The Price

Hamzad:

``Ridiculing the former masters is what slaves are still afraid of------I think``

lol Then you really must see some Indian movies depicting British raj or western culture in general. I would recommend Kranti, Poorab aur Paschim etc. Also, Pakistani plays like Buddha Ghar pey Hai, where someone is always ``foreign return`` or dances like Michael Jackson

stuka---354

you wrote:

[Speaking for India, why the hell should we make movies on christians and jews? People in Gorakhpur and Patiala won`t even know what a jew is]

For the same reason Harundi Bakhshee & So many Rajahs & Snake Charmers are shown.Gorakhpoor people know the western people more than you think.Ridiculing the former masters is what slaves are still afraid of------I think

re: semipreciousme

``…next you’re going to suggest that we all hold hands and sing that old favorite of yours, kumbayah…:)``

...no way...i`m just using it to find fault in pakistan`s stance... :)

``….john reid and what’s going on with sohaib are definitely not isolated incidents….that’s why i’m glad the pcb has decided to support the bcci on this one…now if only they’d return the favor and tour pak….we’ll go easy on ‘em….i promise…;)``

...it`s no secret pak`s had a better team for most of the time...but hey, you gotta be better at something when you`re worse in everything else ;)

Re: Tahmed321

``...Religion has nothing to do with it...``

Indeed -- one only needs to look at the 3rd Mughal emperor, Akbar the Great, who consolidated Humayun`s crumbling empire, pacified the Rajputs by striking an alliance, sought a compromise with different religious groups, and set the foundation for the greatest Indian empire since Ashoka. Wisdom was Akbar`s greatest strength. No wonder, it was Akbar from whom Lord Curzon (the British Viceroy who had the most proactive Indian foreign policy) sought inspiration.

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

tulukka_koothi #50 you explain ``My handle simply reflects the Tulu and Kannada heritage and Koothi (pronounced somewhat like cutie) in a broad sense means one interested in cultural heritage.`` I accept your explanation with thanks. And thanks to Layman too for his (her?) keeping an eagle eye for obscenity. It is all explained by linguistic differences. And to saminashah and roohi for speaking out. Alls well that ends well, and we can all laugh about it over a cup of tea and samosas.

For a minute saminashah and then Layman had me worried. Whew!!

hamzad #330 I read that story too. To me it proves that a backward people will fight and squabble like backward people, regardless of whether they are hindutvas on chowk or mullahs on chowk or the last two jews left in Afghanistan or the ex-mujahadeen (now split into taliban, ex-taliban, and the various factions of the Northern Alliance that would be at each other`s throats if the internatinal community wasnt there). Since muslims happen to be among the most backward people on earth (particularly the rich ones Arab countries), they also tend to be the ones most incapable of living in peace with their neighbors.

Religion has nothing to do with it.

kafir k. khan ``Benazir is an extraordinary woman who has the skill of an able adminstration, diplomacy and government.``

Could you give some examples of Benazir`s extraordinary administration skills? The decades of the 90s is being called Pakistan`s lost decade. Poverty levels went up from a historically low 18% to a historically high 40%.

Please read the World Bank and Transparency International`s reports regarding what went on in Pakistan during Benazir`s rule. Following is one sample. Even the Swiss courts, which notoriously shy away from prosecuting the world`s biggest criminals, agree she is corrupt:

``Pakistan: Bhutto to be charged with money laundering

After wide-ranging inquiries Swiss investigating magistrate, Daniel Devaud, is quoted to have amassed enough evidence against former Pakistan Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, to be indicted on money laundering charges. Prosecution on the charges is to be held in Pakistan, though, since Ms. Bhutto is not able to leave the country to defend herself in a Swiss court. The accusations are linked to kickbacks from the Switzerland based Societé Générale de Surveillance, the world’s biggest testing and inspection company, and a subsidiary firm, which carried out contracts in Pakistan during Ms. Bhutto’s premiership. (http://www.transparency.org/documents/newsletter/98.4/reports.html#Pakistan2)

I am not quite sure giving interviews in India is a correct criteria for the leadership skills of a Pakistani leader. Should an Indian leader be judged by how many interviews he/she gives in Pakistan, or by what he/she does for India. If you want to read the Indian interviews of credible Pakistanis, please read the speech made in India by Najam Sethi (for which he was jailed by Nawaz Sharif). That, I think, sums up quite fairly the situation in South Asia.

The recent popularity and near hero status in the West, of Musharraf, has been a great blow to Benazir and Nawaz. Now their chants of dictatorship are falling on deaf ears. At the same time, the next elections will bring a new leadership within their own parties, which will sooner or later sideline these two leaders (after all the name of Benazir`s party is Pakistan Peoples Party; PPP does not stand for Benazir`s Personal Party). This is what Benazir is really scared of. She never held elections within her own party, due to the fear of being replaced, and was appointed the lifetime Chairperson.

So the next ten months are do or die for her. The only ones willing to listen to her are the Indian leadership, for obvious reasons. She is discredited everywhere else, apart from her own die hard close followers (much like Pakistan`s religious parties are discredited; maybe finally Pakistanis are finally starting to think, instead of naively following false pied pipers), and in her ancestoral feudal lands of Larkana. I think she is just weakening herself within Pakistan. However, this is the only card she has left, albeit a weak one. She wants Vajpayee to talk to Bush to pressure Musharraf to get her back into power. Quite a long shot, if you ask me. This is music to Vajpayee`s ears, but I doubt Bush is going to agree, considering the fact Pakistan is going to hold elections in ten months anyways.

Even if everything Benazir said is correct, the Pakistani public, rightly or wrongly, does not want its dirty laundry washed, for opportunistic reasons, outside Pakistan. Even the APHC, the true representatives of Kashmiris, according to Benazir herself (and in my opinion also), has criticized her actions.

I think it is about time Pakistani mullahs realize that to be beneficial for Pakistan, they need to be popular in Pakistan, not in Afghanistan. And people like Benazir realize that they need to be beneficial for Pakistan, they need to do good in Pakistan, not be popular in India. If they can do both, that is ideal, but they are not aspiring for the PMship of India, they are aspiring for the PMship of Pakistan.

I think any Indian, who is a well-wisher of Pakistan, will realize that Benazir was never good for Pakistan. Any Indian, who wants to see Pakistan destroyed from the inside, would like to see Benazir or Nawaz back in power. In that sense, it is understandable why Benazir and Nawaz are so well like in India. They have done more damage in ten years to Pakistan, than India could do in one hundred years.

It is about time, Pakistanis shifted their eyes onto other political leaders in Pakistan, apart from the ones regularly thrown out by the feudal and ethnic dominated PPP, PML and MQM. There are many other civilian Pakistanis out there, you know. Does it have to be Benazir every single time?

On second thought, in here speech, Benazir did state that the Kashmiris should be given a right to self-determination. I am surprised none of the Indian papers have highlighted that.

Unstinted co-operation at work

The `airlift of evil`

Why did we let Pakistan pull `volunteers` out of Kunduz?

A convoy of several hundred Taliban soldiers evacuate their northern foothold of Kunduz to surrender to opposing Northern Alliance forces earlier this week.

By Michael Moran

MSNBC

NEW YORK, Nov. 29 - The United States took the

unprecedented step this week of demanding that

foreign airlines provide information on passengers

boarding planes for America. Yet in the past week,

a half dozen or more Pakistani air force cargo

planes landed in the Taliban-held city of Kunduz

and evacuated to Pakistan hundreds of

non-Afghan soldiers who fought alongside the

Taliban and even al-Qaida against the United

States. What`s wrong with this picture?

THE PENTAGON, whose satellites and drones are able

to detect sleeping guerrillas in subterranean caverns, claims it

knows nothing of these flights. When asked about the

mysterious airlift at a recent Pentagon briefing, Secretary of

Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Gen. Richard Myers,

chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, denied knowledge of

such flights. Myers backpedaled a bit, saying that, given the

severe geography of the country, it might be possible to duck

in and out of mountain valleys and conduct such an airlift

undetected.

But Rumsfeld intervened. With his talent for being blunt

and ambiguous at the same time, he said: ``I have received

absolutely no information that would verify or validate

statements about airplanes moving in or out. I doubt them.``



Western reporters actually in Kunduz in the days after

it fell this week found much to dispel that doubt. Reports

first appeared in the Indian press, quoting intelligence

sources who cited unusual radar contacts and an airlift of

Pakistani troops out of the city. Their presence among the

``enemy`` may shock some readers, but not those who have

paid attention to Afghanistan. Pakistan had hundreds of

military advisers in Afghanistan before Sept. 11 helping the

Taliban fight the Northern Alliance. Hundreds more former

soldiers actively joined Taliban regiments, and many

Pakistani volunteers were among the non-Afghan legions of

al-Qaida.

Last Saturday, The New York Times picked up the

scent, quoting Northern Alliance soldiers in a Page 1 story

describing a two-day airlift by Pakistani aircraft, complete

with witnesses describing groups of armed men awaiting

evacuation at the airfield, then still in Taliban hands.

Another report, this in the Times of London, quotes an

alliance soldier angrily denouncing the flights, which he

reasonably assumed were conducted with America`s

blessing.

``We had decided to kill all of them, and we are not

happy with America for letting the planes come,`` said the

soldier, Mahmud Shah.



IN DENIAL

The credibility gap between these reports from the field

and the ``no comments`` from the U.S. administration are

large enough to drive a Marine Expeditionary Unit through.

Calls by MSNBC.com and NBC News to U.S. military and

intelligence officials shed no light on the evacuation reports,

though they clearly were a hot topic of conversation. ``Oh,

you mean `Operation Evil Airlift`?`` one military source joked.

``Look, I can`t confirm anything about those reports. As far

as I know, they just aren`t happening.`` Three other military

and defense sources simply denied any knowledge.

Something is up. It certainly appears to any reasonable

observer that aircraft of some kind or another were taking off

and landing in Kunduz`s final hours in Taliban hands. Among

the many questions that grow out of this reality:

Was the passenger manifest on these aircraft limited to

Pakistani military and intelligence men, or did it include some

of the more prominent zealots Pakistan contributed to the

ranks of the Taliban and al-Qaida?

What kind of deal was struck between the United States

and Pakistan to allow this?

What safeguards did the United States demand to ensure

the evacuated Pakistanis did not include men who will come

back to haunt us?

What was done with the civilian volunteers once they

arrived home in Pakistan? Where they arrested? Debriefed?

Taken to safe houses? Or a state banquet?



WHY NOT ADMIT IT

The answers remain elusive. If the passengers were

simply Pakistani military and intelligence men, and not civilian

extremists, what possible motive is there for concealing the

truth about their evacuation? Pakistan may believe that no

one has noticed the warmth of its intelligence ties to the

Taliban and even al-Qaida, but surely the Pentagon isn`t

operating under this illusion, is it? This news organization has

quoted U.S. intelligence sources as far back as 1997 as

saying that ties between Pakistan`s intelligence service and

al-Qaida, and links to the Taliban - a movement nurtured by

Pakistan - are undeniable.

Furthermore, the United States can easily explain why

it would have allowed a military ruler under intense pressure

at home to adopt an unpopular pro-American stance in this

war to evacuate some elite intelligence and military forces

from a chaotic battlefield. But only if, in fact, the planes

were limited to evacuating those people.



The lack of a forthright answer to this question suggests

otherwise, and that is a great shame. The history of

American policy in Southwest Asia, from the shah of Iran to

Saddam Hussein to Afghanistan and Pakistan, is marred by

one example after another of short-term decisions that stored

up enormous trouble for later. We failed for decades to find

common ground with the world`s largest democracy, India.

We failed to temper the shah`s domestic abuses in Iran in the

name of anti-communism and wound up with the ayatollahs.

We decided not to rile our Gulf War coalition allies by

pushing onto to Baghdad and find ourselves a decade later

wondering how to deal with Saddam Hussein. We pumped

Afghanistan and Pakistan with billions of dollars worth of

weapons and military know-how to fight the Soviet invasion,

but then adopted the Pontius Pilate approach in victory,

washing our hands of these struggling nations as soon as

Moscow withdrew.

Now, are we careening down the same road with a

nuclear-armed Pakistan? Are we allowing an army of

anti-American zealots to live and fight another day for the

sake of our convenient marriage with Pakistan`s current

dictator? I wish I could quote Rumsfeld. I wish I could say ``I

doubt it.`` I can`t.

Look in MSNBC-Opinion the following article

The ‘airlift of evil’

By Michael Moran

Hamzad:

``What a great subject for a movie.But Indo-Pak slaves dare not make movies about Jews & Christains unless in lovey-dovey sops.``

Speaking for India, why the hell should we make movies on christians and jews? People in Gorakhpur and Patiala won`t even know what a jew is and even if they did have a vague idea, they wouldn`t care. BTW, you guys don`t have any Jews either, and the Jews have never done anything to you, so what ius your problem? Is it a continuation of the ``every Muslim in the world is my uncle , aunt, cousin `` philosophy, and since the Israelis are oppressing Palestenians, and the Palestenians are Muslims, and since every Muslim problem is your problem, you have to hate the Israelis too???

In that case, you guys are truly different from us. Ham to aslee rishteydaar pehchaan ney sey manna kar detey hain, if they are in need or trouble. And you guys go around looking for Muslims in trouble to take help them out. Morally commendable, but I`m sure you are familiar with the term ``Maan na maan, mai tera mehmaan``.

By christians, if you mean Goras, then yes, there are novies like Kranti, Poorab Paschim etc which are basically retarded, but decent for cheap thrills. Those movies show eastern tradition of paying respect to elders, and it`s comparative superiority over western decadence. They ofcourse don`t pay much attention to Eastern repressiveness, and the contradiction of paying respect to elders while being exceedingly cruel the weaker segments of society, the hypocricy of religious piety covering up worldly corruption.

From The News:

``...Pakistani intelligence agencies estimate that roughly 8000 Pakistani jihadis, mostly from the tribal areas of the NWFP, are presently facing death either in the prison camps of Northern Alliance or in the besieged city of Kandahar. Officials said that some 2000 families have reported their male members missing in the NWFP and Balochistan in the last one month alone...``

http://jang.com.pk/thenews/nov2001-daily/30-11-2001/main/main6.htm

Bhutto Pursues a Pakistani Comeback, in India (NY Times)

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/30/international/asia/30INDI.html?searchpv=nytToday

Re: sadna

``...%ages donot make sense here...``

Agreed. They only matter if numbers count (as in elections). It is hypocracy to oppose elections, yet quote numbers when convenient.

Re: Poonawalla #328

``...No leader in India and Pakistan is courageous enough to accept that both Indian and Pakistanis overwhelmingly favor the LOC as an international border...``

I think that that is exactly the position that India has taken -- convert the LoC into an international border. You had also written in one of your earlier posts that `India should lodge a protest with the military govt. in Pakistan over infiltration`. That will draw a long yawn in Islamabad.

Re: Romair #322

``...Good leaders never wash their dirty laundry outdoors. I cannot imagine Al Gore going outside the USA to denouce George Bush`s policies...``

And good countries let political discourse and dissent be debated in elected assemblies, not on the streets or in foreign capitals.

I am glad that by bringing this up you are giving me an opportunity to demolish some of your long held myths. BB and NS have no opportunity to speak in front of their own people thanks to the President-General-for-life. Thus, she goes from the US Capitol to 10 Downing St. to Lok Sabha to Srinagar, because she is persona non-grata in the land of her birth.