Islams Challenge

WHO WOULD BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MURDER OF INNOCENT TALIBAN AND INNOCENT AFGHANIS IN THE NAME OF JIHAD? – ALTAF HUSSAIN

London – 27 November 2001

Mr Altaf Hussain, MQM Founder and Leader, has said that the righteous ulemas (religious scholars) must issue a fatwaa, according to the jurisprudence (sharia, principles of Qisas & Diyat) as to who would be held responsible for the murder of innocent Taliban and innocent Afghanis in the name of Jihad? Either on the Taliban or those who created Taliban, preached them of jihad, trained them, armed them and sent them to Afghanistan and deserted them after the announcement of US attacks following September 11, 2001. Mr Hussain was addressing a gathering of ulemas, belonging to different schools of thoughts, maslak and fiqahs, at the Iftaar at Khursheed Begum Memorial Hall in Azizabad, Karachi on Monday. Members of MQM Coordination Committee and former members of Provincial and National Assemblies also attended the Iftaar.

Speaking on the situation in Afghanistan, Mr Hussain said that as a result of the war against terrorism, numerous innocent Afghan youth, elderly, women and children are being murdered, who are neither Taliban nor the ones who created the Taliban. Whereas those who created Taliban, preached them of jihad, trained them, armed them and sent them to Afghanistan to end Rabbani’s Government, have now deserted the Taliban after the announcement of US attacks following 11 September 2001. Mr Hussain said that the righteous ulemas (religious scholars) must issue a fatwaa, according to the sharia, principles of Qisas & Diyat, that who would be held responsible for the murder of innocent Taliban and innocent Afghanis in the name of Jihad or as a result of the US and Allied bombing? Either on the Taliban or those who created Taliban, armed them in the name of jihad, funded them, trained them, sent them to Afghanistan and deserted them in the time of need.

Mr Hussain asked what kind of role was it that three days before 11 September, it was being declared that the Taliban Government is independent and autonomous, we recognise them and the world should also recognise them, however, the Taliban is deserted and abandoned within a day after 11 September, when the US announced to act against the Taliban. Similarly in 1971, the Pakistani Army deserted hundreds of thousands of Pakistanis in Bangladesh, who sided with the Army to save Pakistan. After 30 years, millions of stranded Pakistanis are miserably living in the Red Cross Camps. The borders of their own country has been closed for them. He asked, who is responsible for the sufferings of these stranded Pakistanis, their sisters and daughters? Similarly, during the Pakistan Movement, the Muslims of Minority Provinces were hoodwinked in the name of two-nation theory. They were misguided that Pakistan would be the nation for all the Muslims of the Subcontinent. However, after the creation of Pakistan, the borders were closed for the Muslims of the Minority Provinces and they were left on their own in India. Who would be held responsible for bloodshed of millions of Muslim youth, elderly, women and innocent children during the struggle for the creation of Pakistan?

Mr Hussain said that today, the US officials are stating that if Osama Bin Laden or Mullah Omer are given refuge in the tribal areas of Pakistan then those areas would also be bombarded. Mr Hussain asked that who would be held responsible if innocent civilians would die as a result of this bombardment upon tribal areas? Mr Hussain said that where are those who were daily protesting against United States, carrying out processions armed with kalashinkovs and were announcing to wage jihad along with the Taliban? He said that Qazi Hussain Ahmed, Maulana Fazl-Ur- Rehman, Maulana Sami –Ul- Haque, Maulana Noorani and other so-called religious and jihadi leaders, who were claiming to support Taliban. They should have gone along with their convoy to Afghanistan and laid down their lives alongside the fighters of the Taliban to prove the truthfulness of their claims. He said that for the past 54 years, to serve their own interest and rule, the Pakistani Establishment, imprudent civil and military rulers have formulated defective policies and as a result, Pakistan is now in a position, where it has no friends in the South Asia Region.

Referring to Benazir’s India visit, Mr Hussain said that uproar was raised when he expressed his wish to write a letter to the Muslims of India and inform them of the plight of Mohajirs and innocent Sindhi people in Pakistan. He said that in the past when he had said that he would visit India and meet with the Muslims of India, venomous columns were written against him, he was branded as an Indian agent, however, what would the people say on the Indian visit of Benazir? Mr Altaf Hussain said, “when Army Generals, High Officials, political and religious leaders, intellectuals and even Benazir could visit India then why could he not go there? I have also been invited to visit India and from the Sajjada Nasheen of Hazrat Khwaja Nizam Uddin AulyaRH to visit the Dargah in Delhi” and also by the Gaddi Nashhen of Khawaja Sahab of Ajmer Sharif. Addressing all the ulemas, Mr Hussain sought for their permission to visit India to visit the Dargah of Hazrat Nizam Uddin Aulya and the Darbar of Khawaja Sahab at Ajmer Sharif, other revered personalities and to meet the Muslims of India. The ulemas unanimously replied that he should visit India.

Mr Altaf Hussain said that MQM is the only political party of the country, which is practically struggling for sectarian harmony amongst different schools of thoughts, maslak and fiqahs. Everyone respect each other and embrace each other. He said that we believe that no one is allowed to coerce their fiqah or maslak upon others. Everyone should stay on their fiqah, maslak and belief; and must not provoke others fiqah, maslak and belief. Mr Hussain said that the one who believes in the Oneness of Almighty Allah and the Prophethood of Mohammad (PBUH); and worship Allah Almighty, keeps away from dishonesty, fraud, mischief, provocation – the Allah Almighty accepts his worship. Those who confront people against each other in the name of fiqah or maslak, they are neither the friends of Islam nor of the fiqah or maslak. He said that until yesterday, he was the only one and now the entire world is stating that in Pakistan it is not the ulemas who are responsible for spreading sectarian tension, in fact it is the Establishment of the country, which orchestrated sectarian massacres and attacked the mosques and imambargahs killing innocent people.

He further said that the Establishment through their agents targeted the Shia people, particularly the Shia ulemas and intellectuals. He said that he has always condemned the barbaric killings of innocent people despite the fact that he was dubbed as Shia agent, accused me of taking money from the Iranian Embassy, some said that Altaf Hussain is himself a “shia” and his real name is Altaf Hussain Jaffri. He said, “if promoting sectarian harmony amongst Muslims is termed as “shia” then I am proud of being a shia.” He said, “If I say that do not murder of Hindus without any reason and for this I am labelled as Agent of Hindus. If I say that in your city or country, it is wrong and immoral to damage the worship places of the Christians, Parsees and people of other religion; and if I were labelled as the Agent of Jews and Christians, even then I would consider these allegations as an honour. Similarly, if we speak of Muslims and I say to Shia and Sunnis to respect each other, do not damage each others mosques or imambargahs; and I would not mind if I am labelled as the Agent of any fiqah or maslak.” Mr Hussain said that on the Day of Judgment, everyone has to answer to Allah Almighty. The Allah Almighty on the Day of Judgment would decide whether I am wrong or those who accuse me are wrong. He said that the Allah Almighty is not only the God of Muslims but also the God of Universe. He loves all His creations, feeds them either they be Muslims, non-Muslims or an animal.

Mr Hussain said that if it is legitimate to label each other as ‘infidel’ on the basis of fiqah or maslak then the portrait of Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah must also be removed because he was not of the same fiqah or maslak as of the Taliban. In fact, he was a Khoja Asna-e-Ashri Shia. Allama Iqbal RH had written eulogies paying tributes to Hindu God the “Ram” and “Guru Nanak”, then why “Rahmat-u-Allah-o-Alayeh” is written after his name.

Mr Hussain said that we should establish a Forum comprising of scholars of all sects and jurisprudence to proliferate religious tolerance and harmony amongst the people of all sects and schools of thoughts to ensure that no one is termed wrong on the basis of dissent. Only God is empowered to send a dead either in haven or hell and no “Scholar “Mullah” is empowered to issue certificates for heaven and hell. He expressed his thanks to all the religious scholars present in the Seminar for co-operating with the MQM for promotion of religious tolerance.

I could hardly find any signs of religion / Christianity in europe.

A well-meaning article perhaps. But I cannot help but feel a certain sense of irrateness at the Western author`s use of Mohammaden for Muslim, and Avicenna and Averroes for Ib-e-Sina and Ibn-e-Rush respectively.

I have read the Quran, and refere to it almost daily to search for answers. I have looked at every text on fighting. Quran does not allow the killing of non-combatants, nor deliberate suicides as part of fighting attacks.

Yes, we Muslims are and willing to enter Modernity, but within our Islamic value system.

The fundamental gap in the western adoption of modernity is the absense of absolute morality and ethics. everything has been rendered to expediency and nationalist interests. Nothing is sacred before nationalism and materialism.

The Muslim clerics and the misled masses are stuck in the dreams of past glory, and the intelligentsia is too ready to adopt godless secularism. Maybe the events of Sept. 11th 2001 will force some of us to search for and create a proper synthesis between Islam and modernism. The first step will be to distinguish what is religious in Islam and what is centuries of cultural infiltrations.

Who is going to do it. Thinking Muslims living in the west.

Scout

Are you aware that terrorism had almost died in Kashmir a few years back till it was revived directly by Pakistan?

What the Taliban has banned for Afghan women:

• Education

• Applause

• Working outside the home

• Makeup

• Nail polish

• Jewelry

• Plucking eyebrows

• Short hair

• Colorful or stylish clothing

• High heels

• Walking loudly

• Talking loudly or laughing in public

• Singing

• Using public transport except special buses, which

are rarely available

• Being photographed

When women do leave the house, the Taliban states it must be for an essential, government-sanctioned purpose, and they must at all times wear the all-enveloping burqa. They also must paint their windows black to hide themselves from view.



What the Taliban has banned for everyone (The list seems to grow daily):

• Music

• TV and Movies

• Magazines

• Newspapers

• Most Books

• Internet

• Photographs and paintings of people and animals

• Pet parakeets

• Cigarettes

• Alcohol

• Picnics

• Wedding Parties

• New Year Celebrations

• Any kind of mixed gender gathering

• Children?s toys

• Cards and board games

• Paper bags

• Applause

• Being out after a curfew of 7:30 p.m., except government troops



Every Friday afternoon in Kabul, the capital of Afghanistan, 30,000 men and boys pour into a dilapidated sports stadium. The Taliban forces store owners to close up shop.

Outside the stadium, street vendors sell popcorn and nuts. The men are there to watch supposed thieves and criminals be shot, hung, buried alive, or even have limbs amputated.

This week a young woman, Sohaila, receives 100 lashes for walking with a man who was not a relative.

And two male suspected thieves have their right hands cut off. This information is gathered by RAWA through smuggled tapes, videos, and photographs.

RAWA is an organization of Afghan women who gather evidence beneath the darkness and heat of their burqas. A burqa is a robe that covers Afghan women from head-to-toe, with a mesh grid over their eyes. If these women were caught, they would be killed.



The Taliban likes to widely publicize its actions through the one radio station and newspaper in Afghanistan (which is run by the Taliban). The Friday stadium events provide the Afghan men with entertainment.

Since the Taliban has taken over, this is the only form of entertainment in Afghanistan, since most everything else is banned.



The situation is so bad that Afghan people are literally dying to get out of the country. For more then 20 years, Afghanistan has produced the world’s largest refugee group.

Currently numbering 2.6 million, Afghan refugees are still the largest displaced population in the world. More that 1 million Afghan refugees live in 203 officially recognized refugee ``villages`` in Pakistan.

The Beginning of the END of the (un)Islamic Amirate of Afghanistan.

May its Amir-ul-Shyateen Mulla Omar burn in hell for eternity for his CRIMES he committed against the women of Afghanistan. Amen

Re: Jaswant Singh`s visit to USA

Guys,

Saw this article in ``The Nation``(http://www.nation.com.pk/daily/today/editor/opi2.htm). Asghar Butt cannot hide his admiration/jealousy? for J.S. When i talked about independent policies that large democracies like India pursue, i was serious. I learned that during J.S`s visit, senator Baden had announced lifting of sanctions with some monetary assistance for Pakistan. So pissed off was J.S that he cancelled a scheduled senatorial committee meeting with Baden just 20 minutes before it was to take place, saying he was not feeling well only to appear in peach health on C.N.N just half hour later. Answering the news of waiver, J.S replied that India waves any such waiver. Baden sure has not made friends in North Block.

Sridhar

nasah,

mr chidanand rajghatta needs to take a chill pill. has been in dire need of it for a long time...

What Mr. Rajghata is whining about?

US State Dept. called the Kashmir Assembly attack an act of terrorism.

Even Pakistan FO called it an act of terrorism.

US has to tackle one item at a time not spread too thin -- patience -- insecure impatient Indians!

Pakistan has started to tighten the noose around the Lshkariyas, the Harakatyas and the worst of all the Jaishi criminals.

I don`t think another dastardly act like Assembly attack is going to happen again -- if coalition-captive Mr. Musharraf is IN CONTROL of his senses -- AND his country.

That monstrous attack has only settled the issue of Kashmir -- Kashmir is staying with India.

Re: sputtering idiot

I am supporting only the defensive posture the GoI has to take...for all I care the army can get the hell out of there once Pakistan has reigned its terrorists in...until Pakistan does that, the army will defend the house. You are supporting the criminal and I am supporting law enforcement...hence I don`t have to go do anything...you, on the other hand, should tighten your burkha and go fight with the jehadis you send to their deaths from some dirty sofa in the US.

Scout ji,

``You`re the one who started this whole Kashmir discussion out of the blue with your instigating insinuations and questions. I think you have nothing better to do with your time so I`ll leave you to do it alone.``

I guess when people run out of steam they resort to personal attacks.

I asked you about Kashmir because I felt that you were an open-minded person (you are in some respects) and you would see how covert violence leads to the loss of innocent human lives even if the underlying reason is ``noble`` (driving the Indian army out of Kashmir).

You are unwilling to admit the utter contradictory nature of your arguments because it will lead to a loss of face.

According to you

1) Indian Army is forcibly occupying Kashmir.

2) Mujahideen are there to drive them out.

How do the Mujahideen achieve their objective if all they manage to do is take innocent lives. Can you please explain?

We can come to your question later. Please answer mine first. You are just avoiding to answer it because your stand is inherently contradictory.

Response of Reason, Not Rage





``Events`` exercise a great and strong momentum of their own and do not accommodate much interference, although it is possible to influence one`s ``response`` toward them. The recent tragic event has offered Muslims one such opportunity to define and execute a ``response``, the outcome of which will incontrovertibly benefit the entire humanity.

Our response thus far is to the extent of interfaith dialogs, joint prayers, vigils, anti-war rallies and other such activities. These noble acts are important and must continue as it will bring peace to the hearts of those who live today as those who perished are already embraced by the Infinite Peace-Giver. It can be safely assumed that all of us aspire our progeny to live in a fearless, peaceful and a just world of tomorrows.

The pursuit for justice continues, from ``Infinite to Enduring!`` May that be either, but it must be `just`. The alleged should not be convicted before they are tried with a fair opportunity to defend themselves. Justice is a prerequisite for Peace. This is a principled position & must be part of our response.

The sacrifices of 1.5 million and the maiming of countless millions of Afghans by the Soviets, in fact gave victory to United States of America over Communists. The world must remember their sacrifices and the maiming because it is that which made the world free of ``Red Peril``. Our response must remember this fact too.

The 18 minute gap between the first and the second attack allowed every camera to focus on the scene to capture the second impact. With no film footage, the Pentagon explosion and the Pennsylvania crash smolders in our mental background. News consumers must heed to the useful caveat: Just because you see something does not mean that is all there is to see. And just because you do not see something does not mean nothing is happening.

If we cite what steeled the homicidal and suicidal resolve of the perpetrators, we must not feel ashamed to also include the exchange on CBS (May 12, 1996) between Madeleine Albright, then-US ambassador to the UN, and reporter Lesley Stahl.

Stahl: ``We have heard that more than half a million children have died. I mean, that`s more children than died in Hiroshima. And you know is this price worth it in the pursuit of one man (Saddam Hussain)?``

Albright: ``I think this is a very hard choice, but the price? We think the price is worth it.``

That exchange became infamous among some. Is it possible that such senseless statements and actions could have created senseless rage against America? Short of visiting the ruins of World Trade Center, Madame Albright must be invited to reflect her past. Respect is earned if we are fair to all people, all the time. Our principled position shall influence the response.

The media`s response to the event in all of its forms had the irremovable red/blue/white lens. The mantra of Muslims, Islam, Ex`sts and T`sts ... continues with more intensity. Precisely two weeks since Sep 11, fourteen people were shot killed before the ``gunman`` (not a T`st) shot and killed himself. It was in the city of Zug in Switzerland the country that prides itself for its lowest crime rate. Rather than maintaining a full time armed force, the government of Switzerland requires all civilians to undergo military training, and gives an assault rifle and 24 rounds of ammunition to each person for their personal safety. Imagine if these six million Swiss people with an estimated 2 million privately held firearms including automatic rifles, were to have been in some other country. Would media change or remove its fixed lens? Our response must be of reason and not rage.

The struggle to fight wrong is neither a fight of West vs East nor West vs the Rest, it belongs to the believers of peace, compassion and justice for all. It would honor the memory of those who perished on Sep 11 to insist that in the future, our policy makers and our media offer a better accounting of how wars for freedom

Re: continuation of my last post

Reply to your post #: 520

scout,

I am compelled to respond to two things that you brought out in your post:

1. Gandhi`s non-violence will not work and

2. The following:

``But does that make it ok for Bihar and Orissa to struggle economically and socially? How do they utter their grievances when the government doesn`t listen, or puts them on the back burner?``.

My reply to #1 will be, non-violence as a way of redressing grievances has never been resorted to or tried by the Kashmiris. They jumped on to the jehadi bandwagon too soon (after a few rigged elections!)without perhaps realising its full implications.

Even during freedom struggle, there were a number of terrorist outfits that were engaged in violence as a means of independence from British Raj. Shaheed Bhagat Singh and his company were in that category. Gandhiji did not approve of their modus operandi. Just to illustrate a point how violence affects innocent people and loses focus, Bhagat Singh`s group decided to take revenge on General Dyer (of Jallianwala fame)but shot dead another innocent armyman who resembled Dyer. It was Gandhi`s mass appeal as a leader and his non-violent struggle involving participation by the masses that made British took notice and compelled them to grant independece.

Your statement in # 2 is intriguing. Both Bihar and Orissa have democratically elected State govts. You seem to imply that GOI is not allowing these states to develop. This only shows your ignorance of how democracy functions in India. State Govts have responsiblities to develop their state. Some govts like the ones in Maharastra or Karnataka have been doing a good job. Others like Bihar have neglected their own people. GOI is not to blame. When parts of Bihar was being neglected by the State C.M and his cronies, there were protests. This has led to bifurcation of the state into Bihar and Jharkhand. Similar divisions have happened in other states like M.P (Chattisgarh) and U.P(Uttaranchal) in keeping with the aspirations of the people.

India`s democracy and rule of law gives its people voice their grievances in a peaceful manner. I am from the State of Tamil Nadu which in the 60s wanted to secede from the Indian Union. There were issues like language, and a perception that center was calling all the shots, not allowing for local aspirations. This resulted in emergence of a locally popular party, DMK, that threw up leaders like Anna Dorai and Karunanidhi. A peaceful but immensely popular movement headed by the above party and its leaders resulted in Congress being shown the door. 30 years later, no national party can win elections in Tamil Nadu on its own strength without the help of regional allies (DMK or AIDMK). The regional aspirations of Tamilians in India were channelised in a democratic fashion. Tamilians in India today feel they are a part of this great Indian diaspora and there is no talk of seperatism. Similar thing happened to Sikh militancy in Punjab. Indira Gandhi and Congress made tactical blunders but democracy won the day finally. It took more that a decade to put sikh militancy down but the fight was lead by sikhs themselves (people like K.P.S Gill and others). Today they have their own representative govt in Punjab.Again, there is no talk of seperatism by sikhs in India (except by some lunatic fringe elements in Canada perhaps).

Unfortunately, militancy in Kashmir refuses to die down as it is abetted and encouraged from across the border. Kashmiris should be given a chance to say what they want to say without fear of a terrorist gun pointing at their heads. For this, jehadi elements in Kashmir should and will be defeated. If Kashmiris still want to go their own way after they have been given a chance to integrate democratically with the rest of India, then India has no moral authority to hold on to Kashmir. We can live with an autonomous/independent Kashmir as friends the way we have lived with a fiercely independent Nepal to our north. India will however have the moral right to put down violence with all force at its disposal as long as such a force is unleashed on our territorry. Make no mistake about that.

Sridhar

My own 525

``My hatred on two things Pakistani`` should be ``My hatred of two things``. Religious hatred and fanaticism is not just Pakistani thing. It is everywhere being equally harmful everywhere. In Pakistan it is just the official doctrine taught as Pakistani ideology.

Stuka #532,

To me, any idiot who calls someone`s mother or wife a whore is a moron. And ylh has proved himself a moron in that sense. He did it to hamidm and didn`t even apologize.

Yes we all make mistakes in the midst of anger, but to recognize them and make amends makes us better people.

Go ahead and defend him, all you men are the same anyway. Almost all of the world`s problems are caused by members of your gender.

Pisses me off.

MaheshG #529,

Oh I forgot to add, go search for Suxena and company`s anti-Islamic anti-Muslim posts yourself. They`ll be easy to find.

They`ll probably admit to them themselves, the baighairat folks that they are.

imbecile Suxena,

so why don`t you sell your germ infested pretzel stand and go join the Indian army which you so vehemently support? no no, better yet, go to Isreal and wash their behinds. go kill some stone throwing Palestinian children with guns, which I know you fantasize about doing.

MaheshG,

I was talking about mass genocide commited by Muslims against OTHER religions.

But anyway, regarding your posts about Kashmir, I`m not going to repeat myself and answer them.

You`re the one who started this whole Kashmir discussion out of the blue with your instigating insinuations and questions. I think you have nothing better to do with your time so I`ll leave you to do it alone.

Next time don`t ask me controversial and hateful questions if you`re not willing to answer some of mine. Kapeesh? Bub-bye

Re: fight against terrorism

Guys,

I feel that while Mushy may have done a lot of wrong things in aiding and abetting militants across the border in Kashmir, if he has now taken a clear stand to wipe out terrorism from Pakistan, it is commendable and everyone from India needs to support it. I cannot shudder to think what might happen if Musharraf`s govt falls and Pakistan is taken over by fundoos. Will India watch silently if this happens. This was the question that was asked of Jim Hogland of Washington Post in a discussion on CNBC. He said India would strike against the nuclear installations including the militant camps in Kashmir many of which are run by OBL`s men and that may be in US`s interest. William Safire of New York Times intervened saying that Musharraf`s hold is strong and he is unlikely to be overthrown. This was reassuring indeed.

Sridhar

Re: The noose tightens on the terrorist outfits.

This is from the TOI. The Url:

``http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow.asp?art_id=1319643296``.

``US to turn heat on Lashkar, Jaish



CHIDANAND RAJGHATTA

TIMES NEWS NETWORK



ASHINGTON: The Bush administration will turn the heat on more terrorist groups, including those based in Pakistan and operating in Jammu and Kashmir. The list is likely to include Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish e-Mohammed.

The White House is expected to issue an executive order putting a financial squeeze on these groups in the next couple of days, according to sources. Separately, the State Department is also finalising its Foreign Terrorist Organisation list.

Administration officials said while the Pakistan-based terrorist groups were almost certain to be named in the White House executive order, their inclusion in the State Department’s FTO list was uncertain. This was because of the exacting criteria the department needed to meet before it named the organisations so as to pre-empt a legal challenge, they explained.

One such organisation which has been named and which has challenged its designation as a terrorist group is LTTE.

While the FTO designation is a long-drawn inter-agency process coordinated by the State Department’s Office of Counter-terrorism that has to conform to stringent US laws, the White House crack down is a different matter. It comes in the form of an executive order based on a recommendations from the Director of the Department of the Treasury`s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC).

New Delhi has for a long time chafed at what it sees as the State Department’s reluctance to designate Pakistan-based outfits such as Lashkar and Jaish as FTOs. The Indian government hasn’t been entirely convinced that the process is as difficult as it is being made out.

The State Department had come within sniffing distance of nailing Lashkar-e-Taiba as a FTO last year, when changes in the administration put a halt to it. At least one key official in the Clinton administration was said to be unhappy at the poor intelligence inputs and cooperation he received in his efforts to tighten the screws on Pak-based organisations.

Indian officials are anticipating the administration going after groups other than al-Qaeda following a strong case made by External Affairs Minister Jaswant Singh with top US officials to the effect that these organisations mutate rapidly across geographical borders but come from a common source.

The officials say now that as an instrument to control the offshore movement of financial assets and funding, the White House order is probably more effective than an FTO designation which carried no punitive measures.

The Bush administration’s move comes amid increasing criticism from many quarters that it is obsessively focused on al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden to the exclusion of all other outfits. There is also a growing realisation among US analysts and commentators now about Pakistan’s complicity in terrorism despite the administration’s effort to manufacture consent in the interest of what some officials suggest is a short-term, event-specific alliance.

``You would think the radical Islamic guerrillas who claimed responsibility for Monday`s attack -- the Pakistani-based Jaish-e-Muhammed group -- might deserve to be at least called terrorists. India implored the United States to put the group on its terrorist list for earlier outrages. But Washington declined out of fear that such action would undermine the regime of Gen. Pervez Musharraf and complicate US diplomatic goals,`` Washington Post columnist Jim Hoagland wrote on Wesnesday.

``This is diplomacy without vision and without the roots needed for a long, difficult struggle against terrorism. It is delusional to think that the United States can reform the Musharraf regime or elements in the Taliban regime in neighboring Afghanistan into responsible partners to fight terrorism,`` he added.

Similar doubts were raised by New York Times’ William Safire who said ``the trouble with seeking to build a grand intelligence coalition is that too often those willing to rat on Terrorist A are harborers of Terrorist B at home and blackmailees of Terrorist C abroad.``

``President Bush`s grand spook strategy may be to buy a little from each source and them zap `em all, but that`s too simple by half...Over all, are we buying Phase I`s retribution against one terrorist gang with a promise of no Phase II protective strikes against a terrorist nation?`` he asked.``

Sridhar

Re:Reply #: 520

scout

Your post does not deserve a reply. It is a repetition of what many Pakis in this forum have been saying ad nauseum. So, i am not going to give a word to word reply. May be your rulers need to be taught a lesson by the world community. This is actually beginning to happen. See my last post linking Kashmiri terrorists involved in Air India hijacking to Kandahar and the World Trade Ctr carnage.

Sridhar

Re: Major setback for Pakistani rulers` Kashmir jehad policy

Guys,

Just saw it on C.N.N. US has accepted the evidence linking Kandahar linking of IA plane and the September 11 carnage as, in their own words, ``strong``. Nirupama Rao and the pilot of the plane Devi Sharan were on T.V. Jaish-e-mohammad may next be targetted by US next. India has asked for extradition of Maulana Masood Azhar and others. The article is titled ``US sees link between IA hijack and terror attacks``.

Read the article at:

``http://www.timesofindia.com/articleshow.asp?art_id=1875083696``.

Excerpts:

1. ``US investigators probing the September 11 carnage have established a link between the Pakistan-based terrorists who hijacked an Indian Airlines flight in 1999 and the perpetrators of multiple air-crashes that killed some 5000 people, CNN is reporting``.

2. ``Unnamed government officials told the network that Mustafa Mohammed Ahmed, who wired $ 100,000 from Pakistan to suspected hijacking ringleader Mohammed Atta, is an alias for Shiek Syed, one of three prisoners whose release was demanded by the hijackers of the IA plane which was flown to Kandahar``.

3. ``Following the exchange, the three prisoners and the five hijackers drive across the border into Pakistan, where, Indian officials say, they were received and dispersed by operatives of the Pakistan intelligence service ISI``.

4. ``Syed was widely recognized as the leader of an al-Qaeda-affiliated Islamic militant group known as Harkat-ul-Muhahedin, of which Jaish is an offspring. He was educated at the London School of Economics and Indian intelligence officials have told their US counterparts that he was last seen about six months ago at a bookshop in Islamabad``.

5. ``But Washington has evidently confirmed the Indian version linking the two. Not only did Syed Sheik wire $100,000 to Mohammed Atta in Florida for the suicide mission in America, but some of the 19 terrorists involved in the US mission also wired back the remainder of the money back to Sheik in a Gulf country. Sheik is reported to have since returned to Pakistan``.

Pakistan`s complicity is clear. As expected, the Paki authorities are denying that these are terrorists and trying to differentiate terrorists in Kashmir and Palestine from the rest. This attempt is pathetic to say the least.

Sridhar

. I don`t defend Urstruly or Ali or YLH when they`re uttering misguided hatred against Hindus.

I`m sorry I have to show my ugly mug here. As far as I know, YLH hasn`t said anything bad against Hindus. Indians yes, specifically Hindus, I don`t think so. Again, before someone digs up an old cut and paste of YLH to prove me wrong, one can say things under provocation that one does not mean. It`s definitely not a regular pattern from YLH, unlike the other 2 morons he`s had the misfortune to be listed with.

A reality check for Pakis deluding and frothing over Kashmir.

Face it, Kashmir will be in India for eternity..if it is not, you can be assured there was nuclear war and Pakistan no longer exists and neither do a few Indian states (including Kashmir). No one forces a nuclear country to do anything ... those tests in 1998 have frozen the status quo forever.

From your very own newspaper:

``And yet Kashmir is still, 53 years on, firmly in Indian control. It can now be asserted that following the thoughtless and rather emotional decision to go nuclear, the old India-Pakistan dispute over J&K State has been frozen dead. If the theory of deterrence works, neither side can take a military initiative in any situation (for fear of the other`s nukes). And if it fails, a war would break out and, on the basis of Pakistan`s oft-repeated doctrine of first strike, a nuclear exchange will ensue. That will render the Kashmir issue irrelevant, beside much else. The outlook for `Kashmir becoming Pakistan` is bleak.``

Re: bearded sputter

{{``Violence in Kashmir was started by terrorists or jehadis or freedom fighters whatever name you wish to label them by. Remember, no country will sit by and watch violence unleashed on its territories.``

Ok, so why not get to the root of the violence. Have you ever thought of that?}}

And who in blue hell are you to decide what India should and should not be doing in one of its states? Who invited your fat behind to meddle in India`s affairs?

The rest of your post might as well be a laughable cut-n-paste job from www.jehad-in-kashmir.com

Actually, I shouldn`t insult jehadis by calling you one. They are brave enough to go fight and get killed for their perverted beliefs...all you can do is sit here like a coward and push them to their deaths.

Scout, regarding RSaxena, Jay and Gowardhan please point out the posts where they have attacked Islam or Muslims. I will be glad to disown them immediately.

Attacking Pakistanis doesn`t count.

Hasan, you forgot the biggest genocide involving Muslim perpetrators. Pakistani army wiping out 3 million Bangladeshis.

Scout will conveniently forget such instances. Too grating on the consceince, I guess.

Scout,

``So basically, what you are saying is that as long as the Indian army is in the area, YOU will keep on raping innocent Kashmiri women and killing Kashmiri protesters with bullets?``

I don`t understand. According to you the Indian army is there to rape innocent Kashmiri women and to kill Kashmiri protesters with bullets. So, your question doesn`t compute.

Please clarify it for me. You want the Indian army to get out. How does killing innocent little school girls accomplish that?

Scout,

I thought Pakistan`s support to the Jehadis was the effect of India`s forceful occupation of Kashmir.

So, my question to you still stands. Are you trying to oust the Indian Army from Kashmir by killing innocent little school girls?

Scout

You have again said I hate muslims not Pakistan. My hatred of two things Pakistani is clear. Religious fanaticism and Pakistan. Religious fanatics raise religious armies. They justify horrible things simply saying crap like allah knows best. I hate Pakistan because despite what some say on Chowk, Pakistan has become the symbol of such fanaticism. It even teaches it children fanaticism telling them about muslims and nonmuslims as different human beings. I believe Pakistan has become an immoral idea, a scourge on humanity. If Pakistan ceased to exist today a large amount of lies, violence and immorality will end immediately.

I expect someone like hobbyty to take that and twist it to mean I hate Muslims. It is his job, his ambition to organize an all muslim army against non muslims specially in India. How do you explain your doing the same thing? Earlier once you said you will explain why I am against islam not Pakistan. Kindly do that.

shammi #505 when i referred to retired generals i was thinking of hamid gul. i agree that he quite likely had his sympathizers in the military. the end of the taliban does seem to be a matter of days away now, or maybe weeks. or at least let us hope so. and let us also hope that their soulmates in pakistan are also put out of business as well.

nasah #515,

I agree, so let`s not point fingers at one religious group. We`re all in this together.

As long as there is religious hatred within people, whether they be Christians, Jews, Muslims, or Hindus, there will be acts of violence in this world.

No one`s innocent.

MaheshG #512, `` So, basically what you are saying is that as long as India occupies Kashmir you will keep on killing little Kashmiri school girls.``

So basically, what you are saying is that as long as the Indian army is in the area, YOU will keep on raping innocent Kashmiri women and killing Kashmiri protesters with bullets?

I`m sorry MaheshG you leave me no choice but to answer your question with a similar stupid question.

``You accused RSaxena, Gowardhan and Jay of attacking all Muslims. As far as I can recall they have laid the blame for WTC only at Pakistan`s doorstep. So, where did you get this idea that they were attacking Muslims?``

I know you really love those hateful Indians, but please don`t try to defend the indefensible. It`s silly. I don`t defend Urstruly or Ali or YLH when they`re uttering misguided hatred against Hindus.

So why are you?

Re: That roach called OBL

Guys,

I angered scout and other like minded people by saying some nasty things and let me take this opportunity to say i feel bad. But let me explain.

I have been watching T.V channels telling us about OBL in great detail. He comes out as a pious, religious person who gave up his comforts for a cause he believes in. He was also shown to be living in utter simplicity, sharing his meal with other colleagues. These are good qualities. He strongly believes that presence of American troops in Saudia Arabia is unislamic. May be millions of muslims share the same opinion. Where he crosses bounds of decency and civilised behavvior is in thinking that solution to what he thinks are problems is through violence. Since he is pitted against a super power, he has resorted to terrorism and guerilla warfare, thereby killing innocent people.

What irks many non-muslims like me is that while almost all muslims who i watched over T.V here in USA have openly condemned terrorism and said islam does not support this kind of act, few have openly condemned OBL. One muslim clergy when asked point blank by Judy Woodruff over CNN if he condemned OBL, went on a tangent. School girls in one school in Quetta, common man on streets in parts of Afghanistan and Pakistan have openly questioned the fact that OBL may be involved and asked for proof. The need of the hour is for all muslims to completely isolate men who indulge in terrorism and clearly state their stand. Unfortunately, this is not happening. At least that is my view and i may be wrong. USA on the other hand has gone to great length to ensure muslims around the world do not see this as a muslim versus rest battle. The American efforts are commendable and need to be supported. Let us not forget, if there is a country which can forge an international alliance against this menace, it is USA.

Sridhar

rsridhar #507,

``We are going round in circles. Everyone needs to realise that violence in all forms is bad.``

I agree.

``Violence in Kashmir was started by terrorists or jehadis or freedom fighters whatever name you wish to label them by. Remember, no country will sit by and watch violence unleashed on its territories.``

Ok, so why not get to the root of the violence. Have you ever thought of that? Do you think these ``freedom fighters or terrorists or jehadis whatever name you wish to label them by`` are becoming violent just for the heck of it? They want something and the majority of the Kashmiri people aren`t complaining. Yes, it`s wrong, but how else does one fight oppression? Certainly in that area, civil disobedience won`t work. The ideals of Martin Luther King and Mohandas Gandhi will not work in the valleys of Kashmir. The Indian Army won`t let that work. The Indian government just doesn`t want to hear the KAshmiri people`s woes.

``Kashmiri aspirations are genuine. There is no reason to believe such aspirations cannot be fulfilled within the framework of India`s constitution.``

And what progress has been made in that direction?

Your precious angelic Indian army combats the stones of Kashmiri protesters with guns and bullets.

``Other states like Bihar, Orissa have worse economic problems but they have not resorted to a vilent struggle against the center.``

But does that make it ok for Bihar and Orissa to struggle economically and socially? How do they utter their grievances when the government doesn`t listen, or puts them on the back burner?

``Hence, the problem is not the grievance itself but the way it is being addressed in Kashmir.``

Excuse me, did you just say the problem is not a grievance? How the hell could you say that? The majority of Kashmiris want their freedom, want the right to self determination, and you don`t call that a grievance?

``The human rights violations that occur while India fights these terrorists are regrettable but also inevitable.``

So in that vein, I can also say that the freedom fighters` violent revolts are regrettable but inevitable.

``Terrorists are an invisible enemy. They hide like roaches and kill with impunity. While fighting them, it is inevitable that some (nay, many) innocent people will suffer.``

The Indian doesn`t hide but kills endlessly, while fighting them, it is inevitable that the Kashmir backed freedom fighters might kill some innocent people. How does that sound? You yourself were so against violence earlier, and now you`re condoning it as long as the Indian army is carrying it through?

``If Pak really cared, it should stop abetting and sponsoring terrorism from across the border.``

If Indian really cared, it would have stopped the terrorism of it`s army in Kashmir and given Kashmiris their rights and freedom.

``India is prepared to go to war for Kashmir. If it results in exchange of nuclear weapons, so be it.``

Whereever there is oppression, the oppressed will do anything to gain freedom from the oppressors. Remember learning about the American Revolution? It`s the same struggle in Kashmir, but in an obviously smaller scale.

In the case of Kashmir, India is the oppressor, and the only way to stop the blind oppressor is by revolting. And that is what the Kashmiris are doing, backed by Pakistanis or not.

``A little introspection by anyone with commonsense will reveal that Kashmir policy has been disastrous for Pak. Pak today is at the mercy of international monetory agencies through which USA keeps a tight tab on Pak.``

Yes it has, but partly so. Pakistan is also in the hole because of corrupt leadership and government. It is also suffering because of the rise of fundamentalists who would rather go back in history than move with the times.

``Do the Pakistanis feel good when some westerners tell them what to do?``

No but to tell you the truth, westerners are telling all third world countries what to do these days. If the West asked India to do something right this minute, India would go down on it`s knees and say, `yes sahib.` We`re nothing compared to developed nations. Thus the subservient attitudes. There is no choice.

``Is the hatred of India so much in Pak that they are willing to take every other form of SH!T only to keep an appearance that they are giving India a tough time?``

Is the hatred of Pakistanis and Kashmiris so much in India that they are willing to see people die every day?

``Many good Pakistani commentators and journalists have clearly stated that Kashmir policy of mini-war in Kashmir by Pak through militants has been disastrous.``

It doesn`t take a rocket scientist to figure that out.

``Today, Talibanists and militants belonging to Taliban have come to haunt Pakistani rulers. Again,this pro-Taliban has been encouraged in order to rule Afghanistan by proxy as a means of

achieving strategic depth vis-a-vis India. Was this a correct policy? Obviously not.``

Wouldn`t you try to have some diplomatic relations with a neighboring country when the other side of the border has a hateful enemy (India). It`s a simple political/military strategy. However unfruitful, Pakistan had no choice but to recognize Afghanistan. To be stuck in the middle of two enemies would be disastrous don`t you think? But guess what, with the way that things are going between Afghanistan and Pakistan right now, Pakistan WILL be stuck between two enemies.

But we couldn`t help it.

``Today, Pakistan is the only country to have official links to Taliban. It tries to cling on to Taliban in the hope that it can salvage an impossible situation.``

Read what I have said above. Even a first grader would understand that it`s not a good thing to be sitting in the middle of two bullies everyday.

``It is being led kicking and screaming by the world community. Is this a good spectacle for most Pakistanis?``

Oh pleaseeeeeeeee, that`s so immature. Typical Indian mockery at it`s worst. Most of the world including most of Pakistan is shocked by the horrible tragedies that occurred on September 11th. Pakistan lost 200 people of it`s own in the World Trade Center. Everybody`s hurting. CNN is aired in Pakistan. The majority of people in Pakistan saw the world trade centers go down along with the world.

``The real culprit is your Army. It has created hatred against India and benefitted in the process.``

And your government and army are angels? Where does hatred for Pakistan come from in India? By your media, your government, and your army. Check your own purse before delving into Pakistan`s.

``Today, one person is deciding the fate of 130 million Pakistanis. Instead of creating a consensus on policies, policies encouraged for 20 years and more, however wrong they may be (i am talking about pro-Taliban policies here)are being discarded at the drop of a hat.``

The Taleban hasn`t been in power for 20 years. What are you talking about? As far as the military ruler, Pakistan was and is an unidealistic political state. We do the best with what we have. Our leaders have surpassed the levels of corruption. The bloodless military coup

was the only way to stamp out Nawaz Shareef`s exceeding corruption.

``What about discarding your time-tested friend China. How do you think China will feel about the way Mushy boy is suc.king upto Uncle Sam?``

Are you guys jealous that Vajpayee`s `suc.king up` isn`t going anywhere? India went crazy trying to suc.k up to the US the minute the first plane hit the first tower. But that`s beside the point. President Musharraf realized the magnitude of the situation and thus acted accordingly. Any country would do the same.

``When all this is over and if Pak manages to come out unscathed, do you think China will still be a strategic partner.``

You think China is unsupportive of the US`s war against terrorism? They may not say so vehemently, but they are with the world right now.

And the world is with the US. There is no question about Pak/China relations at this point. It is childish to even bring that up. And Indians are acting pretty childish right now.

``At worst of times (when Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan)India did not turn its back on Soviet Union, however wrong that policy of invasion was. There was a consensus at home and we could tell the Americans and the rest who opposed us to take a hike. That is the strenght of democracy.``

NOPE, that is the stregth of FEAR. India was FEARFUL of the Soviet Union. Remember, the Soviet Union was the second most powerful nation in the world back then. And it was in close proximity with India. Now if I were India, I`d be pretty scared to upset the great neighbor too. It`s pretty stupid of you to turn that into an `India the great democracy` situation. It`s pathetic.

Re:Reply #: 514

shima,

Thanks for your post. I agree with it completely.

Sridhar

sorry that was shima not shammi

shammisahab:

``Can you see any hope of changing minds of Scout, Sarwari, YLH, Ali1, Akash, Gowardhan? I guess Jay and Rsaxena are too old to change``

what man..you saying im beyond hope also? or godforbid, that i dont count at all?:( im feeling very left out

RSridhar:

First of all, I have never read you on Chowk(as far as I remember). Secondly, I have never read Scout dissecting someone`s post line by line. I was impressed :) I personally have no patience for that. My intent was not to condemn or negate the essence of your argument; therefore, do not become sensitive on that end. OK!

On your question regarding Kashmir`s Issue: I have hardly `ever` followed `any` arguments on Chowk on Kashmir. It was way back when I ever did that. Personally, I have NO interest in Kashmir. I am sick and tired of this land that has become a curse(hanging sword) for Pakistan since 1947. We have internal issues and matters that require far more attention than looking into Sri-Nagar and elsewhere. I had to read the details of Kashmir`s Issue so many times for my school, college and university exams that I simply abhor this subject and anything associated with it. Please also keep in mind that all Pakistanis do not have the same opinion on the matters of Kashmir. The ones who have families in that area or have had families who`ve migrated from there in the recent past, their attachment and affiliation will be very different from others. This is a natural human reaction. You cannot generalize that for the whole country.

On the other hand, the fact that many Muslims have died in Kashmir and have been mistreated will provoke Muslims from all over the world to comment on the issues prevalent there. Should they be worried about it? This aspect hit me very hard just recently(kind of a revelation) after analyzing the current series of events - The whole world is linked together; you are no longer a stand-alone entity. This is a very deep concept to look into. I do not want to delve into it any more than I need to, but I had to mention why there will be intervention in Kashmir`s matters.

To me, it`s mere fitnaa(bone of contention)!!!

Late Hafeez Jalandhri(my very darling poet)wrote his sentiments on being in Kashmir, and that`s the most beautiful picture one can find , if one has not visited the place. But on the other hand, this beauty is a plain curse. I hate to hurt anyone`s feelings, but I cannot help expressing my disgust as well. I do not even like migrations! Either people should migrate fully to another place or they should not. In the former case, at least they do not have any family or relatives left behind; whereas, in the latter case, they do not have the worries of the former case. Well, this is a very naive thought on my end! If I rationalize my own argument, then what about the friends? the land? the associations? and etc...It`s a web of complexity. I dislike it like anything.

On a last note: There are certain battles on Chowk that can be fought based on logical arguments or deductions or whatever; whereas, there are other subjects that cannot be resolved just by outwitting each other or by cross-examination. Doing any of the aforementioned, will never put the subject to rest.

If the cause of an issue was not logical or based on a principle then how can you imagine its resolution to be that way ?

That`s it from my end.

PS: I would like to put this subject to rest. I am too sensitive to think about the attrocities and comment on them as an observer. It takes a lot out of me to do that. Sorry, I am not in that mood!

Take Care.

Dear scout:

You write:

``When have Muslims, in the twentieth century committed mass genocide of Christians..``(scout)

Just a reminder -- would you call mass killings of Christians Armenians by Muslim Turks -- a genocide?

In the Hammam of mass murders -- everybody got naked once or twice -- including us Muslims.

Sridhar, Kerallite and other south Indian muslims are at least a notch more educated than their north Indian counterparts, and that is why they are more open to universal principles. That is where as Indians we should all try more. That is where I always feel bad when educated muslim like Farzana Versey wastes her time on non-issues. Today Megawati Sukaranaputri has made a statement stating that many pressing issues in Indonesia are overlooked by the fundamentalists and creating a rift in the society by raising a false alarm on claiming how islam is in danger.

It is actually whole humanity is in danger, if really a clash between civilisations occurs.

On a different note, I agree with some of the interactors who are lamenting on the standard of Chowk going down. You do not see interactions from many of the learned Chowkies any more. I have been in Chowk for the last three years, and got into habit of openeing it everyday despite my busy schedule, but am disappointed to see only personal attacks and deep sense of hate between Indians and Pakistanis, hindus and muslims. Can you see any hope of changing minds of Scout, Sarwari, YLH, Ali1, Akash, Gowardhan? I guess Jay and Rsaxena are too old to change :)

re nasah 493

No kidding. History recalls that Milosevic`s closest allies were Libya and Iraq(India was a friend too)while it was Bob Dole and Baroness Thatcher fighting in their own countries to lift the embargo against Bosnia`s legitimate government. Some place the `ummah` has to criticize the West for Bosnia`s misery!

Scout #498,

I asked you about Pakistan backing terrorism and the answer I get is both India and Pakistan should get out of Kashmir.

So, basically what you are saying is that as long as India occupies Kashmir you will keep on killing little Kashmiri school girls.

Regarding my #491

You accused RSaxena, Gowardhan and Jay of attacking all Muslims. As far as I can recall they have laid the blame for WTC only at Pakistan`s doorstep. So, where did you get this idea that they were attacking Muslims?

Re:Reply #: 494

Zahra,

Though your post does not deserve a reply, let me just say we are interacting here not to gain any brownie points but to put forward our views. My views are very clear cut and i voice them without bothering about the ``eenth ka jawab pathar me`` types. I believe policy of jehad by Pakistani rulers in Kashmir is wrong, that Army in Pak is the real culprit and should be shown the door and democracy ushered and so on. I pity those Pakistanis who have not had the time or the inclination to introspect to see if 50 years of anti-India policies have done any good for Paksitan. If you or scout feel you are at this intellectual level of introspection, then feel free to interact with me. Otherwise, do not bother.

Sridhar

Re:Reply #: 488

fawad79,

Criticism of countries rulers and policies does not amount to hatred. That is the first lesson in democracy.

I have spoken against present Pakistani military ruler as well as many of his policies but never have i passed any personal comments against anyone because he belongs to a country or a religion. People like ylh have posted hateful remarks against hindu religion or India just because they did not like some Indians on the chowk.

Sridhar

Re:Reply #: 485

RSaxena,

It is amazing to see how deluded may Pakistanis are. They firmly believe that Mushy as a dictator is good. No Pakistani on board has ever criticised the terrorists in Kashmir. So, i am led to believe they actually believe violence will work in Kashmir or anywhere. That is delusion # 2 for you. The only thing that seems to unite pakistani clergy and its rulers is anti-India hatred. I was shocked to read that the only thing that convinced the mullahs in Pak to side with Musharraf when he agreed to co-operate with USA was his argument that if Pak did not help then vily hindus will and will become a frontline state. The only things that keep my hope of closer ties between the 2 countries alive are people like Tahmed and bilal ahmed.

Sridhar

Re:Kashmir, Taliban and other matters

scout,

I read your post only now,hence the dealy in replying to your post.

We are going round in circles. Everyone needs to realise that violence in all forms is bad. Violence in Kashmir was started by terrorists or jehadis or freedom fighters whatever name you wish to label them by. Remember, no country will sit by and watch violence unleashed on its territories. This holds true for Srilanka (against LTTE, Russia (in Chechanya)as well as India (in Kashmir). Tamilians in Srilanka had a groundswell of sympathies (in India, especially among the Indian Tamils) when they started their epic struggle against oppression by the Sinhala majority. Soon this struggle turned violent. Tamil terrorists started targetting innocent people. One of India`s P.M was killed by them. That is when a kind of revulsion spread among the Tamilians in Tamil Nadu. I was present in Madras (where i was doing M.D)when Rajiv Gandhi was assasinated. Most people felt enraged and ashamed at what had happened.

Today, nobody has any sympathies for LTTE though almost all will concede that Srilankan Tamil`s struggle is for genuine grievances. By resorting to violence, Tamilians in Srilanka have lost any claim to legitimacy. Kashmiri terrorists are no different. Kashmiri aspirations are genuine. There is no reason to believe such aspirations cannot be fulfilled within the framework of India`s constitution. Other states like Bihar, Orissa have worse economic problems but they have not resorted to a vilent struggle against the center. Hence, the problem is not the grievance itself but the way it is being addressed in Kashmir. The human rights violations that occur while India fights these terrorists are regrettable but also inevitable. Terrorists are an invisible enemy. They hide like roaches and kill with impunity. While fighting them, it is inevitable that some (nay, many) innocent people will suffer. If Pak really cared, it should stop abetting and sponsoring terrorism from across the border. It will not do so for obvious reasons and so the struggle will continue until one party wins convincingly.

India is prepared to go to war for Kashmir. If it results in exchange of nuclear weapons, so be it. It will come to this if terrorism goes out of hand in Kashmir, or spreads to wider area in India causing incalculable damage. A little introspection by anyone with commonsense will reveal that Kashmir policy has been disastrous for Pak. Pak today is at the mercy of international monetory agencies through which USA keeps a tight tab on Pak. Do the Pakistanis feel good when some westerners tell them what to do? Is the hatred of India so much in Pak that they are willing to take every other form of SH!T only to keep an appearance that they are giving India a tough time? Many good Pakistani commentators and journalists have clearly stated that Kashmir policy of mini-war in Kashmir by Pak through militants has been disastrous.

Today, Talibanists and militants belonging to Taliban have come to haunt Pakistani rulers. Again,this pro-Taliban has been encouraged in order to rule Afghanistan by proxy as a means of achieving strategic depth vis-a-vis India. Was this a correct policy? Obviously not. Today, Pakistan is the only country to have official links to Taliban. It tries to cling on to Taliban in the hope that it can salvage an impossible situation. It is being led kicking and screaming by the world community. Is this a good spectacle for most Pakistanis?

The real culprit is your Army. It has created hatred against India and benefitted in the process. Today, one person is deciding the fate of 130 million Pakistanis. Instead of creating a consensus on policies, policies encouraged for 20 years and more, however wrong they may be (i am talking about pro-Taliban policies here)are being discarded at the drop of a hat. This is not something that anyone can be proud about. Of course, Pakistan has no choice but to co-operate.

What about discarding your time-tested friend China. How do you think China will feel about the way Mushy boy is sucking upto Uncle Sam? When all this is over and if Pak manages to come out unscathed, do you think China will still be a strategic partner. At worst of times (when Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan)India did not turn its back on Soviet Union, however wrong that policy of invasion was. There was a consensus at home and we could tell the Americans and the rest who opposed us to take a hike. That is the strenght of democracy. That is what Pak lacks today.

Summary of what i have said above:

1. Violence as a policy is wrong, however justified grievances might be.

2. Consensus building is necessary on vital national policies. For consensus to hold, democracy is vital. You cannot trust a dictator in a situation like this.

3. Democracy gives a nation the inner strength needed to follow through important policy decisions during turbulent times. If pakistani rulers thought pro-Taliban policies were of national interest, they certainly gave it up with great haste. If it was a wrong policy (as most people the world over believe it was), why have it in the first place?

I shall reply about OBL and other matters in another post.

Sridhar

Re:Kashmir, Taliban and other matters

scout,

I read your post only now,hence the dealy in replying to your post.

We are going round in circles. Everyone needs to realise that violence in all forms is bad. Violence in Kashmir was started by terrorists or jehadis or freedom fighters whatever name you wish to label them by. Remember, no country will sit by and watch violence unleashed on its territories. This holds true for Srilanka (against LTTE, Russia (in Chechanya)as well as India (in Kashmir). Tamilians in Srilanka had a groundswell of sympathies (in India, especially among the Indian Tamils) when they started their epic struggle against oppression by the Sinhala majority. Soon this struggle turned violent. Tamil terrorists started targetting innocent people. One of India`s P.M was killed by them. That is when a kind of revulsion spread among the Tamilians in Tamil Nadu. I was present in Madras (where i was doing M.D)when Rajiv Gandhi was assasinated. Most people felt enraged and ashamed at what had happened.

Today, nobody has any sympathies for LTTE though almost all will concede that Srilankan Tamil`s struggle is for genuine grievances. By resorting to violence, Tamilians in Srilanka have lost any claim to legitimacy. Kashmiri terrorists are no different. Kashmiri aspirations are genuine. There is no reason to believe such aspirations cannot be fulfilled within the framework of India`s constitution. Other states like Bihar, Orissa have worse economic problems but they have not resorted to a vilent struggle against the center. Hence, the problem is not the grievance itself but the way it is being addressed in Kashmir. The human rights violations that occur while India fights these terrorists are regrettable but also inevitable. Terrorists are an invisible enemy. They hide like roaches and kill with impunity. While fighting them, it is inevitable that some (nay, many) innocent people will suffer. If Pak really cared, it should stop abetting and sponsoring terrorism from across the border. It will not do so for obvious reasons and so the struggle will continue until one party wins convincingly.

India is prepared to go to war for Kashmir. If it results in exchange of nuclear weapons, so be it. It will come to this if terrorism goes out of hand in Kashmir, or spreads to wider area in India causing incalculable damage. A little introspection by anyone with commonsense will reveal that Kashmir policy has been disastrous for Pak. Pak today is at the mercy of international monetory agencies through which USA keeps a tight tab on Pak. Do the Pakistanis feel good when some westerners tell them what to do? Is the hatred of India so much in Pak that they are willing to take every other form of SH!T only to keep an appearance that they are giving India a tough time? Many good Pakistani commentators and journalists have clearly stated that Kashmir policy of mini-war in Kashmir by Pak through militants has been disastrous.

Today, Talibanists and militants belonging to Taliban have come to haunt Pakistani rulers. Again,this pro-Taliban has been encouraged in order to rule Afghanistan by proxy as a means of achieving strategic depth vis-a-vis India. Was this a correct policy? Obviously not. Today, Pakistan is the only country to have official links to Taliban. It tries to cling on to Taliban in the hope that it can salvage an impossible situation. It is being led kicking and screaming by the world community. Is this a good spectacle for most Pakistanis?

The real culprit is your Army. It has created hatred against India and benefitted in the process. Today, one person is deciding the fate of 130 million Pakistanis. Instead of creating a consensus on policies, policies encouraged for 20 years and more, however wrong they may be (i am talking about pro-Taliban policies here)are being discarded at the drop of a hat. This is not something that anyone can be proud about. Of course, Pakistan has no choice but to co-operate.

What about discarding your time-tested friend China. How do you think China will feel about the way Mushy boy is sucking upto Uncle Sam? When all this is over and if Pak manages to come out unscathed, do you think China will still be a strategic partner. At worst of times (when Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan)India did not turn its back on Soviet Union, however wrong that policy of invasion was. There was a consensus at home and we could tell the Americans and the rest who opposed us to take a hike. That is the strenght of democracy. That is what Pak lacks today.

Summary of what i have said above:

1. Violence as a policy is wrong, however justified grievances might be.

2. Consensus building is necessary on vital national policies. For consensus to hold, democracy is vital. You cannot trust a dictator in a situation like this.

3. Democracy gives a nation the inner strength needed to follow through important policy decisions during turbulent times. If pakistani rulers thought pro-Taliban policies were of national interest, they certainly gave it up with great haste. If it was a wrong policy (as most people the world over believe it was), why have it in the first place?

I shall reply about OBL and other matters in another post.

Sridhar

scout # 496

LOL- u mad girl

Re: Tahmed321 #484

I am not sure that it is only retired generals who created or supported the Taleban.

I think that Pervez Musharraf in his BBC interview admitted that despite the support that Pakistan had given the Taleban, they refused to heed Pakistan`s advice on several matters (Bamiyan Buddhas, OBL, NGO officials trials, minorities to wear distinguishing marks, etc.) and caused Pakistan embarrasment. The point is -- that he did admit that his government (as some others before him) had supported the Taleban.

I am glad that the Taleban are finally being jettissoned.

Re: RSaxena #483

In order to develop a response to terrorism, one needs to think through the strategy that terrorists apply. The response should to be to defeat the strategy, not the terrorist alone. Thus, knee-jerk responses are out (and you will find that they are EXACTLY what the terrorist wants you to do).

Fundamentally, terrorism is the strategy adopted by the weak against the strong. The terrorist cannot obtain his/her political/military objectives either through persuading public opinion through legitimate means, or through an all out military conquest.

The terrorist, thus, changes tacks and uses the strength of the adversary against itself. This is achieved by provoking the adversary into adopting a response that favors the terrorists` agenda. Thus, while the victims of terrorism cannot prevent or predict terrorist attacks, they can DEFEAT terrorism by choosing carefully the response they adopt. I am not saying that this is without cost, or that the cost may not rise, but it is the only practical way of defeating terrorism. Further, since the victims can completely control their response, they can also control the outcome of terrorism in the long run. The fundamental point is that the choice is yours as a victim - it is decidedly not in the hands of the terrorist. This is because even terrorists thrive or die on the basis of public opinion. Even in the international arena, terrorist movements are vulnerable when their actions alienate support. Just witness what the world thinks today of the menace of global terrorism after Sept. 11.

There was a time when some Arabs supporting the PLO conducted attacks in departure terminals in European airports in the `70s - you do not see much of that today. Why is that? In `75 an attack carried out by PLO sympathizers (or perhaps PLO members) in the departure terminal of Orly Airport killed several innocents. At the time, there were suggestions in the French newspapers that the pro-Arab policy of the French government should be reversed because it had failed to prevent the attack at Orly airport. Within days the Palestine Liberation Organization strongly condemned the attack. It also announced that it had taken measures to punish persons who engaged in the hijacking of airplanes, boats or trains. What the French journalists had correctly intuited was that the locus of the struggle was not at the Orly airport: it was at the Elysée Palace and at the Quai d`Orsay. This was tacitly recognized by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) when on January 29, 1975, it announced that henceforth it had decided to treat hijacking of airplanes, ships, or trains as crimes and would impose death penalties on hijackers if their actions led to the loss of life.

A similar thing happened after 38 were killed outside the J&K assembly this week - Pakistan joined India in condemning it, because it knew that the resulting negative publicity was too high a cost to bear. Of course, the WTC attack of Sept. 11, is to be seen in the same light - the response of the US will decide whether or not the Islamic world views it as the West vs. Islam or the West vs. OBL. If it is the latter, OBL will be history. That is also why people like Romair are often very sensitive to, and dislike Indian efforts to get `Pakistan branded as a terrorist state`. Nothing grates on any country/people more than being considered an outcast in the world community of nations. That also explains Musharraf`s support for the US in the face of domestic disquiet and internal opposition. The risk of losing Western political support, of being viewed by the world as an outcast, was too high a price to bear - higher than the risk to his own regime from internal opposition or dissent.

People are stunned when Lashkar-e-Toyba executes shepherds. But, it makes perfect sense from a terrorist`s warped perspective - it is to get security forces to fall like a ton of bricks on anyone who could be suspected of being a Laskhar operative (thus, alienating innocent bystanders). This is how one might win converts, and supporters to a political cause. People are outraged when innocents die, but it is how victims channel their response that determines whether the terrorists` agenda succeeds or not. In Kashmir, the avowed agenda of the terrorists (and through them their handlers - the rulers of Pakistan) is to make Kashmiris and non-Kashmiri Indians to view the world as `us` and `them`. This agenda is furthered when Indian outrage at bombings, killings, etc. results in heavy handed security measures being put in place - it brings more converts to the terrorists` cause. The bombings/killings carried out by the terrorists alone cannot undo the Indian State - those attacks are too puny to achieve the result. It is the Indian response alone that can do it. It is here that democracy wins - it exasperates terrorists and their handlers that an elected government controls security forces. An attack on an elected govt. is an attack on the people themselves. That is why democracy is sought to be undone by attacks on the legislature, govt. officials, threats to voters on Election Day, etc.

`… you hear most Pakistanis, they seem to be saying their military dictatorship is the best thing to have happened to Pakistan..`

You need to very careful as to why you hear voices appreciating the new leadership - it is all about removing corruption, throwing out incompetent politicians, stabilizing Pakistan, stemming the descent into lawlessness, etc. - but not explicitly for supporting or stepping up the Kashmir insurgency. Not a single person has claimed that the reason that Musharraf is supported is ONLY because of Kashmir. Although, many Pakistanis may support the official Pakistani line on Kashmir, it is clear that many Pakistanis are also acutely sensitive of being branded as `terrorists`. The T-word is so deplorable that many go to lengths to call terrorists `freedom fighters` , `jehadis`, `mujahideen` or `volunteers` (Romair`s original). Indeed overuse of the word `jehadi` itself has many people concerned for it is so closely associated with Islam, and sullies the religion. If global public opinion begins calling a spade a spade (e.g. as it happened with the Taleban, and Pakistan`s jettisoning them), and terrorists in Kashmir are called as such, you will see how quickly support for terrorism in Kashmir will disappear within Pakistan. Occasionally, an incident like WTC attacks is so evil, so overwhelming that the contrast in behavior between the victim and the terrorist is crystal clear. It is for the same reason that handlers of terrorists in Pakistan will not publicly support or condone any attack in India (I am however not ruling out such attacks). Short of that, the pin-pricks by themselves are unlikely to change Indian resolve or bring about any politico-military change. Rather, it may be counterproductive to the terrorists` cause - since many of the unsuspecting policemen who are killed by mines, and grenades are local Kashmiris with mouths to feed at home. It was precisely this - the annoyance of the ordinary public with the terrorists in Punjab, that eventually led to the fading of the insurgency there.

Furthermore, since the Musharraf govt. is seen to be doing some good by some Pakistanis, a physical attack on it by India over terrorism in Kashmir will be indistinguishable for many Pakistanis as an attack on Pakistan itself. Suddenly, you will make many more enemies, and anyone remotely associated with the government as heroes/martyrs - I do not think that this is what you want.

``…then there is the coward pack of culprits like Urstruly, sarwari, scout, etc. who don`t go to the frontlines to fight but provide ideological support to terrorism in Kashmir...``

My response above applies to this. Paper warriors are the first to flee from the cause when the cause itself becomes ignominious.

You have also stated that India should resort to selective assassinations - I am sure a very tempting option to you to eliminate undesirables. But, you need to also understand that it is counterproductive if used without thought to the arguments that I have laid out above. It may work (as it did in the case of Bhindranwale), but it alone is no panacea. Today, former Bhindranwale sympathizers run the state govt. in Punjab, and would have been mistakenly targeted by your assassination policy (if adopted) in the past.

The best solution is to contrast the terrorists` behavior from that of the victims in stark terms. Elections remain a potent tool - one side conducts them, the other mouths shibboleths. Do not underestimate the power of the ballot. Elections, or threats to disrupt them do not go unnoticed by the world.

#499 my previous post

``When those that emphasize the former outnumber those adhering to the latter, you have essentially a fundamentalist society. The latter outnumber the former in almost all societies except where muslims as a whole are not a majority.``

should read

``When those that emphasize the former outnumber those adhering to the latter, you have essentially a fundamentalist society. The latter ARE outnumberED BY the former in almost all societies except where muslims as a whole are not a majority.``

Re:Reply #: 490

jay,

I had argued in another thread many months ago that South Indian muslims are different. Many are well integrated into the cultural mileau of the region. So, a Kerala muslim will dress like rest of the Keralite, take pride in speaking Malayalam and so on. Same with many Tamil muslims. Abdul Kalam is a Sanskrit scholar. Another scholar Bhashyam (i think)gave illiminating commentaries on Ramayana.

Sridhar

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Romair:

``Are there any Indians who are happy for Pakistan, because the sanctions have been lifted, and thus the life of the average Pakistani will improve? If there aren`t any Indians who are happy, and many who are sad, then I would like to ask them why they feel this way.``

I am happy, sincerely so, about non-military sanctions being lifted on Pakistan. If my opposite in Pakistan is trying to make a better living, and the removal of sanctions makes it easier, why would I not be happy?

The lifting of military sanctions do not make me happy. I think you will find that understandable.

#490 jay

Janaab Jayaprakash:

There seems to be a battle going on - that has come out into the open now - between the moderates and extremists, between liberals and fundamentalists in islam. I have seen from close-up quite a few christian fundamentalists evolve into liberals once they decided that the book could be read in many ways. The bible is not a book of facts but one of allegories and mataphores, they have come to argue. What has happened in the west is that rationalism has tipped the balance in favor of the liberals.

What has been happening in muslim societies is rather the opposite. The koran has come to be more and more a book of facts and instructions on high. A major difference i think is that the bible is not the voice of god. It`s more like a biography of god. It`s easier therefore not to insist on a literal interpretation of the book. The koran, on the other hand, being a book of god`s words, is harder for a believer to deviate from. Hence the arguments are not about interpretations but which of the many mutually contradictory passages you choose to emphasize. On the one hand you have ``slay the idolators`` and on the other, ``there`s no compulsion in religion.``

When those that emphasize the former outnumber those adhering to the latter, you have essentially a fundamentalist society. The latter outnumber the former in almost all societies except where muslims as a whole are not a majority.

More power to people like tahmed123 but voices like his are drowned out everywhere where muslims are a majority.

MaheshG #491, ``And you think you will help Kashmiris attain their complete freedom by killing little school girls?``