India, Pakistan and America’s Mixed Signals

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

JIHAD HYSTERIA

``Later, organizers issued the statement they had planned to read at the rally, which they said was intended to ``denounce the buildup of war hysteria with one voice.``

If the Asma jahangir gang and the born again peace lovers of pakistan had acted against the jihad hysteria, the war hysteria would not have developed.

None of the pakistanis care o admit that jihad is a central religious concept, especially so far a country created for the religion. There can simply be no peace, as we understand it, across a jihadic frontier. It has not happened in the philippines, palestine, indonesis. It can only be a sustainalbe kill rates.

Anti war people of today are actually pro-jihadic people, and that explains why pakistanis are against war.

For Pakistan Nuclear option is the only viable option.Let the Hindus have the first taste of it & in huge doses.After that whatever happens is for muslims to decide among themselves.This would send a clear signal to the Satanic States too.

__________________________________________________

NUCLEAR WAR LOOMS IN SOUTH ASIA

Copyright: Eric S. Margolis, 2001

December 30, 2001

For the first time since the October, 1962 Cuban missile crisis, two nuclear-armed powers, India and Pakistan, are in a direct military confrontation that could lead to a massive conventional war - and even to full-scale nuclear conflict. The armed forces of both old foes are on high alert and deploying to forward positions. India and Pakistan said last week their nuclear-armed missiles were ready to strike.

When `War at the Top of the World,` my book on Afghanistan and the Kashmir conflict first came out in 1999 (2000 in the USA, UK, and India), people asked, `who cares about that region?` I sought to explain, usually in vain, that this little-known, but highly strategic, part of the globe was about to erupt. A nuclear war between India and Pakistan, according to CIA studies, would kill 2 million people immediately, and injure 100 million. Equally apocalyptic, a nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan, and attacks on one another`s nuclear power reactors, would send a cloud of radioactive dust around the planet.

India and Pakistan have already fought three wars over Kashmir. For the past twelve years, a score of Kashmiri Muslim insurgent groups have waged a fierce guerilla war against some 600,000 Indian soldiers and paramilitary troops in Indian Kashmir. India calls the Muslim insurgents `Pakistani-supported terrorists,` a position lately adopted by the United States. Pakistan calls them legitimate `freedom fighters` battling for the independence of Kashmir. India`s has long rejected UN demands for a plebiscite to determine Kashmir`s future.

The Kashmir insurgency has been an extremely dirty war. Some 50,000 have died, mainly civilians. Indian forces have resorted to brutal reprisals, arson, torture, murder of suspects, and gang rape of Muslim women. Kashmir insurgents have slaughtered Hindus, causing 250,000 to flee the Jammu region, and assassinated many state officials. Indian forces disguised as Kashmiri mujihadin have even attacked Sikhs in an effort to turn them against Muslims.

India has long threatened to attack Pakistan, which it accuses of arming and supporting the Kashmiri mujihadin. In fact, Pakistani intelligence, ISI, has quietly backed some - but not all - of the militant groups, as well as Sikh separatists and Christian insurgents in India`s eastern hill states. India, in turn, stirs up sectarian violence inside Pakistan.

For India, the last straw came just before Christmas, when as yet unidentified militants attacked India`s parliament building in New Delhi. This assault followed attacks against Delhi`s trademark Red Fort and against the Kashmir parliament in Srinagar. India accused two new Pakistan-based Kashmiri insurgent groups - Lashkar-e-Toyiba and Jash-e-Mohammed - of staging the attacks with Pakistani backing. Interestingly, according to my information, neither of these extreme groups are run by Pakistani intelligence. But Pakistan was plunged into confrontation with an outraged India.

The attack on parliament in Delhi was an intolerable outrage. India`s cautious prime minister, Atal Vajpayee, is under intense pressure to strike Pakistan - or at least Kashmiri insurgent bases in the Pakistani portion of divided Kashmir. Hindu fundamentalists, led by Home Minister L.K.Advani and Defense Minister George Fernandes, are beating the war drums. Even India`s usually conservative generals are itching to `teach those bloody Paks a lesson.`

Pakistan is issuing its own threats and massing troops. The confrontation with India is a boon for Pakistan`s military strongman, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, diverting public anger over Pakistan`s recent debacle in Afghanistan and its unpopular new role as an American base. Unfortunately for Pakistan, Musharraf retired or sidelined the army`s best generals under American pressure just before the confrontation with India.

India is massing troops, armor, and aircraft to forward attack positions along its 1,000-mile border with Pakistan. India`s three powerful armor-heavy `strike corps` are poised to sever Pakistan`s vulnerable waist in the Bahawalpur-Rahimyar Khan sectors. India`s increasingly potent navy is ready to blockade Karachi, Pakistan`s main port and entry point for oil. India`s 1.2-million man armed forces, with 3,400 tanks and 738 combat aircraft, outnumber and outgun Pakistan`s 620,000 troops, 2,300 tanks and 353 warplanes. India`s arsenal is mostly modern Russian equipment, while Pakistan`s is obsolescent. Equally important, Pakistan`s limited industrial base allows only a short war, while India`s much larger economy can sustain a long conflict.

The US is leading frantic diplomatic efforts to prevent war. But passion are running very high. The most likely war scenario: Indian commando and air attacks on insurgent bases in Pakistani Kashmir which could escalate to full-scale war. Pakistan probably cannot halt a massive Indian invasion without using tactical nuclear weapons. This, in turn, could trigger nuclear strikes against military and civilian targets. Hopefully, both nations will pull back from the brink, but a false report, or another militant raid, could set off a huge, devastating war with unimaginable consequences.

__________________________________________________

Congratulations on a good article. It indeed speaks truth.

Several thoughts came to my mind after reading the article and the replies from both Pakistani and Indian/Israel sympathizers.

Thought number 1:

What has happened in Indian controlled Kashmir (a disputed territory declared by UN) in the past and what goes on there on a daily basis is a manifestation of denying the right of self-determination to the People of Kashmir. This right of self-determination is justified under several UN resolutions. UN resolutions call for the right of self-determination for the people of Kashmir period. People of Kashmir have waited for 50 years but India has denied the right to the people of Kashmir. India wants “terrorists” to stop terrorism and then they may talk about giving some autonomy to Kashmiris. “Terrorism in Indian occupied Kashmir and now in India started about ten years ago but what was India doing starting 1947 till 1989.

Same goes to Israel. The same old story. Occupied territories declared by UN and Israel’s rhetoric that you stop the terrorism first and then we may talk about giving you back your areas.

One common thread among both the countries is that they are denying UN resolutions thus redefining United Nations as Useless Nations.

Thought number 2:

Definition of terrorism as stated by the State Department of USA is “``Premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant * targets by sub-national groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.`` Similarly International terrorism is defined as “terrorism involving citizens or the territory of more than one country``.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,487098,00.html

Read the detailed article on the definition of terrorism by the link provided above.

By the above definition what India and Israel are doing by Kashmiris and Palestinians respectively is not terrorism but merely abuse of human rights and for which the punishment is minimal. However when the people of Kashmir and Plaestine fight for their right of self-determination/autonomy they are labeled as terrorist.

Surprisingly by the State Departments definition of Terrorism the war of independence by the Continental American forces in existing United States and the Anti British forces in the subcontinent were terrorists also. It is just that the “State Department’s definition” of terrorism didn’t exist at that time.

Killing of unarmed civilians by the use of military (India/Israel) should also be declared terrorist.

Thought number 3:

The thin line between terrorism and independence struggle is success. The best case is Israel itself. Just look at the history of the creation of Israel. Again the irony is that the “State Department’s definition” of terrorism didn’t exist at that time otherwise Minachem Begin was no different then bin Laden.

Thought number 4:

Sooner or later India and Israel will face the same fate as South Africa. They will relinquish the control over Kasmir and Palestine as atrocities can not go on forever.

Asfand Siddiqui

Sacramento CA

re hamzad afaqui

``The important thing to remember is that the Soviet Union is no more.Communism & Socialism are DEAD...``

Please make sure you remember Hazrat Ronald Reagan (RA), who made that possible, in each of your prayers. Also say a regular prayer for Mohtarma Maggie Thatcher and the jannati(late) Judge William Casey. Between them they surely brought down Communism just as the blame-America crowds like Chomsky and other left-liberals were busy saying that communism was the wave of the future. At that time, in the darkest hour of freedom, Reagan said that `no, freedom is the wave of the future`. Similar things are seen today except that red Communist totalitarianism is being replaced as the enemy by black Islamist totalitarianism. SAme left liberals are apologizing(Chomsky, Edward Said, Teddy Kennedy) and the same freedom-loving people are determined to stop this barbarity too. Heck at least you and I agree on the evil of communism/socialism.

Yeah, we`ll beat this Islamist cancer too. And it won`t take forty years.

Here is another example of how Pakistani Jehadi politics has affected it`s standing in the world; no cricketing country dares to tour Pakistan. It should give an idea to people like Ras Siddiqui, who view it`s Jihadi policies so romantically, where Pakistan stands in the civilized world today.

(The News, Pakistan)

Lack of international cricket is extremely disappointing: Inzamam

By our correspondent

KARACHI: Senior members of the Pakistan cricket team are disappointed with the lack of international cricket in the past six months and are looking towards the cricket authorities to provide them some financial compensation if this situation persists.

Pakistan Vice Captain Inzamamul Haq told `The News` here on Sunday that it was a disappointing situation for most of the players to have played just one Test (against Bangladesh) and five One-day Internationals since July this year.

``The situation is frustrating for all of us. The younger players are not getting a chance to gain experience at the international level and establish themselves while it is imperative for the seniors to play regularly to keep their places in the team,`` Inzamam stated. ``We are concerned with this situation because we are not even sure if we will get proper international cricket in the next few months due to the uncertainty surrounding the visits of West Indies, New Zealand, etc.``

``It also means basically that with the World Cup just one year away and a tough series against Australia before that, we are not getting a chance to settle down and form a winning combination,`` he pointed out. ``Also the present situation means loss of earnings for us, as we are all professional cricketers,`` said Inzamam and added ``cricket is after all our livelihood.``

Pakistan`s most accomplished batsman stated that in prevalent circumstances the players felt that the Board should prepare some sort of contract which would ensure some financial compensation for the players if they went without international cricket in the next few months.

``The Board and Lt. General Tauqir Zia look after the players and their welfare very well. But we just feel that in given circumstances it would not be a bad idea to discuss annual contracts providing financial stability to the players with the Board.``

Inzamam also made it clear that players would be more than happy to play at neutral venues in case touring teams and PCB accpeted it as a viable option to overcome the present lack of cricket. Pakistan has played just one Test against Bangladesh in the last week of August which they won inside three days and then five matches in the triangular one-day series in Sharjah in October-November, where they won the final.

In comparison Australia have during this same period played six Tests, India six, Sri Lanka four etc. Inzamam said the players realized that the present conditions were beyond the control of the Board, which was doing its best to organize matches.

``My point of view is that if the Board and Government is giving guarantees to visiting teams they should play in Pakistan. We played in similar uncertain conditions in Sri Lanka in the 1996 World Cup because the Sri Lankan Board and government had given us security assurances.``

He recalled that even in early 1999 the Pakistan team had toured India on their Board and Government`s assurances despite receiving death threats. ``It is not good for any team to go without international cricket for so long. The players lose their edge and get stale. Given this situation even our tour of Bangladesh cannot be taken lightly.`` Inzamam noted that since August, even Bangladesh had played more international cricket than Pakistan and would have improved and learnt a lot in these matches.

Asma Jehangir beaten during peace march at Indo-Pak border
Munir Ahmad (AP)
Wagah, December 31


Hundreds of antiwar demonstrators marched toward the Pakistan-India border on Monday in a protest that turned ugly when border guards, shouting obscenities, beat Pakistan`s top human-rights activist and at least a dozen others.
Asma Jehangir, a lawyer and activist who works as a human-rights envoy for the United Nations, was set upon by border guards led by Maj. Faisal Ghauri, a commander, after she said she and her entourage came to the border near the town of Wagah to demonstrate against war.

Jehangir was not seriously injured.

``We had planned this rally for peace,`` she told a news conference an hour after the late-afternoon rally. ``And it would have shown the international community that Pakistan is a peace-loving country.``

The rally included hundreds of activists and members of Pakistani nongovernmental organizations who were bused into the border area, roughly 30 kilometres east of Lahore, and began to march, holding candles and white flags.

Pakistani border guards told them to go back, but they continued to march. One guard slapped a female demonstrator, and the scene degenerated. Ghauri began shouting obscenities at Jehangir, saying,

``You are here to promote peace at a time when the enemy is holding guns.``

Other guards then set upon her with sticks, beating her and several male marchers who tried to protect her.

Later, organizers issued the statement they had planned to read at the rally, which they said was intended to ``denounce the buildup of war hysteria with one voice.``

``We are deeply disturbed at the Indian government`s steps to isolate and immobilize the people of the two countries by putting an end to all forms of communication,`` the statement said.

Calls to government officials in Islamabad seeking comment about the beatings were not immediately returned Monday night.

Jehangir was criticised by President Gen. Pervez Musharraf earlier this year for criticising Pakistan to the international community. He later apologized, saying he ``got emotional.``

[Begin Quote]

The December 13th attack on the Indian Parliament was either of local Indian origin or the work of someone that wants to poison the waters and embarrass Pakistan

[End Quote]

Keep up your disgusting propaganda! Why dont

you say openly (like the official spokesman

for Musharraf) that the Indians did it to

themselves. The Indians are attacking themselves,

the israelis attacked the WTC, islam is a

religion of peace etc. etc.

Fortunately, the whole world recognizes that

Pakistani officialdom exists in a separate

world of fantasy and delusion. The only

debate now is how to limit the damage to the

world at large by this bizarre culture.

Official Pakistan has invited, collaborated

and supported some of the worst mass-murderers

ever. All of this has been justified as freedom

struggle. Read any Pakistani newspaper

(Dawn, Nation). There are full of reports like:

Freedom Fighters Kill 7 in Wedding Party in

Occupied Kashmir

(Actual headline in Dawn)

If a society begins to accept statements like

this, it is truly debased and nearing a point

beyond civilization. Naturally these murderers

that Pakistan has nurtured have no interest

in the survival of Pakistan itself or any

reasonable solution in Kashmir. They are busy

blowing up the Srinagar Assembly or attacking

the Indian parliament.

What Pakistan needs

to decide now is whether it plans to

continue to support mass-murderers in the

name of religion or change its suicidal

path. A million indian soldiers are waiting

to hear the answer.

RE: Reply #: 14 sadna

``Ras, either the attack on Parliament was engineered by India and hence was not a `hit on the head by a hammer` or it was a terrorist attack NOT engineered by India in which case it was a `hit on the head with a hammer`. You can have it only one way not both.``

Sadna,

There is a fundamental problem with people like Ras Siddiqui. He apparently thinks it is unimportant that the 140 million people of Pakistan have had their fundamental rights abrogated by the army right now and for a majority of it`s existence, but somehow the rights of a few million Kashmiris are of paramount importance.

And we are somehow expected to believe that the Pakistani Government whose two timing shennanigans in Afghanistan have been exposed so vividly, is the innocent victim in all of these.

Mr Ras Siddiqui,

Who is Pakistan (or you for that matter) to say Kashmir or Palestine needs a solution?

The problem with Palestine is that there are too many non-Palestinians(Lebanese, Syrians, Iraqis, not to forget Pakistanis among the lot) shouting. Being a muslim does not give you any special relationship to a political problem or any one of its participants with whom you may share a a trait, be it religion, language, or color of the hair for all I care.

Its not wrong to have opinions but it is wrong to interfere and mess-up an already tangled problem.

When it comes to Kashmir, the Indian side has an elected government that is more than to say about Pakistan. If Indian Kashmiris have a problem they should bring it up like civilized people much like Martin Luther King did in the 1960s in America.

The 21st century does not recognize ``Jihads``, ``Freedom Fights``, or any non-democratic means as legitimate struggles especially against democratic institutions. Democracy is slow but eventually fair and to illustrate:the American minorities did not settle their issues overnight and they might open some new ones as times goes by. The last thing peaceful people who have legitimate concerns against democratic institutions need is interference or ``arms`` aka ``moral support`` from people not interested in resolving any issues but revenge for ``1971`` for whom they were to blame for themselves.

NotAMullah

RE: Reply #: 13 jay

``This should be a lesson for the geriatrics of delhi, a general can only respond to threats, threats to the military that sustains him. There can be good from a threat. from dawn of today``

That is an apt description of the leadership in Delhi. It is high time grandfathers Vajpayee, Advani and the crooked chameleon Fernandes are shown the door in the next elections to allow fresh blood into the corridors of power. All this take of no one being there to take over is just poppycock; the same kind of talk was bandied about during Indira Gandhi`s time, but India has emerged stronger than ever. The weak link in India`s rise to being a world power is the incompetent political leadership which is so out of touch. It is high time politicians who are more world savvy are elected.

The one person I am starting to admire is Farooq Abdullah. For so long he has been urging India to take the fight to Pakistan, but it took visions of their own mortality for our desh netas to act. More power to him.

ras

......pakistan too has to stop sending mixed signals if it wants america to stand by it .... the essential prerequisites are a return to ``real`` democracy and a crack down on the jihadic elements who are a public relations nightmare ..... it is difficult to compete with `` the world`s biggest democracy`` when you have clowns in khaki and jokers in bushy beards running around speaking for pakistan ......the only thing more idiotic is the sight of that psychopath saddam hussain shooting off his rifle on cnn .....

HI

I am surprised to see so suddenly see so many Pakis advocating peace. Had the same situation arosen in different time and space it wouild not be so.

Mumbhai

Ras:

You have asked the right questions, though I still find you a bit lenient towards the US. But are you quite certain that what America does will be seen as a war against Islam, as you say? If so, then is the Islamic world not justified in reacting to it as per the `slot` they have been fitted into? It is a chicken-and-egg dilemma.

You are right when you say, ``Pakistan needs terrorism today like it needs a hole in its head.`` Some fools do believe that `lesser` nations operate in this fashion.

Regards,

Farzana

Ref fozia #: 12

[If war does erupt and spirals out of control, Pakistan will eventually be the loser.]

But Pakistanis have been losers since Day One. They lost democratic control of their country to the Army. They lost the possibility of land reform to the feudals. They lost control of their government to the bureaucrats.

All you are saying is that the Army-feudal-bureaucrat complex will lose in case of a protracted war.

Maybe out of the ashes will rise a new Phoenix, a country where the people`s talents and skills are directed towards improving their plight and not for wars in Afghanistan or subversion in India. And then you will all realize that your best friends all along have been your Indian and Afghan neighbors.

That is not a bad outcome at all.

Ref sarwar #: 8

[Blood Brothers

Now More Than Ever, India and Pakistan Must Remember All They Share

By Akbar Ahmed and Amit A. Pandya

Many Pakistanis are sure that Hindus cannot abide Muslim self-determination on the subcontinent.]

Muslim self-determination? What a joke!

When did the Muslims ever have self-determination on the subcontinent?

At the time of their conversion?

Has a single government in Pakistan changed administrations quietly on democratic principles?

What is Akbar Ahmed trying to slip in here?

You want Muslim self-determination? Go to Bangladesh!

You want Muslim self-determination? Go to India next!

You want Muslims kept in ignorance and told that Allah will provide all they want in the next life so that they will be ready to kill themselves in this life. The only Muslim self-determination offered in Pakistan is mass suicide or slaving away for the welfare of the Army and the feudals.

Ras
``The December 13th attack on the Indian Parliament was either of local Indian origin or the work of someone that wants to poison the waters and embarrass Pakistan.``

``We have to take into consideration of what people are telling us before we get hit in the head by a hammer to recognize a problem. India needs to be similarly reminded. Kashmir needs a solution, one that respects the wishes of its people.``

Ras, either the attack on Parliament was engineered by India and hence was not a `hit on the head by a hammer` or it was a terrorist attack NOT engineered by India in which case it was a `hit on the head with a hammer`. You can have it only one way not both.

There is enough video footage of the attack to identify a few of the attackers, btw, and as a honest journalist interested in maintaining credibility, one would have expected you to at least mention this before making these allegations against Indians.

In either case, any Kashmir settlement you hope for, would need to be agreed to by the same MPs who were under fire on Dec 13. Donot expect these
MPs to capitulate to threats of violence, things just don`t work that way anywhere in the world, yeh jihad ki dalaali cchod dijeye and take to some more profitable profession.

MILITARY MIND,

This should be a lesson for the geriatrics of delhi, a general can only respond to threats, threats to the military that sustains him. There can be good from a threat. from dawn of today

Musharraf`s message delivered to Benazir

ISLAMABAD, Dec 30: The government on Sunday contacted former prime minister Benazir Bhutto, in exile in Dubai, to discuss current tensions with India, her party said.

A Pakistan People`s Party statement said that Pakistan`s consul-general in Dubai, Amanullah Larik, met Ms Bhutto on Sunday morning and delivered a message from the government.

Ras,

Good article, and especially like the history repeats itself theme by drawing back to 1971. One can only hope that this latest standoff will not escalate into war. Though I am of the opinion that even if India backs down, that in another 6 months to a year another issue will rear it`s head and the two armies will be staring each other down yet again.

I too am very skeptical Pakistan would even have given ``moral support`` to any Kashmiri groups to attack the heart of the India these days.

It simply doesn`t make sense, Pakistan and especially Musharraf had recently been annoited America`s new ``best friend``. Billions of aid dollars were flowing in again, along with a loosening of numerous trade restrictions.

This would obviously help to rebuild Pakistan`s shattered economy. Why on earth would they willfully now go and provoke India which is nearly 10x larger in population to go to war with them? Especially with US in their backyard talking about stamping out terrorism everywhere?

Quite frankly it does seem a little too conveniant that an act of terrorism occurred on Indian soil at precisely this time to take attention away from Pakistan/USA`s best friend status and put Pakistan back in the camp of countries that harbour terrorism.

If war does erupt and spirals out of control, Pakistan will eventually be the loser. Pakistan simply can`t afford a war drawn out of any significant period of time with India. It`s remaining finances will be depleted. Potential devastation in the cities along with the depletion of military strength. The LoC could potentially shift in this potential war. And it`s best friend USA will in the end pressure the weakening Pakistani military to show ``restraint`` and concede to the new LoC borders.

Long term - USA needs to build a stronger relationship with India to balance against the Chinese and Russian spheres of influence in that region. Should war erupt and India is the clear aggressor, it would be unlikely that Bush/Powell would do more than express ``dissappointment`` in this matter and in the end tilt their bias towards India once Osama Bin Laden is found - dead or alive...

Fozia

Ras,

``Why would Pakistanis pick this moment of all times to support terrorism in India, especially when the rest of the world including their own leadership is fighting a war against it? India in particular has threatened a military response against “terrorism” emanating from Pakistan. Nobody mentions the fact that Pakistan needs terrorism today like it needs a hole in its head.``

Here we go again. Did pakistan need kargill invasion when the lahore declaration was being signed. Ask the great pak general. Military cares only about the military, when the sanctions were lifeted the first request from the general was for F16s. Do you think pakistans top most need was F16s. Do not try to find comman mans reasons for jihadic thinking, that permeates the pak military.

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

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

[Much has also been said and written about the “questionable” safety of Pakistan’s nukes in the past few months (India’s Nukes are safe?).]

Yes, India`s nukes are safe. The nuclear pits are with the Atomic Energy Commission, the detonation assembly is with the military, they are far apart and cannot be put together except under the express order of the civilian government. Pakistan is reported to have fully assembled nukes and they are supposedly not mated to either the rockets or the F-16 aircraft but the nukes are under the control of the Pak military. So any rogue in the Pak Army could conceivably launch a nuclear attack. Also, fully assembled nukes means that a mob could storm the storage location and get the nukes out and create a DEFCON (defense condition) for the world.

[Many Muslims feel that Pakistan is being given negative reporting in the western media because of the fact that it is an Islamic country with nuclear weapons.]

It is being given negative reporting because of its unsavory association with Osama bin Laden, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, and a host of people beyond the pale. It is getting proper recognition for the fact that the Taliban are the students of madrassahs in Pakistan funded and run by fundamentalist religious leaders with the full support of the Pak government and the ISI. The best way to avoid negative publicity is not to engage in stupid things. You do not have the ``deniability`` factor when any reporter can walk into these madrassahs and see posters asking for donations for jihad.

[It would be interesting to find out who is giving these ideas to our media here but let me stress the point that any attempt to take out Pakistan’s nuclear assets by any party will not help America’s war against terrorists. It will be viewed as a collective war against Islam period.]

As id the world gives a sh!t about the Ummah`s opinion. So, what are you going to do even if it is a war against Islam? Fight America? Fly more planes into buildings?

Ras:

``..Nobody mentions the fact that Pakistan needs terrorism today like it needs a hole in its head...``

So, are you saying that there was time (before `today`) that Pakistan needed terrorism? Is that not an admission of guilt? Of formenting terrorism?

``The December 13th attack on the Indian Parliament was either of local Indian origin or the work of someone...``

Since you are implying that at some point Pakistan `needed terrorism`, then why should you be surprised if someone takes advantage of the situation in which Pakistan has painted itself (assuming that it was not the handiwork of the JeM/LeT who have offices in Pakistan)? You see, one can only be tarred with that allegation if one has been less than forthcoming and ambivalent about the nature of terrorism.

To listen to some geriaritic hippies is to acknowledge that Allah did send some folk to earth to serve as warning & specimen of His cursed ones.

The important thing to remember is that the Soviet Union is no more.Communism & Socialism are DEAD....Extinct,Kaput,No more!---& this was done by the Islamic Mujahideen(Never Never forget this!) with the help of that great Nemesis & Qehr on the red,pink,& purples.

The crushing of the theory & concept of communism is the start only.Some rats & roaches are trying to find cover under the fancy names of humanism,secularism,& relativism.They will be exposed even if they masquerade as Democrats.

What happened in Afghanistan(& Iraq) is nothing but business deals gone sour between individual interests.It has nothing whatsoever to do with Islam or Muslims or nations---but such is the tragedy & reality that individual snubs,insults & put-downs sometimes assume proportions of national pride & result is involvement of countless unnecessary deaths(both sides).Any other ``theory`` of history is nothing but an attempt to perpetuate tenure & wage-scales for the professors & advisors.

__________________________________________________

Nothing is going to happen.The US has no interest whatsoever in the affairs of India or Pakistan.These are already enslaved nations and if there is some row in the servant-quarters then it is just a minor annoyance.There has not as yet a better invented device than the bomb to achieve population parity with the `civilised` world.These countries are not Sierra Leonne, Zaire,or Somalia where rare metals abound & the chip-market would become ground zero in no time.

__________________________________________________

All the belligerance in India is to get the BJB & RSS rule buttressed before the next election or a vote of no-confidence.India is terrified by its muslim constituency & it can convince it only by making Pakistan look vulnerable.The confidence that got eroded in 1971 was replenished by the detonation of the bomb---and the Indian Muslims deep inside know the ruse of secularism.It is good to play along till the time is ripe & right.

The hindus just cannot afford to live without some former master looking over their shoulder.They are simply not used to it.Like a Dalit who will continue to be submissive to a brahmin even though he might achieve equality legally.I remember a South African Indian who was kind of uncomfortable by the thought that he could enter any theatre,go to any park,visit any place he wanted to....even after aparthied was no more.

__________________________________________________

The posturing by both the Bhoora-goraa slaves is to prove their deep loyalty to their former masters.They impress the world on CNN & BBC by their americanised & british accents.They leave no stone unturned to prove to their masters their profound knowledge about Disney-characters & prevailing fads & fashions.

__________________________________________________

Slaves have no right to `Analyse`.They are supposed to agree with the masters.They must speak like them,eat like them,dress like them.They must take orders from their `born-here` offspring because they themselves were `born-there`.They must learn to accept their offsprings` nakedness & vulgarity & constantly PROVE that they have ``evolved``.They must never be seen around proud muslims but apologise relentlessly for their colour & sound.Even Zoo animals keep the dream alive to be free one day.Not the Bhoora-Goraas! They urge the master never to abandon them & should trust them to leave the cage doors open.

Ras Sahib,

Good to see one of your works again.

You write, encapsulating one of the several fundamental thrusts of your article, that

``We are being made to believe that these two countries are the now somehow fighting the same war. ``

They certainly seem to be. In the cases of all three, the US, India, and Israel, what we see is the use of certain genuine political grievances to mercilessly assault, kill, and maim innocent people by the terrorists. Add to that the fact that each of the three countries thus affected is a representative democracy which in itself is a kindred bond. It is naive to believe that these countries do not somehow see a similar theme, if not similar groups, amongst these assaults. Indeed, one can argue that the attacks in NYC, Delhi, and eastern Jerusalem are part of a thematic barbarian attack on democracy itself.

Let us not kid ourselves. Whether it is the foreign mercenaries in Kashmir or the Saudi funded zealots elsewhere, they are simply enemies of freedom. The sooner other countries join India/Israel/USA to exterminate the vermin, the better.Rabid conspiracy theories (Israel did WTC or RAW planned the Parliament attack) are not going to wash this time, no matter how hard the apologists try.

What did the world expect India to do? Sit and wait until the Afghan war was over and then send diplomatic protests to Pakistan? No country can or should tolerate an attack on her Parliament, an institution that sets free peoples apart from others. In the case of the Delhi attack, it has symbolism far beyond India. After all the seat of the world`s biggest democracy was attacked. The only fault in India`s response, so far, has been her lack of it. One recalls Britain`s swift retaliation when the Nazis bombed the Mother of Parliaments sixty years ago.

In attacking PArliament House in Delhi, the perpetrators have attacked the very concept of free governments. The sooner they are exemplarily punished, the better.

``Now is not the time for verbal swordplay, for unlikely flights of imagination and wildly shifting perspectives, for metaphysical conceit, for wit. . . .Now is a time for simplicity. Now is a time for, dare I say it, kindness.`` - Margaret Edison, ``W;t``, Winner of the Pulitzer Prize for drama, 1999

Thank you Ras. It was very honest and much-needed.

Aamir

SEND THIS MESSAGE TO ALL YOUR FRIENDS!

STOP WAR IN SOUTH ASIA

All who value peace and human life need to intervene and stop war in South Asia. India and Pakistan are poised to engage in such a misadventure as their respective troops and missiles (possibly nuclear) face each other on their border and on the Line of Control in Kashmir. This is happening while we in the United States are busy watching the news from neighboring Afghanistan.

People of Indian and Pakistani origin especially need to wake up to the reality of what kind of misery this conflict will produce. Our armchair warmongers of South Asian origin who now make their homes outside the region, in Europe, Canada and here in the United States need to get a large dose of reality.

Some Pakistanis are arranging a peace march at a Northern California venue (exact date and place to be decided) this week and urge all from the South Asian (aka “Desi”) Diaspora and their friends to protest against the possibility of war between India and Pakistan. I hope that Americans will join us and show solidarity with the pursuit of sanity in the region. Let us have a happy, peaceful and prosperous new year in a part of the world where the misery of poverty already rules the streets. Help us stop this looming war.

WEDNESDAY JANUARY 09 2002



Cover story

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0%2C%2C7-2002013426%2C00.html



A state of war



BY TREVOR FISHLOCK



The dispute over Kashmir has brought India and Pakistan to the brink of nuclear war. But why has this beautiful state become the subcontinent`s powder keg?



Poets hymned it as a land of love and languor. In 1627 the dying emperor Jahangir, who shaped its blissful gardens, was asked to name his last desire. “Only Kashmir,” he murmured. “Only Kashmir.”

India’s first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, promised melodramatically that its name was written upon his heart. Today, millions make the same emotive claim.

Passions for Kashmir run hot and bitter, the bayonets almost touch and the urge for war is strong. Two rivals, two ideas, two faiths stand nose to nose in one of the world’s most dangerous places. One mistake or misjudgment and the spark falls on the fuse.

India and Pakistan have fought three wars, two of them over Kashmir. The great bulk of their armies are based along the frontier that runs through Punjab and Kashmir. The border is always tense.

In Kashmir there has been an almost permanent grumbling small war of artillery bombardment. Apart from the all-out conflicts, India and Pakistan have two or three times pulled back from the brink, and now the assessments of their military power have to include their nuclear capability. There was a particularly dangerous stand-off in 1990.

It was inevitable that the terrorist attack on the Indian Parliament on December 13 would bring India and Pakistan once more to the edge of the abyss. It was an echo of the October suicide bomb attack on the Kashmir assembly. The Parliament in Delhi is the heart and emblem of what India stands for. Now India is raging.

Poor Kashmir. It lies in the Himalayan ramparts where the borders of India, Pakistan and China rub together. Reality mocks its beauty. There is no escaping the permeating melancholy of a land that lies under the gun. It is as if malevolent gods, jealous of its loveliness, placed a curse upon it.

The poison entered the garden in 1947 when the war-weary British quit their Indian empire and partitioned it. They had no wish to cut it up: one of their imperial achievements, they said, was to have united India and made it secure. They divided it to meet the demands of Muslim leaders who said that Hindus and Muslims could not live together in one country, that the communities formed two separate nations. Pakistan was therefore created as a homeland for the subcontinent’s Muslims.

Britain ruled India with the co-operation of more than 500 Indian princes, a galaxy of maharajahs, rajahs, ranas, raos, khans, mirs, jams, nizams and nawabs, loyal to the British crown, well-oiled with flattery, some fantastically rich and a few of them barmy. In the summer of 1947, these rulers had to choose whether to take their states into India or Pakistan. It was a personal decision, without referendum.

Public opinion hardly came into it. Most princes joined India. Most knew that they would be extinguishing themselves as a ruling class, but it was clear to all but a few that the game was up. On the eve of independence, all the princes had made up their minds except four.

The Maharajah of Kashmir, Sir Hari Singh, was one of the ditherers. He was vain, pompous and addicted to hunting bears and shooting ducks. As a young man he had an unfortunate scrape in London, being found in bed with a woman at the Savoy Hotel and milked for a lot of money by a blackmailer pretending to be the woman’s husband.

At Partition, Kashmir, more fully known as Jammu and Kashmir, was in a key position: a prize because it was a large state and famously beautiful, a honeymooners’ resort of lakes and cool alpine meadows.

Given its place on the map, it could have swung either to India or to Pakistan. Because of its overwhelming Muslim majority, Pakistan’s new leaders expected that it would join their Islamic entity. But the maharajah had to decide — and he was a Hindu. This was not unusual. In princely India, Muslims often ruled Hindus and vice versa. But Hari Singh dithered. He could not believe that the British would really go home. He did not want to join Pakistan because he could not bear the thought of his state being subsumed. He dreamt that Kashmir could somehow be an independent country and he could keep his power.

India and Pakistan became independent in August. Hari Singh was still dithering in October. As he fiddled, the storm broke. Thousands of Pathan warriors from the North-West Frontier, bordering Afghanistan, rushed into Kashmir, vowing to seize it for Pakistan. Although they were a rabble, they might have succeeded. They were close to Srinagar, the capital, when they were delayed by their lust for loot and women. While they pillaged towns and raped girls and nuns, the hapless Hari Singh gathered up his diamonds and Purdey shotguns and fled his palace in a motorcade.

India acted fast and decisively. In a flurry of action the maharajah agreed to join India, and Indian forces flew to save Srinagar. This was the first Kashmir war, not an all-out confrontation but a series of fights and communal conflicts. Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the leader of Pakistan, wanted to send the new Pakistan regular Army into action, but did not do so when the absurdity of the situation was pointed out to him: the forces of India and Pakistan shared a commander-in-chief, Field Marshal Sir Claude Auchinleck, while many officers on both sides were British.

Kashmir was left divided along the line where fighting stopped in 1948. A United Nations ceasefire came into force on January 1, 1949. In 1965 Pakistan tried and failed to annexe Kashmir and was defeated in brief and bitter fighting. At one stage Indian forces were almost at the gates of Lahore and could easily have taken it. Pakistan’s leaders believed that Kashmiris would welcome Pakistani troops as liberators. It was a shock that they did not. In 1971 India and Pakistan went to war again, India assisting the secession of East Pakistan, which became Bangladesh. Pakistan was left truncated and humiliated.

Yet the story of a vacillating maharajah and the ensuing bloody quarrel over territory is only the half of it.

Kashmir is a tragedy for its divided people and a continuing source of danger in a subcontinent inhabited by a fifth of the world’s population. The tragedy has deep roots. Kashmir is the offspring of bitterly divorced parents. Pakistan aches for it but will never possess it. India will never let it go: it is not negotiable. The trouble is that both sides define themselves by this feud.

Their mutual suspicions date from the 8th-century Muslim conquest of western India and the many hundreds of years of Mogul rule that were brought to an end by the British Raj. For India’s Hindu majority, independence in 1947 was a reclamation of their vast land, the end of centuries of foreign domination. Nehru and others believed passionately that this new India would be a daring concept, an embracing of all its religious, linguistic and regional diversity, a magnificent secular state.

The steely and intractable Jinnah did not believe it. His new country of Pakistan grew out of that scepticism, the belief that Muslims in India would be vulnerable, second-class citizens.

Pakistan was an invented state, a by-product of the great Indian struggle for independence. It evolved in the last few years of British rule among people who wanted to escape religious and political discrimination in the new order. Landowners especially thought they would lose out in India. Democracy barely made the journey to Pakistan.

In a sense Pakistan remains stranded in 1947. Its great debate has centred for half a century on what it is for and what it should be. Jinnah mused that it could be a secular country. But in that case, what was the point of Partition? Some of his successors said that Pakistan was nothing if not Islamic and determined to make it more so, a military theocracy.

Yet Islam proved an unreliable glue. It did not cement Pakistan and East Pakistan. Bangladesh erupted as the assertion of Bengali language and culture. Nor did it cement the disparate parts of Pakistan itself — Punjab, Baluchistan, Sindh and the North- West Frontier — or, indeed, the many shades of Islamic belief. Thus Kashmir is useful, the “unfinished business of Partition”. However much Pakistanis disagree about the nature of their society, they find common cause in Kashmir, the belief that they were robbed in 1947. This is the unifying insult. It is why Pakistan has supported Kashmiri insurgents. India’s treatment of Kashmiris during the long years of internal strife are held as proof that Jinnah was right, that Muslims needed their homeland.

It is true that India could have managed Kashmir more wisely, less roughly. But Pakistan has to live with the fact that there are more Muslims in India than in Pakistan. India has the second largest Muslim population in the world: evidently Hindus and Muslims do live together in a secular society, Nehru’s idea of India, even if it is not always easy. And Kashmir, the only Indian state with a Muslim majority, is in Indian minds the shining fact of secular India. Its existence throws the question to Pakistan again: what was Partition for? India has a powerful idea of its identity. It is the giant of South Asia, its Armed Forces are huge and it is proud of its democracy, even if this is somewhat battered. Pakistan, on the other hand, does not enjoy such a positive identity. It thinks of itself in terms of its neighbour and endures the negative of being Not India.

It means that even if the impossible were to happen, that Kashmir should somehow become part of Pakistan, the anxieties and insecurities of Pakistan would endure. There would have to be another issue by which Pakistan could seek to establish its identity and purpose.

In the meantime the two nations face each other again — and judging from what we see and hear, there are many on both sides desperate to fight. Centuries of prejudice are poured into the funnel of Kashmir.

People on both sides treasure the slights of history. There is an endless misunderstanding of each other’s beliefs and opinions. Estrangement is total. Trivial matters become huge. Hindu nationalists complain that Muslims cheer for Pakistan during Test matches. In both India and Pakistan, keen teams of monitors comb through guide books and encyclopaedias searching for maps that might contain instances of “cartographic aggression” — inaccuracies that seem to favour one side or the other.

Words are traps, and there is a sense that a comma could cause a crisis. But the opinions of outsiders are not welcome. For this is a feud between cousins, a quarrel in the family. It could hardly be more acrid and perilous.

Iran fills a void left by Pakistan`s decline

http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/008/nation/Iran_fills_a_void_left_by_Pakistan_s_decline+.shtml

By Anthony Shadid, Globe Staff, 1/8/2002

SLAMABAD, Pakistan - Long the regional heavyweight, Pakistan now finds its role in Afghanistan has all but vanished, dealing a blow to the nation`s influence in southwestern Asia and leaving an opening for rivals like Iran, diplomats and officials say.

Iran is seeking to capitalize on the dramatic shift in Pakistan`s fortunes with moves to tie its economy more closely to Afghanistan, according to officials here and in Washington. Pakistan`s longtime rival is opening links to Afghanistan by air and road, the officials said.

``There has been a complete flip-flop on who was the major player, and it has gone from Pakistan to Iran,`` a Western diplomat in Islamabad said, speaking on condition of anonymity. ``The Iranians are good about not gloating over that fact.``

Iran`s entry into the void shows both the extensive diplomatic realignment in the region since Sept. 11 and how far Washington has come in its perceptions about Iran, a state it still lists as supporting terrorism. Moreover, diplomats said, it underscores how far Iran itself has come in moderating its policies and playing a more assertive international role.

The decline of Pakistani influence here is remarkable, given the formidable authority Islamabad wielded in the US-backed fight against Soviet troops in the 1980s and the far-reaching support it provided the Taliban during its rise to power in Afghanistan in the 1990s.

Today, Pakistan`s once-extensive intelligence network in Afghanistan has gone the way of its Taliban allies. In Kabul, it faces an Afghan government with a still-vivid memory of Pakistan`s support for the Taliban and consequently an intense distaste for any hint of Pakistani meddling.

Mushahid Hussain, a member of Pakistan`s Parliament and a former government minister, said that in his nation`s pursuit of `` this flawed policy to install a friendly government in Kabul, we promoted favorites, we ditched friends, we suddenly had a romance with the Taliban.

``Of course after Sept. 11, we realized that our pro-Taliban policy was buried in the wreckage of the World Trade Center.``

Iran played a more extensive role than has generally been acknowledged in reaching the agreement in Bonn last month that made possible the provisional government in Kabul, the diplomat said. Tehran has also taken on a higher profile inside the war-shattered country by providing aid, including the funding of teacher salaries in Kabul for the next six months.

In a farther-reaching effort, Tehran has sought to bolster its links by road from Mashhad in western Iran to Herat, an Afghan border city with longstanding links to Iran. Iranian officials have urged the United Nations to make more use of the Iranian port of Chabahar on the Arabian Sea to ship aid into southwestern Afghanistan, and an Iranian diplomat in Islamabad said that direct flights would begin ``in the near future`` from Tehran to Kabul.

``They`re not missing a beat,`` said the Western diplomat.

He and other diplomats agreed that the Iranians appear to be a force for stability in Afghanistan, so US officials have so far raised no objection to their growing role.

``It`s obviously something we`re going to keep an eye on, but it`s not causing alarm to the extent that we`re trying to stop it,`` a State Department official said.

Pakistan`s diplomatic retreat from Afghanistan is occurring as the nation is losing ground in other ways.

For example, Washington is not only cooperating more with Iran, but is also diluting its reliance on Pakistan by forging closer ties to nations in the region such as Uzbekistan and, of course, Afghanistan itself. And the United States is reshaping the situation on the ground by increasing its military presence in the region, with Russia`s blessing.

Pakistan is also stinging - and presumably has lost ground in the region, at least for the time being - as a result of its ongoing military confrontation with India.

Although the Bush administration has pressured both sides to avoid war, the most intense efforts have clearly been made in Islamabad, which has reacted with unprecedented crackdowns on the Islamic militants it had been supporting. The result has been to make Pakistan seem less of a force, particularly compared with its archrival, India, which has offered no apparent concessions.

Some analysts say that next to the Taliban and Al Qaeda, Pakistan has lost the most as a result of the US campaign.

``Everything seems to have boomeranged against Pakistan, both in the east and in the west,`` said Hamid Gul, a former head of Pakistan`s powerful Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate.

It is hard to overstate the extent of Pakistan`s loss of influence, especially within Afghanistan.

After the Soviet invasion in 1979, Pakistan had treated its neighbor to the west as its strategic backyard, shepherding the US-funded resistance by the mujahideen that eventually led to a Soviet withdrawal a decade later.

But it was under the Taliban that Pakistan enjoyed its greatest influence.

From 1994 on, Pakistani intelligence fostered the Taliban as a military client, providing help in recruitment and training, logistics, money, weapons, and even military intervention on the Taliban`s behalf.

Hundreds of Pakistani volunteers, many fired by religious fervor, populated the Taliban`s ranks. And the religious militia drew on Pakistan`s religious parties, groups that grew in prominence during the 1990s, for financial and ideological backing. In 1997, Pakistan led the way in granting diplomatic recognition to the Taliban.

``If you look at Afghanistan, the Taliban regime was probably the most friendly to Pakistan in the last 100 years,`` said Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema, president of the Islamabad Policy Research Institute, a Pakistani think tank.

That very success with the Taliban, analysts said, is the reason the retreat has been so sweeping: Pakistan invested so much in the Taliban that it was left with virtually nothing to show once the Taliban disintegrated before the American military onslaught.

Diplomats and former officials said Pakistani policy is in shambles, reeling from the loss of influence in Afghanistan and with no realistic prospect of exerting any.

Pakistan has yet to open an embassy in Kabul, though a Foreign Ministry spokesman said that would occur ``sooner rather than later.``

``Where does Pakistan stand after 25 years of making sacrifices for Afghanistan?`` said Gul. ``Pakistan has no relevance as of now. It has completely pulled out.``

Gul, who supported Pakistan`s policy of fostering the Taliban, blames the US government. Washington broke promises to keep the Northern Alliance from taking power, he said. ``Pakistan was used as a pawn, not as a partner by the Americans.``

But other analysts here put the blame squarely on Pakistan, part of an assessment of policy here that some compare to US discussions over the victory of communists in China in 1949.

``Pakistan`s policy toward Afghanistan was one vast failure,`` said Hussain.

``Judge by the results. Ultimately what did it produce? It didn`t produce stability for the region, for Pakistan, or for Afghanistan.``

For now, Pakistani officials say they will support UN efforts to form a government in Kabul that represents Afghanistan`s mosaic of ethnic and religious groups. That in itself is new, said one senior Pakistani official.

``In the past, there were preferences for certain people and certain parties,`` the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. ``That has proved to be a disaster.``

But given Pakistan`s ties of language, culture, and ethnicity, the official predicted that its influence would once again grow in Afghanistan.

``Whatever government ultimately emerges in Afghanistan will have to deal with Pakistan,`` he said. ``We are not worried about it.``

This story ran on page A1 of the Boston Globe on 1/8/2002.

RSaxena:

“btw, there`s nothing wrong with having dinner with a guy, as long as you don`t hold hands or light candles to stare in the other fellow`s eyes...”

….it may not rock your boat, but what’s wrong with guys holding hands and staring into each other’s eyes?…

RSaxena:

``i told you...the thing with bombay is that a lot of it is it indeed hard-earned money, but it`s daddy`s hard-earned money!..``

At least it`s someone`s hard earned money. Delhi money is more often than not, dirty money. Money earned through bribes and corruption, not hard work. That has percolated down to overall cynicism and negativity which is the hallmark of Delhi. It`s absolutely repulsive. Some may say it was always there, and maybe that`s right. Maybe I had to leave to come back and see the difference.

tahmed321

“semipreciousme #94 Gul is no mere nut case - read his interview on Herald to see how he is now passing off the failed ``ISI foreign policy`` that he and his friends engineered (thereby creating the mess in Afghanistan) to the foreign office in Pakistan.”

…i did read that interview (not to mention all those articles they had on jihadi groups)….needed a chocolate loaded pick-me-up after that…

re: stuka

{Don`t do such zullums on me. Notice, I invited SPM for dinner, not for a round of Bar Hopping. I mean, gimme a break, would you really like to go for a one on one dinner WITH A GUY???

For you, the invitation to visit every watering hole in this fine city stands. And trust me, there are plenty. Good ones too.}

ok ok, that`s fine...as long there is an invitation for something...btw, there`s nothing wrong with having dinner with a guy, as long as you don`t hold hands or light candles to stare in the other fellow`s eyes...

{BTW, I just spent a cpl of days in Bombay.(in Delhi right now). I hereby officially switch my allegiance to Bombay. Bombay has better attitude, better clubs, and definitely more hard earned money as opposed to the filthy corrupt Delhite attitude and way of life (excluding Defence Forces who still mantain dignity)}

...i told you...the thing with bombay is that a lot of it is it indeed hard-earned money, but it`s daddy`s hard-earned money!...although there is a whole class of young graduates from India`s top b-schools working in consulting and investment banking with some pretty fat salaries...

Arrey RSaxena

Don`t do such zullums on me. Notice, I invited SPM for dinner, not for a round of Bar Hopping. I mean, gimme a break, would you really like to go for a one on one dinner WITH A GUY???

For you, the invitation to visit every watering hole in this fine city stands. And trust me, there are plenty. Good ones too.

BTW, I just spent a cpl of days in Bombay.(in Delhi right now). I hereby officially switch my allegiance to Bombay. Bombay has better attitude, better clubs, and definitely more hard earned money as opposed to the filthy corrupt Delhite attitude and way of life (excluding Defence Forces who still mantain dignity)

Stuka:

``This from a person who has managed to convert the Hard Core Hindutvavadis into calling her ``wholly precious`` ;) Bhai, I am impressed.``

....and i`m most flattered...:)

``Regardless of what Binifer once mentioned about your boyfriend`s jealousies,

....binifer`s been spreading vile rumors....esp. since i don`t even know her...

``may I please have the pleasure of taking you out to dinner if you ever visit Boston.``

....the pleasure will be all mine...:)

``I promise, I will sing hossanahs to the memory of MA Jinnah if you say yes. :))``

....um, you`re going to be taking me out to dinner, not ylh...;)

re: stuka

{Regardless of what Binifer once mentioned about your boyfriend`s jealousies, may I please have the pleasure of taking you out to dinner if you ever visit Boston.}

what?!?! i never got such an invitation...i see how this works...you know that nyc bar hopping thing, you`re being taken off the list as we speak...being replaced by Ursturly, even though we`ll have to keep an eye on him to make sure he`s not secretly slipping poison in our drinks...and too bad for you, b.c. just last night some cronies and i found a place where the female:male ratio is about 2...

Re: #88

RSaxena,

Shankar: {We hindus are idol worshipping heathens,}

Rsaxena: ``speaking of idol worship, i`m a little confused how some muslims can mock that while revering that big black box -- kaaba or whatever it is called - in saudi arabia. is that big box not an inanimate object as well?``

Inside that black-box is a rock.

Its not easy to grasp the essence of the arab-rock relation. Its a fascination that goes beyond the mundane. The ultimate tribute has been paid to the humble rock by making it an object of adoration and worship.

The arab and his rock - a relation beyond the temporal!

regards,

semipreciousme #94 Gul is no mere nut case - read his interview on Herald to see how he is now passing off the failed ``ISI foreign policy`` that he and his friends engineered (thereby creating the mess in Afghanistan) to the foreign office in Pakistan. I agree that there are many fine individuals among our generals. The fact that Hamid Gul and others took over matters that they were neither legitimately charged with, nor intellectually capable of grasping, is the reason we are forced to focus on military and law and order issues rather than on economic issues.

THE GENERALS DO NOT WANT TO MAKE PEACE:

The Generals - specifically the crore commanders

do not want to make peace. They sabotage civilian governments` efforts to make peace with India. With peace there would be a smaller army and no need to pass out plots and bungalows to these rascals and nutcases.

``....more like SEVERE exasperation with all people who take war so lightly...and unfortunately, pak and india seem to have more then the normal quota of these trigger-happy idiots...``

This from a person who has managed to convert the Hard Core Hindutvavadis into calling her ``wholly precious`` ;) Bhai, I am impressed.

Regardless of what Binifer once mentioned about your boyfriend`s jealousies, may I please have the pleasure of taking you out to dinner if you ever visit Boston. I promise, I will sing hossanahs to the memory of MA Jinnah if you say yes. :))

re ras sahib 92

The columnist fails to mention a few things in his birthday greetings:

The late ZAB (Allah Bakshe)-

1. The `foe` of reactionary forces, declared Ahmadis as non-Muslims, creating a human rights situation unparalleled in Jinnah`s Pakistan.

2. The `savior` of Pakistan, created the situation of intransigence which led to the breakup of the country.

3. He also set Pakistan on the course of socialist service economy from which she is still recovering.

4. The great `anti-feudal` still has family that hold Larkana in its pocket.

5. The behavior of his police towards political opponents wasn`t exactly upto the standards of Amnesty INternational.

That said, Shaheed Bhutto, was given a raw deal by the dictator who replaced him. He was, after all, Pakistan`s first freely and popularly elected Prime Minister. But he was a man, a human being with greatness and flaws. No more and no less.

tahmad saab

``semipreciousme: how about our own paki generals? Hamid Gul....``

....stop right there...hamid gul, imo, is a bona fide nutcase not fit to roam the streets let alone air his `veiws` to the public...

audio-video #89 psssst your secret is safe with me. The one about you being a fake Pakistani pretending to be a Indian in order to make people think Indians are as brainless as your posts seem to make you appear. In fact you are a genius. ISI will give you a medal, no doubt.

From The Nation (Lahore) January 5, 2002

Bhuttoism

Altaf Ahmad Qureshi

Bhuttoism is the political philosophy of a great man of our history i.e. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, a poet revolutionary, who laid down his life for the betterment and prosperity of the poor and wretched of this land. By refusing to bend before might, by upholding the constitution and legal order he had become a legend, a source of inspiration to the struggling masses. He is the man who has been killed by Army but has lived in history.
Bhuttoism, the political philosophy of Shaheed Bhutto, stands for the National Liberation Revolution and is based on Struggle
i) Against Imperialism within the country and outside;
ii) Against feudalism and capitalism;
iii) To remain Non-aligned in the confrontation of Super powers;
iv) To achieve Economic Liberation and technological development; and
v) To live in peace with all neighbouring countries.
Struggle against imperialism: Since his days at Berkeley University, Shaheed Bhutto had been struggling against doctrine of colonialism and neo-colonialism. He was first true Pakistani who gave a socialist economic programme to the down trodden and talked about people`s rule. He was first great Pakistani who introduced socialism in every house and gave courage to poor masses to fight for rights and real independence. He inspired millions by his thoughts and made people think for themselves and their country. He gave them honour and respect. He was the first Asian who persuaded Arabs to use their oil as tool against imperialist`s designs. He convinced King Faisal to increase oil prices. The Islamic Summit at Lahore was nothing but creation of a big force against imperialism in world politics.
After assuming power on December 20, 1971, Shaheed Bhutto recognised Independent Vietnam and developed relations with her on ambassadorial level. To help Arabs against Zionism and imperialism, Shaheed Bhutto wanted to turn Pakistan into a nuclear power. He was nearing his goal when the imperialists decided to get rid of him. Shaheed Bhutto was thrown out of Government, and two years later was hanged. Shaheed Bhutto, despite all the propaganda against him over past ten years, simply refuses to die or fade away. He will live as the greatest anti-imperialist Pakistani.
Struggle against feudalism and capitalism: To break the might of the feudals, Shaheed Bhutto introduced land reforms twice. First land reforms were introduced in early 1972 and the second reforms were announced in early 1977. He brought the feudals down to earth and raised the status of the landless peasants.
He introduced labour reforms to provide at least basic necessities of life to the poor working classes. He increased the wages of the labourers 5 times during his tenure. He introduced a scheme to provide 5 marlas of land to the labourers and to the landless peasants. He introduced a scheme under which Collective Bargaining Agents (CBA trade unions) could be part of the management.
Non-Alignment: Shaheed Bhutto, in view of the global situation, laid down the theory of bilateralism. He says balance can only be created when all nations enjoy equal status. He wanted to have good relations with neighbours and with the poor nations of the third world. He pursued the Bandung Declaration in his foreign policy.
Economic Liberation and Development: During Shaheed Bhutto`s tenure in power, Pakistan received only 8 billion dollars worth of loans. He tried to pool and develop own resources to remain independent.
Peace inside and around Pakistan: Bhutto signed Simla Agreement with India to have peace on the eastern borders and convinced Late President Daud of Afghanistan to recognise the Durand Line as the international border on the western border. He created a peaceful atmosphere inside the country necessary to boost production.
This could not be tolerated by the imperialist forces and they decided to get rid of the Great man. So they did in connivance with the reactionary forces of Pakistan. We miss him, since he never failed to raise our spirits. Even when things went wrong, when we lost half of our country, when our 90,000 men were POWs, we were not so depressed or lacking in faith as we are today. Shaheed Bhutto has left his footprints on the sands of time, and he now belongs to the ages. In his footsteps, we hear the rolling thunders of history.
Today, January 5, is the 74th birth anniversary of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto

From The Hindustan Times..

The foolishness of war

Khushwant Singh

There are millions of my countrymen who agree with me that we must never ever go to war against Pakistan again — or for that matter, against any nation. Sabre-rattling is not patriotism; it is a foolish person’s show of bravado.

Persons who have not seen the havoc modern-day weaponry can cause to both, those on battlefields and civilians, who have not seen once-flourishing cities in Poland and Germany reduced to rubble and the ruins of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, have little idea of what war is.

I have. The vast majority of those who perished in World War II were not soldiers but civilians — men, women and children. I never want to see that happen in India, Pakistan or any other country.

Are our responses to the attack on our Parliament the best we could do to fight terrorism? I do not think so. Pakistan condemned it as soon as it occurred, as it did after the attack on the Kashmir assembly. Accusing President Musharraf and his government of being behind these attacks is unwarranted. So is recalling our high commissioner from Islamabad.

Al-Qaeda, Lashkar-e-Tayyeba, Jaish-e-Moha-mmed and the Taliban are not creations of Musharraf’s regime. They were created by his predecessors and came to him as unwanted inheritance. They have strong presence in Pakistan’s armed forces and have gained popularity among the common people of Pakistan.

Musharraf has an unenviable task of getting rid of them. He did a right about-turn by disowning the Taliban in Afghanistan under American pressure. Under the same pressure, he is doing his best to disown other Islamic militant organisations. It is not in our interests to add to his troubles but to help him in the task he has been compelled to undertake.

His hold on Pakistan is very tenuous. There are many in Pakistan’s defence services who would like to see him out of power. They will be more extremist and anti-Indian than Musharraf. Would helping subvert Musharraf’s regime at this juncture be in India’s interest? Our government seems to think so. I think it is a grave error.

Stopping train and bus services to Lahore is also a retrograde step. The need of the hour is more people-to-people contact between Indians and Pakistanis, not making it almost impossible. To say that these buses and trains are conduits for terrorists is a canard no one should believe.

PRAY FOR PAKISTAN EVERYDAY

January 04 04:00 PM EST

Cycle of Death - A letter from Pakistan

By Ali Ahmed Rind LA Weekly Writer



The day after Pakistan’s interior minister denounced the Taliban and religious extremism, his brother was shot dead in downtown Karachi. The minister, Moinuddin Haider, speaking at a seminar titled “Terrorism: A New Challenge to the World of Islam,” said the Taliban’s “narrow concept of Islam was both misguided and misguiding. We would never let some hymn-reciting, illiterate religious bigots run this country.”

The following day, his brother, Ehteshanuddin Haider, patron of the Fatmid Foundation, a well-known charity in Pakistan, was killed as he left his office. The message seemed clear in tumultuous Pakistan: Taliban fighters, in retreat from Afghanistan (news - web sites), are bucking to show their presence in my country.

At his elder brother’s funeral, Moinuddin Haider was asked if he saw any connection between his own remarks and his brother’s death. He politely replied, “I am still of the belief that we should not let some illiterate zealots run the country.”

It is clear that Pakistan, a country that came into being in the name of Islam, is passing through the most dangerous times of its half-century existence.

On its eastern border, tension is building with old foe India after a December 13 terrorist attack — by Pakistan-based Kashmiri separatists — on the Indian Parliament, an attack that killed 14 people. On its western border, an unwelcoming Kabul government blames Pakistan for three decades of strife. Internally, Pakistan bears the wrath of Muslim radicals upset that President Pervez Musharraf sided with the U.S.-led coalition and could be making a compromise with India on the Kashmir (news - web sites) issue.

On top of all this, the possibility that Osama bin Laden (news - web sites) has found refuge in Pakistan adds to the quandary. Speculation about bin Laden’s whereabouts, running high for weeks, grew most intense last week when a spokesman for Afghan’s defense ministry, Mohammed Habeel, accused a pro-Taliban religious leader, Maulana Fazlur Rahman, of giving protection to the world’s most wanted man. “Attack is permissible on any country — be it Pakistan or any other — that gives protection to Osama. We support that type of attack,’’ Habeel said.

The Pakistani press contacted Maulana Fazlur Rahman, who has been detained in his hometown of Dera Ismail Khan for the past three months on sedition charges. He dismissed the allegation as a political gimmick. One of his aides said, “Though we do support the Taliban, we never had any connection with Osama bin Laden. This is part of an international scheme to pressure the Musharraf government to come down hard on religious parties, akin to the [actions of the] secular states of Egypt and Algeria, thus throwing Pakistan into the flames of civil war.”

Rahman heads Pakistan’s largest religious party — Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam, the party of Muslim scholars that has been an ally of the Taliban. It has a large presence in Pakistan’s western border areas, and in the initial days of the war on the Taliban, Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam organized one of the largest anti-government, pro-Taliban violent rallies in Pakistan. It was because of these demonstrations that General Musharraf’s fragile government decided to charge Fazlur Rahman with sedition, on grounds that he tried to incite the armed forces to overthrow the general’s pro-West government.

I spoke with one of my military sources about the Afghan defense-

ministry spokesman’s support of an attack on Pakistan if it is harboring bin Laden. “Kabul is playing into the hands of India,” he told me. “In times when we are facing warlike situations on our eastern border, Northern Alliance people want to settle the score with Pakistan. They hope Pakistan will meet a fate akin to that of the Taliban.”

Independent political observers do not rule out that bin Laden may have been aided by a pro-Taliban faction of one of Pakistan’s intelligence agencies. “It is no secret that Pakistan’s ruling clique is divided on the issue of the Taliban and Osama,” said Riaz Chandio, a political activist. “Therefore it is likely that while President Musharraf is helping the U.S. to capture Osama and members of the Taliban leadership, one or another head of numerous intelligence agencies is helping Osama to avoid meeting that fate.”

In late October, Osama apparently got advance warning less than three hours before the missile bombardment of Beni Hissar camp, a hideout near Kabul. It’s anyone’s guess who may have tipped him off, but some believe Pakistani sources saved him.

It is not a new phenomenon for Pakistan that the government of the day follows one policy and the intelligence agencies go the opposite way. “He may be in a safe house under the protection of one intelligence ally, watching soldiers of fortune as they hunt him in the rugged Afghan mountains,” Chandio said.

A political commentator speaks for most Pakistanis when he says that now is the time to close once and for all this chapter of Muslim radicalism and Osama-brand terror. “Though he may be dead under the debris of a cave or running endlessly for his life, he opened a wide chasm between them and us. It will be in the interests of all of us to close this chapter, better sooner than later.”

It is troubling that the game on the global chessboard does not follow rules driven by morality. We may be witnessing more turmoil in coming times. One Osama may be replaced by another, and the terror may continue.

SameerJB #98 I must admit I dont share the assumption behind the statement that ``There is no point interacting at way too low intelligence level.`` The assumption that someone is below one`s own intelligence level is a presumptuous one I think. And if he is bigotted in the religious dimension, I think you may wish to examine a couple of your own posts which reflect ethnic bigotry too.

Nor do I conclude (like Rsaxena and a couple of others) that KhanSahibs views are so off the chart that this must be an act: replace ``hindu`` with ``paki`` and change KhanSahib to Jay (or a couple of other chowk posters I can think of) and suddenly KhanSahib no longer seems so incredible. Of course, Jay has been posting his hate-pakistan garbage for a couple of years now and KhanSahib is new: let us give him the chance to respond before we jump to conclusions.

As for Gen. Busharaff: Welcome to Chowk. You are from what I consider my home town, good old Rawalpindi where I grew up. While appreciating your support, I dont think there is any need for strong words towards KhanSahib. They merely diminish the substance of what you write, and the substance is great.

re: shrinker

{We hindus are idol worshipping heathens,}

speaking of idol worship, i`m a little confused how some muslims can mock that while revering that big black box -- kaaba or whatever it is called - in saudi arabia. is that big box not an inanimate object as well?

semipreciousme: how about our own paki generals? Hamid Gul was proclaiming before the US started action in Afghanistan that US soldiers were ``cream puff`` soldiers who would be chased away by his might talibans like (to use that tired old example) they (supposedly) chased out the Brits in the 19th century and the russians in the 20th century. When I read that I wondered if this man actually knew anything more about the world than mullah omar: The US has had war experience all across the globe. It has an economy and a culture and brains and technology that the Hamid Guls of Pakistan (let alone the taliban) dont even begin to understand. Even if they have visited this country and travelled all over it and even had some superficial cultural aspects rub off on them.

Title: Respect For Other Religions

Author: Anees Jillani

Publication: Jung , Pakistan

Date: April 6, 2000

There lives even now a Hindu owner of a middle-sized Hotel in New Delhi who has a Muslim wife. She was married at the time of partition, was abducted, raped but later rescued by the armed forces. Her Muslim husband who had by then migrated to Pakistan was contacted by organisations handling repatriation of such women but he refused to take her back. She was lucky that she came across her present husband while living at one of the rehabilitation centers in early 1948. The young Hindu businessman married her and rescued her from the centre. He insisted that she could retain her religion. Wife of a prominent Pakistani was similarly abducted during partition. Many years later, she came into contact with a Pakistani who had gone to a tailor`s shop in Delhi. Working almost as a slave and without any access to the outside world, she stitched her husband`s name on a piece of cloth and secretly gave to the Pakistani. The latter managed to contact the husband in Pakistan but the husband, who had by then remarried, refused to have anything to do with her wife.

Karan Thapar, a conspicuous Indian Journalist, who recently interviewed General Musharraf on Door Darshan and who was given the general`s tie for praising it, narrated another interesting experience in one of his columns. He was watching an open-air theater about the Kargil war (Indians have nothing better to do than harp on this theme for the past one year now) when he started hearing two Indian jawans disapproving of a scene. Two Pakistani jawans had been captured by the Indians and after a thorough interrogation, they were shown as criticising Pakistan, its leadership, and its military. The Indian jawans sitting in the audience, who themselves had participated in the Kargil war, told Thapar that such a thing can never happen. Jawans even of an enemy can never criticise their own country, military and its leadership. The Indian media, and even some of the senior Indian army personnel, can routinely be seen praising the valiant performance of some of our soldiers during the Kargil war.

The moral of the story from the above three anecdotes is that not all Hindu Indians are rascals and villains; and not all Pakistani Muslims are angels going straight to heaven via Lahore. Both India and Pakistan are big nations in terms of their populations; and thus comprise all sorts of people. If India has produced Bal Thakeray, then it also has Nirmala Deshpande who led a 36-member women peace mission to Pakistan from March 25 to 31. We all know of similar contrasts in our country. What, however, distinguishes Pakistan from India in this respect is the presence of a Muslim community almost the size of Pakistan living within India. It simply cannot be ignored in a democratic-cum-secular setup. I first visited India in 1985 and found quite a few Muslims still cheering the Pakistani cricket team in a match against India. Not anymore. When asked now about their plight in a Hindu-dominated India, they say that they are fine; worry about your own self. Most of them are more perturbed about the state of mohajirs in Karachi than Hindu-Muslim riots in India.

This is, of course, not to say that India is a perfect example of secular model in the comity of nations. Far from it. It is a country where forces preaching Hindutva are in power and where the Babri mosque was demolished on December 6, 1992. However, what goes to the Indian system`s credit is the fact that the same Hindutva forces had to tone down their rhetoric and even their agenda to remain in power and win elections; construction of Ram mandir is no longer on NDA`s (National Democratic Alliance`s, of which BJP is a constituent) agenda and manifesto. The Indian premier himself called the day of destruction of the mosque the saddest day of his life and there are criminal cases pending against none other than the home minister himself for being involved in the destruction.

Since we have a selective memory, few would recall that some Pakistanis demolished many temples as a reaction to the mosque demolition. Have you heard of any Pakistani ever arrested for destroying those temples or attacking the Hindus? There is a BJP government in power in the state of Gujarat that permitted its civil servants to join Kuppahali S Sudarshan-led RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh); the state government justified its action on the ground that RSS is not a political but a cultural outfit. This permission led to such an uproar in the Lok Sabha and such condemnation by the print media that the BJP eventually bowed to public pressure and withdrew the authorisation on March 8, 2000. The above anomalies may not be written or talked about in Pakistan but the world community is not deaf, nor is it dumb. They see India as a Third World country attempting to maintain democracy and secularism; they all wish it well because this is the system that most of them also subscribe to. On the other hand, ours is a country which is gradually shifting into the hands of mullahs who talk of Islamic bombs and missiles and who wish to rule the whole world. What an irony because, at present, they cannot even rule themselves. They see India as a country where even the minority communities surpass the population of their own nations and then there is Pakistan where even a single conversion of a Hindu or a Christian is reported in all the major dailies, including the English ones.

We can no longer have it both ways. We cannot aspire to be a fortress of Islam and wish Clinton and Tony Blair to be our best friends. If we want to be Green Fortress, then we will have to content ourselves with Afghanistan`s Mulla Omar and survive like Afghanistan. No one in the world is asking us to change our religions. Islam, in fact, is the second largest belief in