America’s Responsibility

dost mitter,

{{Shouldn`t the U.S be governed by the same values abroad that it uses in its domsestic affairs? Or should it always be America uber alles and let the values of freedom, democracy, liberty, kindness, generosity, and the rule of law take a hike when it comes to defending American interests abroad}}

Excellent question.

What is boils down to is ``should a country (esp the US), conduct foreign policy based on the moral ideals that it stands for domestically, or should it do it from a pragmatic perspective?``

Throughout history, every nation, has acted ideologically in its domestic policy & pragmatically in foreign policy. The irony is that it HAS to act that way. There is no alternative.

Let me elaborate. Scandinavian countries--from a human rights perspective, are as close to ideal as you can get. However, even Scandinavian countries are pragmatic when it comes to foreign policy. Why does Sweden ``do business`` with India/Pakistan--2 countries that have a poor human rights record? Should they have diplomatic relations with only those countries that have a good human rights record? Sweden sells arms to other countries. Is the sale of arms be contingent on Sweden`s ideology or pragmatism?

If a country conducts foreign policy on ideology alone, it should pretty much become an isolationist, or have diplomatic relations with only a small handful of countries. Such a position is unteneble, esp if the country is a superpower. So, IMHO, domestic policy should be primarily be based on ideology & foreign policy should be primarily based on pragmatism.

On the part of the US, it does all it reasonably (Ok thats debateable) can to ensure its moral values in foreign policy. But when push comes down to shove, pragmatism takes precedence over ideology in foreign policy. It IS the right thing to do.

If not, the US should have cut off diplomatic relations with China; after Tibet & after Tiannamen Square. For that matter the US should have nothing to do with India & Pakistan because of the poor human rights records of these countries.

I think the US does has spasms of conscience about ``morality``, in its foreign policy. That ``vulnerability`` has been exploited very well by Indians. After 12/13, India demanded that the US not be hypocritical, because of their policy after 9/11. Now, there is no longer a difference between a ``freedom fighter`` & a ``terrorist``. Mushy was forced to make a U-turn in Pakistan`s Kashmir policy. Heck, if, during the Agra summit, Mushy had agreed to the ``cross border terrorism`` phrase, India & Pakistan could have signed a ground breaking treaty in Agra. The Agra summit ``failed`` because Mushy insisted that it was a principled fight for freedom & not terrorism, that Pakistan was supporting. After his historic speech, he swept all that into the dustbin of history.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

That leads me to discus a separate, but related point. Pakistanis will be angrily squirming at this. Indians have always realised that there are several ways to ``skin a Pakistani cat``. A military ``war`` is only one type of war. More & more a military war between the 2 sides is becoming too..``impractical``. In a diplomatic war, India always wins hands down, against Pakistan.

On the face of it, Pakistan has several diplomatic ``advantages`` over India. There are several Islamic countries that have a closer affinity to Pakistan (than India) because of a common religion. Pakistan has excellent diplomatic relations with every country in the world; except India. Even in S.Asia, the other countries have annoying ``issues`` with India, because of the latter`s hegemony. However, these countries are not annoyed with Pakistan.

Bottom line--Pakistan has more (& better) friends in this world than India has. Yet, everytime it takes on India on the diplomatic front, India prevails! Once again, (like a broken record)--the fact that no country in this world (even Pakistan`s closest friends) has outrightedly slammed India & taken Pakistan`s side in the Kashmir issue; means India has won HANDS DOWN!

The only thing that other countries say to India is ``I know,I know, you have every right to be angry about 12/13; but you should talk to Pakistan--its not good to fight a war``. Whereas, the US & West has twisted Pakistan`s arm to make a U-turn in the Kashmir policy. Even now, the frikking Indians are saying ``we are not going to withdraw our troops until Mushy puts his money where his mouth is!``. What is Colin Powell saying to the Indians?! ``Uh..Ok..but make sure you dont go to war``. Hey the BJP does NOT want a military war with Pakistan. They may be crazy, but they are definitely NOT stupid. Even the most ardent hawk in India knows that India will be badly hurt in a military war--even if Pakistan is destroyed.

I`ll say one thing about Indians--we are wily mofos--as wily as any coyote:) Pakistanis maybe proud & noble--like a wolf...but when it comes to matching ``guile`` & ``wilyness``--we banias win hands down:) If you carefully read between the lines of Ayaz Amir`s article--thats what he is so pissed about:)

You lost this ``war``, Pakistan! admit it! OK throw rotten tomatoes at me:) I dare you...

Studebaker

“LAJWANTI IS NOT Studebaker FOOL”

…and here, god help me, i agree with the hydra…it’s not the same person…

``Thirteen million people in Indian-held Kashmir are struggling for their freedom against foreign occupation and alien domination,`` Ahmad said.

``Those who employ the state apparatus to trample upon the fundamental and inalienable rights of people are also perpetrators of terrorism,`` he said.

AHMAD





India, Pakistan clash over Kashmir in UN



terrorism debate

AFP

United Nations, January 18

India and Pakistan traded accusations in a UN Security Council debate on Friday that each was using or supporting terrorist methods in Kashmir.

India`s ambassador to the United Nations, Kamalesh Sharma, urged the council to ``make an example`` of any UN member state that tried to justify terrorism.

Without naming Pakistan, he said that the Lashkar-e-Taiba and the Jaish-e-Mohammad were ``testing the will and resolve of the international community``.

Pakistan`s President Pervez Musharraf banned these and three other groups in an address to the nation last weekend, but refused to hand over any Pakistanis included in a list of 20 alleged terrorists drawn up by New Delhi.

``We believe that the existence of, and support to the activities of, terrorist groups such as Jaish-e-Mohammad and Lashkar-e-Taiba is in direct and complete contravention of Resolution 1373,`` Sharma said.

The resolution, adopted by the Security Council on September 28, obliges all member states to pass laws and take executive action to deny financing, support and safe harbour to terrorist groups.

Neither India nor Pakistan is a council member, but both asked to take part in Friday`s open debate, called to take stock of progress made by the UN`s counter-terrorism committee, set up under Resolution 1373.

Sharma`s Pakistani counterpart, Shamshad Ahmad, retorted that his government had taken ``resolute and decisive action`` against terrorism and was determined to ``purge our society of obscurantism and violence``.

But, he said, India was ``confusing and obfuscating the issue`` in order to pursue its own political ambitions for regional hegemony.

re: Kashmir and third party mediation

Friends,

USA has already gained a foot-hold in Afghanistan.Its stated aim now is to be in that country for as long as is necessary to rebuild it. Its unstated aim, of course, is to get better access to the central Asian oil and gas.

A mediation of sorts is already taking place in Kashmir. I saw this Kashmiri guy Fai and some others arguing in c-span about Kashmir`s future. We may not call it mediation but facilitation or whatever else that is sweet to our ears but the fact is USA is already a third party to this dispute.

Is this good for India or Pakistan? Not necessarily. USA may like to find a foothold in Kashmir valley as well. The stated reason would be to usher in self-rule by Kashmiris. A UN sponsored force (read American)may stay on after the state is divided between India and Pak (India retains Jammu, Ladhak and Pak retains its portion of Kashmir). America gains a lot by its presence in Kashmir. It is perhaps the most ideal place to eavesdrop on the Chinese and the goings-on in Tibet. India may not be totally averse to this situation. It is better than the jehdadis creating trouble all the time and bleeding India by ``a thousand cuts``. India may still have trade with the valley. But the valley will be lost to both countries.

Reminds me of the story of the Arab and the Camel. Arab was sleeping in his tent in a desert. A camel was sleeping outside the tent. It was very cold. The camel politely asked the Arab if it can stick its neck into the tent as it was very cold. ``Only the neck``, said the Arab. The camel assured him. You guys know this story, don`t you?

Sridhar

re: Real heroes

Guys,

For both Pak and India, people like Narayana Murthy (and not some politician or military ruler)are real heroes. This man has single handedly (actually with a group of a few more men)steered his company to international fame. Many of his colleagues are dollar millionaires. Murthy believes in sharing wealth, still lives a spartan life and is focussed on the task of nation building and not just money making (contrast this with people like the Ambanis).

The following article was from rediff

``Murthy in Time top 25 business people

Time magazine has included N R Narayana Murthy of Infosys among the world`s top 25 business people.

It said Murthy, 55, was among India`s richest men and Infosys, the company he founded in 1981, was the first Indian firm to be listed on Nasdaq, the US stock exchange for tech firms.

The magazine said: ``Murthy has not sold his soul for money and success. One of the country`s most admired men, he is vigilant about his employees` well-being -- granting stock options, building exercise facilities and spreading values as much as wealth.``

Sridhar

Drumz,

Its official: youre my little bro! Now I get to torture you by calling you big sister names...munno...

...good summary of the curious beginnings of indian and chinese relations...one interesting point is that if both nations do develop economic trade worth billions, it may have implications for their political relationship as well...will india continue to accomodate tibet at china`s displeasure and risk throwing away all that money?...will china continue to supply arms to pakistan at India`s displeasure?...money talks, and it talks very loudly...for all it`s song and dance on democracy, the US eyes money and continues to do business with china.....interesting times..

http://www.antiwar.com/matuszak/ma011902.html

tahmad:---420

More stuff in an attempt to put your mind in first gear.

What is wrong in being anti-US.Is it blasephemous

to be so?Is that the new cult or something.Are the Shamans of Secularism upset.

If dyed in red & blue can be gainst US on more matters than one then why not outsiders?Why is it that if one is against something then must be for the other? Being anti-mulla does not make one necessarily learned.It is a pathetic attempt to seek acceptability in a fast changing world.It is time we ``educated`` ones are able to do what we have bequeethed to those we disparagingly called mullas.Had we acquired even the rudimentaries of our Deen(as it was in the glory days)we would not be crying foul today.

Nations as countries are nothing but corrals.Whether US or Pakistan they are completely meaningless to me as a muslim.They have either some nostalgic or economic value and no more.I,me is more important than the country.Its security is dear to me because I(ME)(& those & that I value & cherish)am there and not because of some collective surge of that disease called ``patriotism``.Nation(country) is important because of ME & NOT,NOT the other way round.

``Humm ko mitaa sakey,yeh zamanay mein dumm naheeN

Humm sey zamaana khud hai,zamanay sey humm naheen``

By this time it should be evident to you how rigid & incorrigible I am.So please refrain & stay happy.Just continue your rakhee bandhans.Never worry about the limped wrists.

It is,but only natural.

MEANWHILE ENJOY THE FOLLOWING:

_________________________________________________

FORMER German minister of Defense Von Buelow.

from The SPIEGEL

VON BUELOW INTERVIEW BLOWS 911 CASE WIDE OPEN

Posted By: Rosalinda

Date: Wednesday, 16 January 2002, 1:24 a.m.

(DRAFT) [Source: Tagesspiegel, Jan. 13] PARTIAL TRANSLATION

{The following interview with Von Buelow appeared in the German

daily }Tagesspiegel,{ on Jan. 13.}

__________________________________________________

Q: You seem so angry, really upset.

Von Buelow: I can explain what`s bothering me: I see that

after the horrifying attacks of Sept. 11, all political public

opinion is being forced into a direction that I consider wrong.

Q: What do you mean by that?

Von Buelow: I wonder why many questions are not asked.

Normally, with such a terrible thing, various leads and tracks

appear that are then commented on, by the investigators,

the media, the government: Is there something here or not?

Are the explanations plausible? This time, this is not the case

at all. It already began just hours after the attacks

in New York and Washington and--

Q: In those hours, there was horror, and grief.

Von Buelow: Right, but actually it was astounding:

There are 26 intelligence services in the U.S.A.

with a budget of $30 billion--

Q: More than the German defense budget.

Von Buelow: --which were not able to prevent the attacks.

In fact, they didn`t even have an inkling they would happen.

For 60 decisive minutes, the military and intelligence agencies

let the fighter planes stay on the ground, 48 hours later,

however, the FBI presented a list of suicide attackers.

Within ten days, it emerged that seven of them were still alive.

Q: What, please?

Von Buelow: Yes, yes. And why did the FBI chief take no position

regarding contradictions? Where the list came from,

why it was false? If I were the chief investigator

(state attorney) in such a case,

I would regularly go to the public, and give information

on which leads are valid and which not.

Q: The U.S. government talked about an emergency situation

after the attacks: They said they were in a war.

Is it not understandable that one does not tell the enemy

everything one knows about him?

Von Buelow: Naturally. But a government which goes to war,

must first establish who the attacker, the enemy, is.

It has a duty to provide evidence.

According to its own admission,

it has not been able to present any evidence

that would hold up in court.

Q: Some information on the perpetrators has been proven

with documents. The suspected leader, Mohammad Atta,

left Portland for Boston on the morning of Sept. 11,

in order to board the plane that later hit the World Trade Center

Von Buelow: If this Atta was the decisive man in the operation,

it`s really strange that he took such a risk of taking a plane

that would reach Boston such a short time before

the connecting flight. Had his flight been a few minutes late,

he would not have been in the plane that was hijacked.

Why should a sophisticated terrorist do this?

One can, by the way, read on CNN (Internet)

that none of these names were on the official passenger lists.

None of them had gone through the check-in procedures.

And why did none of the threatened pilots

give the agreed-upon code 7700 over the [Steuerknueppel: STEERING NOB?] to the ground station?

In addition: The black boxes which are fire and shock proof,

as well as the voice recordings, contain no valuable data--

Q: That sounds like--

Von Buelow: --like assailants who, in their preparations,

leave tracks behind them like a herd of stampeding elephants?

They made payments with credit cards with their own names;

they reported to their flight instructors with their own names.

They left behind rented cars with flight manuals in Arabic

for jumbo jets. They took with them, on their suicide trip,

wills and farewell letters, which fall into the hands of the FBI,

because they were stored in the wrong place

and wrongly addressed. Clues were left like behind

like in a child`s game of hide-and-seek,

which were to be followed!

There is also the theory of one British flight engineer:

According to this, the steering of the planes

was perhaps taken out of the pilots` hands, from outside.

The Americans had developed a method in the 1970s,

whereby they could rescue hijacked planes

by intervening into the computer piloting

[automatic pilot system]. This theory says,

this technique was abused in this case. That`s a theory....

Q: Which sounds really adventurous, and was never considered.

Von Buelow: You see! I do not accept this theory,

but I find it worth considering. And what about

the obscure stock transactions?

In the week prior to the attacks,

the amount of transactions in stocks in American Airlines,

United Airlines, and insurance companies, increased 1,200%.

It was for a value of $15 billion.

Some people must have known something. Who?

Q: Why don`t you speculate on who it might have been.

Von Buelow: With the help of the horrifying attacks,

the Western mass democracies were subjected to brainwashing.

The enemy image of anti-communism doesn`t work any more;

it is to be replaced by peoples of Islamic belief.

They are accused of having given birth to suicidal terrorism.

Q: Brainwashing? That`s a tough term.

Von Buelow: Yes? But the idea of the enemy image doesn`t

come from me. It comes from Zbigniew Brzezinski and Samuel

Huntington, two policy-makers of American intelligence

and foreign policy. Already in the middle of he 1990s,

Huntingon believed, people in Europe and the U.S.

needed someone they could hate--

this would strengthen their identification

with their own society. And Brzezinski, the mad dog,

as adviser to President Jimmy Carter,

campaigned for the exclusive right of the U.S.

to seize all the raw materials of the world,

especially oil and gas.

Q: You mean, the events of Sept. 11--

Von Buelow: --fit perfectly in the concept

of the armaments industry, the intelligence agencies,

the whole military-industrial-academic complex. This is in fact

conspicuous. The huge raw materials reserves of the former Soviet

Union are now at their disposal, also the pipeline routes and--

Q: Erich Follach described that at length in {Spiegel}:

``It`s a matter of military bases, drugs, oil and gas reserves.``

Von Buelow: I can state: the planning of the attacks

was technically and organizationally a master achievement.

To hijack four huge airplanes within a few minutes

and within one hour, to drive them into their targets,

with complicated flight maneuvers!

This is unthinkable, without years-long support

from secretapparatuses of the state and industry.

Q: You are a conspiracy theorist!

Von Buelow: Yeah, yeah. That`s the ridicule heaped

[on those raising these questions] by those who would prefer

to follow the official, politically correct line.

Even investigative journalists are fed propaganda

and disinformation. Anyone who doubts that,

doesn`t have all his marbles! That is your accusation.

Q: Your career actually speaks against the idea

that you are not in your right mind.

You were already in the 1970s, state secretary

in the Defense Ministry; in 1993 you were the SPD

[Social Democratic Party] speaker

in the Schalk-Golodkowski investigation committee--

Von Buelow: And it all began there!

Until that time, I did not have any great knowledge

of the work of intelligence agencies.

And now we had to take note of a great discrepancy:

We shed light on the dealings of the Stasi

and other East bloc intelligence agencies

in the field of economic criminality,

but as soon as we wanted to know something

about the activities of the BND [German intelligence]

or the CIA, it was mercilessly blocked.

No information, no cooperation, nothing!

That`s when I was first taken aback.

Q: Schalck-Golodkowski mediated, among other things, various

business deals abroad. When you looked at his case more closely--

Von Buelow: We found, for example, a clue in Rostock,

where Schalck organized his weapons depot.

Well, then we happened upon an affiliation of Schalck in Panama,

and then we happened upon Manuel Noriega,

who was for many years President, drug dealer,

and money launderer, all in one, right?

And this Noriega was also on the payroll of the CIA,

for $200,000 a year.

These were things that really made me curious.

Q: You wrote a book on the dealings of the CIA and Co.

In the meantime, you have become an expert

regarding the strange things

related to intelligence services` work.

Von Buelow: ``Strange things`` is the wrong term.

What has gone on, and goes on, in the name of intelligence services, are true crimes.

Q: What would you say determines

the work of intelligence services?

Von Buelow: So that we don`t have any misunderstandings:

I find that it makes sense to have intelligence services....

Q: You don`t think much of the earlier proposals

by the Greens, who wanted to dismantle these agencies?

Von Buelow: No. It is right to take a look

behind the scenes. Getting intelligence about the intentions

of an enemy, makes sense. It is important when one tries

to put oneself into the mind of the enemy.

Whoever wants to understand the CIA`s methods,

has to deal with its main tasks, {covert operations}:

below the level of war, and outside international law,

foreign states are to be influenced, by organizing insurrections,

terrorist attacks, usually combined with drugs and weapons trade,

and money laundering. This is essentially very simple:

One arms violent people with weapons.

Since, however, it must not under any circumstances come out,

that there is an intelligence agency behind it,

all traces are erased, with tremendous deployment of resources.

I have the impression

that this kind of intelligence agency spends 90% of its time

this way: creating false leads. So that, if anyone suspects

the collaboration of the agencies,

he is accused of the sickness of conspiracy madness.

The truth often comes out only years later.

CIA chief Allen Dulles once said:

In case of doubt, I would even lie to the Congress!

Q: The American journalist Seymour M. Hersh,

wrote in the {New Yorker,} that even some people in the CIA

and government assumed, that certain leads had been laid

in order to confuse the investigators.

Who, Herr von Buelow, would have done this?

Von Buelow: I don`t know that either. How should I?

I simply use my common sense, and--

See: The terrorists behaved in such a way to attract attention.

And as practicing Muslims, they were in a strip-tease bar,

and, drunken, stuck dollar bills into the panty of the dancer.

Q: Things like that also happen.

Von Buelow: It may be. As a lone fighter,

I cannot prove anything, that`s beyond my capabilities.

I have real difficulties, however,

to imagine that all this all sprung

out ofthe mind of an evil man in his cave.

Q: Mr. von Buelow, you yourself say

that you are alone in your criticism.

Formerly, you were part of the political establishment,

now you are an outsider.

Von Buelow: That is a problem sometimes,

but one gets used to it. By the way,

I know a lot of people, including very influential ones,

who agree with me, but only in whispers, never publicly.

Q: Do you still have contact with old SPD companions,

such as Egon Bahr and former Chancellor Helmut Schmidt?

Von Buelow: There are no close contacts any more.

I wantedto go to the last SPD party congress, but I was sick.

Q: Can it be, Mr. von Buelow, that you are a mouthpiece for

typical anti-Americanism?

Von Buelow: Nonsense, this has absolutely nothing to do

with anti-Americanism. I am a great admirer of this great,

open, free society, and always have been. I studied in the U.S.

Q: How did you get the idea that there could be a link

between the attacks and the American intelligence agencies?

Von Buelow: Do you remember the first attack

on the WorldTrade Center in 1993?

Q: Six people were killed and over a thousand wounded,

by a bomb explosion.

Von Buelow: In the middle was the bombmaker,

a former Egyptian officer.

He had pulled together some Muslims for the attack.

They were snuck into the country by the CIA,

despite a State Department ban on their entry.

At the same time, the leader of the band was an FBI informant.

And he made a deal with the authorities:

At the last minute, the dangerous explosive material

would be replaced by a harmless powder.

The FBI did not stick to the deal.

The bomb exploded, so to speak, with the knowledge of the FBI.

The official story of the crime was quickly found:

The criminals were evil Muslims.

Q: At the time Soviet soldiers marched into Afghanistan,

you were in the cabinet of Helmut Schmidt. What was it like?

Von Buelow: The Americans pushed for trade sanctions,

they demanded the boycott of the Olympic games in Moscow....

Q.... which the German government followed...

Von Buelow: And today we know: It was the strategy

of the American security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski,

to destabilize the Soviet Union from neighboring Muslim countries

They lured the Russians into Afghanistan,

and then prepared for them a hell on earth, their Vietnam.

With decisive support of the U.S. intelligence agencies,

at least 30,000 Muslim fighters were trained

in Afghanistan and Pakistan, a bunch of good-for-nothings

and fanatics who were, and still are today, ready for anything.

And one of them is Osama bin Laden. I wrote years ago: `

`It was out of this brood, that the Taliban grew up

in Afghanistan, who had been brought up in the Koran schools

financed by American and Saudi funds,

the Taliban who are now terrorizing the country and destroying it

Q: Even though you say, for the U.S.

it was a matter of raw materials in the region,

the starting point for the U.S. aggression,

was the terrorist attack which cost thousands of human lives.

Von Buelow: Completely true. One must always keep this

gruesome act in mind. Nonetheless, in the analysis of political

processes, I am allowed to look and see who has advantages

and disadvantages, and what is coincidental. When in doubt,

it is always worthwhile to take a look at a map,

where are raw materials resources, and the routes to them?

Then lay a map of civil wars and conflicts on top of that

--they coincide. The same is the case with the third map:

nodal points of the drug trade.

Where this all comes together, the American intelligence services

are not far away. By the way, the Bush family is linked to oil,

gas, and weapons trade, through the bin Laden family.

Q: What do you think of the Bin Laden films?

Von Buelow: When one is dealing with intelligence services,

one can imagine manipulations of the highest quality.

Hollywood could provide these techniques.

I consider the videos inappropriate as evidence.

Q: You believe the CIA is capable of anything,

[wouldn`t stop at anything].

Von Buelow: The CIA, in the state interests of the U.S.,

does not have to abide by any law in interventions abroad,

is not bound by international law;

only the President gives orders.

And when funds are cut, peace is on the horizon,

then a bomb explodes somewhere. Thus it is proven,

that you can`t do without the intelligence services;

and that the critics are {nuts,} as Father Bush called them,

Bush who was once CIA head and President.

You have to see that the U.S. spends $30 billion

on intelligence services, and $13 billion on anti-drug work.

And what comes out of it?

The chief of a special unit of the strategic anti-drug work declared, in despair, after 30 years of service,

that in every big, important drug case,

the CIA came in and took it out of my hands. (Rosalinda: Michael Levin)

Q: Do you criticize the German government

for its reaction after Sept. 11?

Von Buelow: No. To assume that the government

were independent in these questions, would be naive.

Q: Herr von Buelow, what will you do now?

Von Buelow: Nothing. My task is concluded by saying,

it could not have been that way [according to the official story]

Search for the truth!

(sotto vo(i)ce) . . . ``suddenly there are lot many peoples using CAPS on this page``.

hamzad #413 This post tells me nothing about the US press. It tells me a lot about you: you are so obsessed with your anti-US feelings that you ignore the realities around you and live in a dream world. Even if the US plane was shot down (as the news item you post claims), what does that prove???? Does it disprove the fact that the taliban and al-qaeda collapsed like a house of cards when confronted by the US military? Does it disprove the fact that the collapse of the taliban has been welcome by Afghans, millions of whom had voted with their feet by fleeing Afghanistan?? As for the news items itself, a moment`s thought would tell any reasonable man that it is as unrealistic as the claim made by the mullahs that 4000 jews did not show up for work at WTC on September 11.

Step out of your dream world, and have the courage and the honesty to see reality. You will be better off in the long run as a result. It is people like you who have made muslims the laughing stock of the world.

re:Reply #: 411

harimau,

My purpose of pasting that letter on this forum had less to do with its contents than with its tone. For once, i thought, the letter was written without any rancor or ill-feelings. We have been interacting in chowk long enough to know how ylh throws a fit for every little insinuations (real or imaginary) and blames the entire community or religion for an individual`s fault. That letter was, i thought, for a change refreshingly different. That`s all.

Sridhar

re: harimau on ylh

{{YLH is the master of the half-truth. He stops Jogindranath Mondol`s {that is how the Bengalis would spell it, not Mandal) story at a point convenient to him.}}

....good catch...he is the master of the half-truth, of revision, and of delusion...it`s an art he picked up at the Ivy League institution, Rutgers....

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

Shah: I can care less what the Quran says about gussa. This is not gussa, youll know when it comes to that level. This is simply intensity (The fire`s been burning and nobodyz gonna stop it).

And I dont care why people are here. Samina is my sister. Ill ask u nicely, dont fukk with her or your gonna have me breathin down ya neck (can u HANDLE that?).

The rule IZ simple, dont talk negatively about my fam. Do not EVER break this SACRED rule or not even Allah will prevent my wrath on your azz (only HALF joking).

Godot,

Very well written article, Godot, I regret I missed reading it, until today.

I have a few, shall I say, philosophical differences with you. Not that my views are written in stone; but I need somebody to convince me that I`m wrong:)

What is the point of being a superpower, in the first place? As far as I`m concerened, the main advantage of being a superpower is that ``my interests are paramount, & should supercede someone elses interests--when push comes down to shove``.

Morally, that may sound selfish & unaltruistic. However, that characteristic is present in EVERY human being & EVERY country. Gee, otherwise, if you go on morality or ``moral responsibility`` alone--the US responsibility should be to feed, clothe, provide health care & education to EVERY human being in EVERY country. Or atleast, America should redistribute money to EVERY country proportianate to that country`s need. THERE IS NO END TO IT!

EVERY single country WANTS to be a superpower or dreams to be one. If we dont dream to be the best that we can be; we lose the whole challenge in life. Why the heck should an American bust his butt to send his/her money to every bum in the world, whether that bum likes him or wants to kill him?!

This whole business of ``why do they hate us so?`` I think has gone TOO FAR. EVEN GOD IS HATED! Should GOD feel guilty that every human or every country doesnt have the same benefits? Infact, some of the world`s most moral & ``larger than life humans``--(Jesus Christ, Gandhi, Martin Luther King) were ALL assassinated. You cannot please EVERYBODY & EVERY nation--no matter how ``moral`` America`s interests are.

America`s responsibilty is to protect, preserve & further the interests of the CITIZENS OF THE US--period. If Govt of America does not do that to the citizens` satisfaction--the Govt IS & BOOTED out at the next election. That IS & SHOULD be the way it is.

If countries hate the US interests & behaviour & express that hatred by defiant violence--like terrorists acts or wars--then America SHOULD go to war. Its NOT possible to avoid killing civilians in a war. In that respect, the US has done everything it can to minimise it & agonises over it. Tell me ONE nation that has tried to avoid civilian casualties in a war, more than the US.

Unless a superpower is a total isolationist country, it is impossible NOT to meddle in international affairs--not in this day & age. I think its right for the American people to be judge & jury for the action of their Govt. What right does the rest of the world have to be the judge of the American people? If somethinks that thats immoral or hates us for that--screw them!

Let no one, but God, be the judge & juror of the American people. More importantantly, let no other nation or international body DARE judge on God`s behalf.

News that US media would never report.

e-mail or distribute this to all your muslim friends. __________________________________________________

KANDAHAR (Special Report): In the Mewand District of Kandahar, a US helicopter was shot down Wednesday, killing seven US soldiers. In the mountainous region of the Roodfarah area of Mewand District, which previously housed Arab Mujahideen bases, US Special Forces tried to initiate a raid. 15 US warplanes and helicopters were participating in the operation. All of a sudden, one US helicopter was destroyed which was among those guarding their ground troops. Three explosions were heard before the helicopter crashed to the ground. US Forces arrested one Afghan boy in the area, but he was later on released. This boy disclosed that the US forces were completely shocked and in a state of panic and confusion when this helicopter was destroyed. After the destruction of this helicopter, the cowardly US soldiers` left the place and called in airstrikes to level the area in which it was destroyed. Airstrikes continued throughout Wednesday night.

MORE FIRING AT KANDAHAR AIRPORT

KABUL (Online): More exchange of fire took place near Kandahar Airport on Wednesday whilst Arab Mujahideen prisoners were being transported to Cuba. The firing began when a US aircraft carrying 30 Mujahideen prisoners was about to take off for the US base in Cuba. US marines tightened up security measures in their own right after this exchange of fire. According to Military officials these measures were taken due to the presence of unidentified personnel within the security bounded areas.

BOMBING OF US WARPLANES OVER ZAWAR CONTINUES

KABUL(NNI): US warplanes continued their bombing Wednesday over the Eastern regions of Afghanistan. Attacking from a very high altitude, they targetted so called `new` Taliban and Al-Qaida positions and dropped several heavy bombs. This bombing also targetted new positions near Zawar. This bombing has been a continuous cause of unrest for the residents of the region, who are now mustering plans to break from the interim puppet government and attack US forces in Afghanistan.

PRESENCE OF SEVEN MUJAHIDEEN WITHIN PERIMETER OF KANDAHAR AIRPORT CREATES CHAOS AMONGST US SOLDIERS AFRAID OF GUERRILLA ATTACKS

WASHINGTON (NNI): US marines have tightened up their security measures after the suspected sighting of seven Mujahideen within the security perimeter of Kandahar Airport. US officials in Washington disclosed that US Marines captured a huge amount of ammunition including hand grenades, assault rifles and rocket launchers in the vicinity of Kandahar Airport. The spokesman also disclosed that seven men had entered the security perimeter of US Marines in Southern Afghanistan. The spokesman added that efforts were underway to capture those seven men and security measures had also been tightened up.

NOW CRIME TO EVEN HELP MUSLIM CIVILIANS WITH RELIEF EFFORTS

BANNU (Special Report): The media has recently carried reports of a British man, James McLintock, who was captured in Pakistan near the Afghan border on suspicion of involvement of terrorism. Mr McLintock, apparently a Muslim, told the authorities that he was involved in relief efforts for Afghan refugees with an established Karachi-based relief organisation. Having been cleared by the FBI after interrogation in inhumane conditions, Mr McLintock was given a punishment of three years hard labour in Pakistani jails for the crime of wishing to assist Afghan refugees.

This incident further shows the hypocrisy of the international community, who first made it a crime for Muslims to defend themselves, and now they have even made it a crime to help Afghan refugees, suggesting the point that: `When we disbelievers kill you Muslims, you are not allowed to defend yourselves and if we kill your fellow Muslims and turn them into refugees, then you are not allowed to help them, else you will get punished.`

Mr McLintock continues to be held in solitary confinement in Pakistan jails; his Muslim wife, Shaffia Begum, and his non-Muslim parents, have been trying to have him released, but it is unlikely the British Government will intervene to have him released, because it only intervenes for British citizens who are white and NON-Muslim, in the same way that America does not care about the rights of Mujahid John Walker Lindh, who is also white, but Muslim. If Mr McLintock was a white, non-Muslim, homosexual nurse who had committed murder and theft (like the two British nurses in Saudi Arabia who killed a fellow Australian but were released upon pressure by the British Government on Saudi Arabia), he would now be sitting in his comfortable home, with lucrative contracts to sell his story to the media and become a star.