Interview with the Vamp

Haha seriously. Asking me if I`m jealous of Ms. Jolie is like asking if I like chocolate - personally I don`t think someone like me could even compete with the looks of Angelina. But I do like to poke a bit of fun at celebrity culture and this was a statement to both the hijinks of celebrities as well as the journalists who worship them. I do admire Angelina Jolie for coming and highlighting the situation of the Afghan refugees quite a lot, so no nard feelings either way - I hope.

Re: # 25

Bina Shah you eagerly type ``But I do like to poke a bit of fun at celebrity culture and this was a statement to both the hijinks of celebrities as well as the journalists who worship them``

Do note that the abovementioned ``poking of fun`` tarrs most celebrities with the narrow brush for uncalled scepticism. It is this very intrusiveness and sarcasm by the paparazzi which bogged down Princess Diana to the Parisian bridge`s-end and nearly crippled the Posh-Becks marriage. It certainly did not help Shahrukh and Aishwarya.

I realise this article is being tongue-in-cheek, but other journalists get empowered by such poking fun and satire using it as an accomplice to veer toward what is known as ``gutter press`` slagging off any celeb in sight whilst also raising them to cult status.

Bina, that was funny. enjoyed it, thoroughly.

Umer M, #21, You are hillarious!!!

Very well written--congrats.
committing atrocities on innocent civilians of their os called enemy countries and then shedding crocodile tears is very old policy of the imperialists.After bombing Vietnam for years,they sent toys to their orphaned children and now similar tamaasha in Afghanistan.
Bina`s satire is to the point and exposes the wolves in sheeps` skins.

Re: # 21

Oye, drink a Pepsi and calm down.Just ask yourself who is responsible for the refugees ending up in pakistan and calmy digest the answers that will come to you if you`re someone who reads the news!!.Remember the Taliban??.Har har.

first of all i would like to congrats you.............you have done a great job........you asked some awesome question and i believe that you would hve mad her confuse aswell........and musharaf is handsome........laugh out loudly..................
well actually every person who takes step into politics deffinately a handsome guy....because he does a great job for himself...................mind it.......that democracy hit only for pakistan.........so don`t mind others.................i read your each and every article you come up everytime with different and nice topic.................keep it up!

Re: # 29
I am guessing that by the Taliban, you are referring to Pakistani support for that motley crew. If you read recent history, the refugees were initially created by the Soviet Union`s interference with the politics of Afghanistan. The fault lies not with Pakistan, Iran, India or even Afghanistan. It lies with the Soviet Union which sent 80,000 troops to support it`s puppet regime. The fault lies with the USA which financed the mujahadin, only because of the possible threat to oil supplies. Of course, with history being rewritten in several parts of the world at the moment, it is easy for impassioned accusations to be made (witness the rise of revisionism in ``Indian history``).

On a related note, although UmerMurtaza could have put it a little more politely, I agree with the point about Pakistan being a refuge. Often Pakistan has been accused of doing little for the refugees, but the critics themselves offer the usual ``international aid`` and words of comfort. Their method of helping results in most money being diverted to corrupt officials and a little bit going to relief work. The refugees become addicted to foreign aid. It does not result in refugees regaining their previous lives. Imagine if Pakistan had indeed built superb facilities for these refugees. Imagine at war`s end, would any refugee want to return to their shattered homeland? Of course not, they would want to remain in comfort. However cruel this sounds, it is better that refugees return to their homeland and rebuild their lives, than to remain the pampered guests of another country.

Why is it expected that Pakistan should be a good-natured benefactor, when it`s own economy was struggling with other problems. Even at the best of times, many western nations have ambivalent attitudes towards refugees (witness the rise in hatred for ``asylum seekers`` in the UK). They can hardly expect another country to shoulder responsibility for their wars.

Pakistan did not start the war in Afghanistan, but once they had refugees, was it wrong to allow a militia to form with the original intention of regaining stability in Afghanistan. Should Pakistan have cracked down on the Taliban then and there? Certainly the Taliban became a force for evil but could that have been predicted? What difference is there between Pakistan supporting one militia and the USA eventually succouring another militia?

These kind of questions tend to be brushed under carpets by the very people who initiated these problems.

Cayanne,

Regarding the Afghan refugees, a few clarifications:

It started with the Soviet-Afghan war. Brezniev (sp?) himself quoted the CIA covertly supporting the pre-79 nascent mujahideen factions (6 months before the war) so that the puppet communist government in Afghanistan would collapse. This would force the Soviet military to step onto the Afghan soil and the Americans would have had their Bear trap set.

Also, because the Mujahideen used the villages as their hiding bases, the Soviets decided to bomb the shit out of those places so that the mujahideen would be flushed out. The resultant native villagers would flee to Pakistan and create the refugee burden. This move was intended to stop Pakistan from supporting the covert war. This, in around 1985, was responsible for the biggest wave of refugees.

During ’85, the process of Talibanisation had begun in the tribal belt but let’s not forget that the ‘2 bullets + 2 guns = 1 dead Russian’ textbooks were published in the States. The total cost of the project was 50 million dollars.

Then the dumb Mujahideen (89 – 92) decided to bomb each other which further worsened the situation and brought more Afghanis onto the Pak soil.

Then in 1994 the Taliban came to power (and believe it or not, the very first mission of the Taliban was supported by our very own Benazir).

The Taliban brought peace and stopped the gandu warlords fighting over little boys’ ani. But, being dumb and head-strong like they all are, power got to them and they changed for the worse.

And I believe Musharraf had told them on many occasions (prior to 9/11) to calm down in terms of their policies.

As for creation of Taliban, yes Pakistan had a BIG hand. Whether it’s wrong or right is one thing but Pakistan had to preserve its interest. There are bigger problems in this world and they are the hippy environmental issues but certain states refuse to bow down because it’s in their economical interests.

Just thought I’d get things in perspective for you.

This is an imaginary interview why people are rolling up sleeves and getting into serious discussion about Taliban and politics. Give me a break!

fuck, fuck fuck fuck fuck all vamps boyeeee!!

Not even David Letterman or Jay Leno can beat this! Great Stuff, BS, Keep it up!

Pakistan didn`t support Taleban merely for self-interest. Involved also were religious convictions. That Punjabi brat, Mullah Ziaul-Haq once said to Selig Harrisson that Pakistan will integrate all Central Asia upto Aral under the flag of Islam.

Excellent piece, very well written!
Bina you captured the mockery in few words. Thums-up!