rising section - among many other motivations.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 17 Feb 2012 09:09

Shiv ji,

But there is such a thing as a C versus M conflict as well. C versus M exists in US support of Israel and opposition to Iran

But if you look at India as a whole we have a nation that happens to be H+M. For whatever reason, the H versus M conflict has been suppressed in India in a way that no other civilization has managed. This has made it 2 players but not in teh way you mean it. Still it might be possible to leverage this.

Shiv ji,

problem with Pakistan is that it is not just Muslim, but that it is the only country whose only justification for existence is theology as defining and containing the nation. No other entity in the world matches it except Vatican in this aspect. it is burdened with overwhelming sociological continuities with the remaining portion of India - and hence has to continuously separate itself and define itself in terms of how different it is from India. It is not just Hindu although that is convenient. The Paki islamicity is a shield - the burqa to save the vulnerable wilting lily of Paki islamic identity. It can never allow itself to be an ally or fellow walker of India - it will be dead then.

But for that Indian thinking has to rise beyond Pakistan to a global scale with ideas that will knock off the US from its pedestal. The thought scares too many Indians, but we have unwitting allies in China who wants to do that, Russia who plays his own game. We need to split the Ummah halfway down so they support India for what we are. India undoubtedly offers Muslims opportunities of a type that only the west used to offer, but it also offers freedoms that the West does not offer. India can, and must leverage that. The high table is for climbers, not for people who worry that Unkil or Aunty will be angry.

This is broadly true as a target for Indian policy. But the incentives you hint at are tricky. There are dangers that those incentives - allowances - might only be used to strengthen the mullahcracy and subvert from within. A process whose basic tools and agents are already in place almost all along the coastal regions, western and eastern land borders - and the crucial political regions in the north along the GV.

I think you will soon see the first hints of that internal danger. It may be - that you won't have the time to try the external grand strategy you are talking of. I agree in principle to what you say is the objective, but I am afraid the time for that is gone. No not because of unkil or aunty - but things have now accumulated in the hands of the theological networks of power to an extent that is irreversible.

This can be tackled of course, but then that countering needs a different internal structure not immediately possible in the current framework. Crises are good - I welcome them - because they precipitate necessary action and changes.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 17 Feb 2012 10:13

Bheekhmangi Pigonomy

“Even out of that paltry 18 percent only 8 to 9 percent of the funds trickle down to the sentinels of the country, which was a matter of serious concern,” he maintained. According to 2011-12 budget Rs 495.2 billion were allocated to defence, out of which “Rs 206.4 billion is for employee-related expenses, Rs 128.2 billion for operating expenses, and Rs117.5 billion for physical assets” - military hardware etc. In fact, allocation for debt servicing - payment of interest and instalments of loans - amounted to Rs 1034 billion. So, the defence allocation is less than 50 percent of single largest allocation for debt servicing. In budget 2011-12, total receipts were estimated Rs 2732 billion - tax revenue Rs 2074 billion; non-tax revenue Rs 658 billion; thus allocation of Rs 495.2 billion for defence is exactly 18 percent of budgeted receipts.It is true that Pakistan is facing economic challenges and fiscal deficit, trade deficit and current account deficit. The major problem is energy shortfall, prohibitive cost of energy and deteriorating law and order situation, which have made many industries unviable, and new investment is not forthcoming. In the last budget, the government reckoned 4.3 percent economic growth, but that was hardly possible with loadshedding for 12 hours a day. Against this backdrop, one cannot envisage to surpass the last year growth figure of 2.4 percent. In real terms, there is going to be no growth in the current year because of an increase in population, as the small growth is nullified with the increase in population. It has to be mentioned that for higher growth there has to be sizeable increase in investment. The present rate of savings to GDP is around 14 percentwhich is lower if compared with the developing countries and emerging economies. To give a boost to the economy, the investment ratio to GDP savings should be 20 percent of the GDP, and even more when foreign investment has declit.

( Going by their Tax to GDP ratio, Will small- Poaq really have 200Billion $ pigonomy)