The American Nightmare: No Exit, No Entry I have always wondered how the USA is going to adjust with the issue of overseas labor working at much lower costs than American labor.

If I get a contract for $20/hr per programmer, I can start a company in Pakistan and make a profit. In addition, Pakistan has given me a tax holiday, on IT, for a few years. Even more, I don`t have to worry about hiring and firing, legal issues, extensive employee benefits, getting sued, etc. Moreso, I can even pirate expensive software, if I really want o cut costs.

Even an entry level html developer charges more than $20/hr in the USA. A consulting company has to charge, at least $100/hr to make any kind of a profit. On sophisticated software, they have to charge much more. IBM etc., even now, charge well over $150/hr. With some consultants coming in at $300/hr. When I was working in a company, once we hired a few consultants for $500/hr each!

Now, once the other countries start getting things sorted out, how in the world is the USA labor going to compete. Why in the world will a US company develop anything in the USA.

Moreover, in manufacturing, engineering etc. how is the USA going to compete. Other than forcefully restricting work visas, on domestic contracts, what else could the USA do. If it refuses visas or off-shoring of jobs, it will lose its exports to companies in Europe, who allow visas and off-shoring, i.e. SAP will develop its software much cheaper than Oracle, if Germany has easier visa conditions than USA...........

In a world, where everyone is competing and everyone is asking for a piece of the pie (not to mention a piece of the natural gas), how can one civilization - Western - forever maintain such a high standard of living? Regardless of the policies it makes........

Uptil WWII, the West was able to control the world`s resources and labor through colonialism. From then till now, the West was able to control the world`s resources, through support of, ``friendly`` regimes and through its coroparations being the only game in town......

But in another 25 years, this corporate colonialism will end also, since other countries corporations will also start competing...........As I said earlier, the cycle driver in Bombay will sllowly move towards a Huyndai, through his off-shored job, causing the SUV driver in California to move down to one, as his job gets off-shored........

Changing Radio Stations Speaking of kalima chowk: is that the same chowk that was known as Tahira Syed chowk during my days? The story went that the construction on the chowk (shown in the above picture) looked like Tahira Syed`s hand; when she sings she twirls her hand around a lot. And that Nawaz Sharif, who was then the Chief Minister of Punjab had constructed it for her, since she was reputed to be his girlfriend, after her divorce from her husband..............

The American Nightmare: No Exit, No Entry --..-- #20: ``how in your opnion, would the rest of the population consume similar resources?Your statement Based on this, the living standard in the USA is bound to go down. There is nothing the USA can do about it has an air of bravado and doesnot carry much meaning - Can you expand on this?``

First of all, I have to say you have the most interesting nick on this site. Very creative.....

The answer to your question is that I don`t really know. I am not an economist. But I do try to read what economists write, and then see what makes the most sense. Here is what I have gathered:

If there are a fixed amount of resources in the world, which there is, then in a perfect situation those resources would be equally distributed across the world, thereby, leading to an equal living standard for everyone. However, that is not how the world works. The more efficient societies, through technology, force etc. tend to dominate the resources. Through technology, the use their own resources more efficiently. And through force they utilize the resources in the other countries (main reasons behind colonialism, war in Iraq etc.).

Now as the rest of the countries in the world becomes more efficient, through education, good governance etc., there ability to utilize and compete for resources increases. Also, there ability to protect there own resources, against aggression by more efficient countries, increases also. The British can no longer get the rates on South Asian cotton that they could when they owned South Asia. USA will not get the rates on oil, if the Middle East countries end up with strong nationalistic govts.

If India gets to a point where every citizen can afford a motorcycle, its demand for resources will increase. In addition, if it becomes more efficient as a country, it will have the wealth to compete for those country`s resources. It will, thus, attract far more of those resources towards itself, than it does now. If the USA uses 25% of the world`s resources today, if India successfully competes for 5% of those, USA will be down to 20%. Or it will have to pay more to remain at 25%.

This will result in a decrease in living standard in the USA. This is in relation to the lead the USA has over the rest of the world. Due to technological advances, living standards as a whole (medicine, longer life, safer cars and planes etc.) will continue going up. However, for every motorcycle that Ravi buys in Bombay, there will have to be Joe somewhere in USA who will have to pay more for fill his SUV. Which will leave him less money to spend on steak dinners...........

If we assume a utopian perfect world, with very equal resource distribution, one day Ravi will eventually move up to a Huyndai, and Joe will have to move down to one............Things won`t ever get that equal, but they will move in that direction...............To some extent, we are starting to see the initial state of that happening in IT...........The average living standard of the Indian IT developer is going to keep going up, while the growth in that of the average US IT person will not grow and probably decline, at some point.............

Changing Radio Stations hamidm mian #19: You are honest. Which is what I like about you........

As they say, ``Sou sonaar kee, aik lohaar ki``...........(you being the sonaar, and me being the lohaar).........I couldn`t resist it......Good thing you didn`t take it personally.......You were getting carried away with your, ``standing up to the Army`` stories........I just wanted to keep things honest, here...........You, tahmad, fuzair, nazarhayatkhan etc. have benefited more from the military than anyone else here (especially NHK, who I believe is still benefitting).......Nothing wrong with that......You guys and/or your family members worked hard and deserve to benefit........But after benefitting like that, one cannot become a, ``rebel``...........Kind of like people who live in the USA, benefit from it, and then badmouth it........Wouldn`t you say......

Being the off-spring of a Brigadier of yesteryears was a huge deal. A Brig of your father`s generation was equivalent to a Lt. Gen. of today`s world. Commadant of CMH Pindi may have ridden a bicycle now and then, but not always.......those guys had far more facilities than Brigs of today.......I find it hard to believe you never rode in a staff car, but I will take your word for it........You did have a staff car, correct.......

As for the time in Lowertopa: could I request you to not do it again. Those rooms are paid for by young men, through their monthly mess bills, making almost nothing. Its the only entertainment they have. You make more than them in a few hours. There is nothing more frustrating then going to the one place one can afford, after six spending six months in Shorkot, and find it being occupied by rich expat sons and brother-in-laws of some retired General (or even Wg. Cdr.)............there are after all positions lower than a Wg. Cdr......Then again, maybe I have you to thank for my ending up in North America.........Maybe you were the one occupying the room, when I visited........

The showing the card to skip the toll is ok..........That is upto the toll people..........

The American Nightmare: No Exit, No Entry The USA has 4% (?) of the world`s population, yet uses 25% of the world`s resources. Based on this, there aren`t enough resources in the world for everyone to have the same living standards as Americans.

2/5th of the world`s population - China and India - barely used any of the world`s resources. If one throws in countries like Pakistan, Indonesia etc. that number goes beyond 2/5th.

Now these countries are demanding these resources also. Just to give you an idea, India, even today, uses the same amount of natural gas as Pakistan. Forget about the USA. The average Indian uses 1/7th the natural gas of the average Pakistani. What will happen when he wants to use the same amount of gas (or oil or anything) as the average American?

Based on this, the living standard in the USA is bound to go down. There is nothing the USA can do about it. Granted wrong foreign policies like Iraq or incorrect economic policies like what Bush has introduced, are accelerating the process. But it is impossible to maintain such a high living standard, forever, anyways. Unless one can keep utilizing 25% of the world`s resources.

The living standard of the average American is going to come down, not because IT jobs are being shifted to India or China. If my numbers are correct, less than a quarter of one percent of Indians are employed in the IT industry. And only a tiny % of Americans are also. The living standard will come down when 2.4 billion Chinese and Indians also want a chunk of those 25% of resources that the USA is using.

The price of the resources will go up, making it more expensive for the average American. Hence he will not be able to buy a new SUV, and will have to do with a small Huyndai. And his airline ticket for the annual vacation to Europe will become more expensive. Hence he will have to settle with Florida, etc.

Interestingly, I think Canada is quite nicely placed in this new world. Assuming it can delink its economy from a total dependence on the USA economy, and become a supplier to other countries, like China. Canada is heavily resource rich. It has far more than it needs. It has more oil reserves than Saudi Arabia. The Great Lakes contain 18% of the world`s fresh water in lakes. And Canadian rivers discharge 7% of the world`s river freshwater......Not to mention lumber, minerals and other export items........

Interestingly, Canada imports 25% of the USA`s total exports. USA exports twice as much to Ontario, as it does to Japan. USA exports more to Canada than to all countries of EU. Canada-USA is easily the largest trading partnership in the world. While 90% (?) of Ontario`s exports go to the USA. So, currrently, if USA goes under, so does Canada........

Changing Radio Stations hamidm mian #12: ``...... a couple of years ago i was rear-ended by a army staff car in front of the pia office on the mall in pindi .......... it took me the better part of half a day, but i was able to stand up``

Why is everyone on this site a rebel? Or why do they try to portray themselves as one?

If the info doing the rounds is accurate, and your father was a Brigadier; and that too, during the days, when Brigadiers were the equivalent to Field Marshalls, would it be correct to assume that you must have sat in more than your share of staff cars, while you were growing up............Did your Army driver ever rear end anyone..........

Once, while living in some remote corner of Punjab (or was it NWFP), my friends and I got a few days of vacation. We decided to go to Murree. Lowertopa base to be exact. We couldn`t afford any hotel in Murree, so we figured the officer`s mess there would accomodate us. Since it was, after all, built for people like us, who were making barely 7000 ruppees a month. When we got there, half the rooms were filled with senior officers. Fine, they were senior. But every other room was filled with adult kids of retired Brigadiers and Generals, visiting from North America and Europe, who were there with their own kids, on vacation.........

I went back to Pindi, while some of my friends decided to stay in tents.......That was the day I started thinking about leaving the military. Why someone visiting from North America, making a fortune, had to use their father`s contacts to steal a cheap room they never earned, is something I could never figure out.......They or there retired dads could not dish out an extra 200 ruppees a day to stay at a hotel in Muree..........

If you tell me you never rode in a staff car and never utlizied your family`s contacts to get rooms in officers` messes, even though it is against the rules, I will believe your standing up to the Army story............

Otherwise, I will have to say, ``Noonh soe chuhay kha kay, billi chali Hajj ko``........

Church Lures Gujarat Tribals to Christ Usrtruly #87: ``So Holy Prophet made it mandatory to ``Copy the Guidance`` of the Judo-Chrsitian law``

Are you stating that it is mandatory for Muslims to follow the laws of Christianity and Judaism? Could you highlight exactly which versions of those laws? Not to mention, which books? I don`t know about Judaism, but much of what is in Christianity contains things that Christians, themselves, cannot agree upon.................So who is to interpret this and who is to decide which verses from which books of Christianity and Judaism are to be used..........

Here We Go Again I would tend to agree with Urstruly. This is a propoganda piece and not an opinion piece. Opinion pieces have to based on some kind of fact. And they are not supposed to reach a conclusion, if they do not have any facts. If the author wanted to present an opinion, he should have presented all possible candidates, and then used some facts to state, in his opinion, based on the facts available, this is who did it.........While simultaneously highlighting that he did not have conclusive facts........

What the author has done is used his personal biases (not opinions) and used this tragedy to promote his political and social point of view. It is no different that what the govt. used to do, when it would immediately state that India was responsible, within a few days of any blast. No facts, no investigation. Just an opinion, based on nothing.........

If a person thinks a certain group needs to be agitated against - be it the maulvis, or the secularists, or terrorists, or freedom fighters, or Israelis, or Indians, or NGOs or anyone - they should just state that. They should not, without fact, attach them to a bombing, and then complain that there should be an agitation.........

My guess was that this is Al-Qaeda. Based on the attack involving a car bomb, and a US franchise. That is an opinion. However, I would indicate that the govt. should investigate and find facts and then only should be put blame.........Not the other way around.........The other way around is what this article does............

If this was a Shia mosque, then the opinion would point to religously sectarian organizations. If this was the Indian embassy, then perhaps to militant anti-Indian organization. But to the best of my knowledge, using car-bombs to blow up anything related to the USA, has never been done by any local, ``jehadi`` organization. These are new phenomenons, related to the arrival of al-Qaeda in Pakistan, after 9/11..........Just an opinion, though......Not a conclusion, until facts are out.............

Indo-Pak History via Mail Dost-mittar #534: ``But for those of us who regard the subcontinent as a single geographic and civilisational entity with tremendous diversity - and I do not want to get into the 101st round of whether or not the subcontinent is a civilisational entity, this is universally accepted as such and some jealous Pakistanis` complaint is not going to change anything -``

You tend to avoid debates, which may highlight issues you are uncomfortable with. One cannot simply avoid such debates. One has to engage in them and prove one`s point.........

No one has, ``universally`` accepted the Sub-Continent as a civlizational entity! Other than some Indian commentators. Even Samuel Huntington, who considers India and Nepal to be one, ``Hindu`` civilization, does not go as far as including Pakistan and Bangladesh in that civilization. Even for present day, where India is one country. How in the world could one make such a claim historically, when the Sub-Continent was multiple regions and kingdoms.........

If what you say is true, then do tell me what is common between me and someone from Kerela or Tamil Nadu or Gujrat? You can tell us apart from a mile..........And could probably tell our ancestors apart from ten miles.......I have been confused for an Afghan, an Irani (or even a Mexican) but never a Tamil, or Kearaliite, or Gujrati....How in the world are (or were) we a part of the same civilization, if we don`t even have any commonalities after 5000 years?

Could you define the boundaries of this single civlizational entity of the Sub-Continent that you are talking about. Did it go into Iran and Afghanistan and Burma? Why not into Turkmenistan and Iraq? And could you explain under what definition you consider it one entity. And who universally accepts it as an entity? And why Pakistanis would be jealous?

Isn`t the biggest complain Indians have that Pakistanis do not, ``jealously`` defend their South Asian identity enough? Or is it that Pakistanis are jealously trying to be a part of an Indian identity?

The only reason I am debating this is because such a point of view, that claims India to be some sort of a civilizational entity, without feeling the need to provide facts to back it up, is what alienates Muslims in the region. It basically sets the criteria for them, that to be historically part of some entity, they must acknowledge their historical Hindu-ness (or domestic religion-ness, as you present it). Not their Punjabi-ness or Pathan-ness etc.

And once they acknowledge that, they must acknowledge all historical links with all Hindus, anywhere. Even if they have nothing in common with them.....i.e. not only must I acknowledge that my ancestors were Hindus of a certain civilization (let`s say Punjab). This I do acknowledge. As should all Pakistanis. I must also acknowledge that they shared a commonality with areas in present day India, thereby forever linking me with India - an entity that never existed historically, until 55 years ago!

While I am comfortable acknowledge my links with a historical culture of Punjab, which at one time was majority Hindu. Or an Indus culture. Why in the world should I acknowledge a link with the rest of India? It has nothing to do with jealousy. It simply has something to do with fact.............

The argument you are presenting is basically a nuanced form of a Hindu Ummah, concept presented by RSS. They openly declare the Sub-Continent to be one historical religious Hindu Ummah. You are attempting to paint the Hindu religion as a culture. And then claiming that everyone should acknowledge this culture. A culture, which had no common factor than religion............

A civilization has to have certain common features: these include geographical commonalities, language, food, physical features, social customs, clothes, etc. The Sub-Continent never had any of these in common. Which is why it barely ever existed as one entity. Had it been a civilization, it would have naturally moved towards one entity. Yet again and again, it broke away. The only time it remained together, was when it was conquered, under force, by Ashoka and the Brits.......The moment the authoritative force disappeared, it broke up, along some natural lines. Including today.........

There was, infact, only one common link across historical South Asia. And that was religion of some sort. Now is religion enough to constitute a civilization? I certainly don`t think so..........One can, incorrectly, call that religion (Hinduism, Bhuddhism etc.) a, ``culture,`` much like one can do the same with Islam. But even that, ``culture`` could never hold the Sub-Continent together. Primarily because there was never one culture.....................There never was one civilization........

Punjab is a civlizaition. Sind is a civilization. Bengal is one. As is Gujrat and Tamil areas. etc. India is not one. It never was one. Pakistan is not one. It never was one. Bangladesh is the only country in the region, which was one civilization (or today, half of one)............I think it is time that Pakistani Muslims acknowledged they Hindu history of their Punjabi, Sindhi etc. civilizations. And it is time that Indian stopped trying to portray present day India as some sort of a unified hisotrical civilization that everyone in the Sub-Continent should consider themselves a historical member of...............

Church Lures Gujarat Tribals to Christ Dost-mittar #37: ``as a state which is proud of its secular credentials.``

I have never quite been able to figure out this line of thinking. Could you explain, why someone should be, ``proud`` of their secular credentials. Or their religious credentials. Or their capatilist credentials. Or their socialist credentials. Or any other kind of credentials, including their Hindu or Muslim credentials that they may possess..........

When people start becoming, ``proud`` of some kind of credential, aren`t they declaring their superiority over others, for no reason? Isn`t it better to simply have credentials, without being proud of them? And just live like decent human beings, and just be nice to each other. Without highlighting one`s credentials........

I have met so many people who are unnecessarily proud of their Hindu or Muslim or secular or athiest credentials. Including many on this site. And yet I have found jerks amongst all such groups, individually and at a group level........In fact, when I go to some country or meet some, I try not to look at their credentials, and just judge them by how nice they are to me...........

I think it is the being, ``proud`` part that is the problem, not the credential part...........

Here We Go Again Stuka #43: ``BTW, not that Ii discount the possibility of RAW doing this, but what if it is one of those Jehadi groups? Which wall will you go bang your head against?``

I hope Pakistan does not have a knee-jerk reaction and blames India for this. I don`t think it has, nor will it. It should be investigated with int`l expertise and blamed placed after proof. Pakistan has actually caught quite a few bombers, recently.........

I don`t think this has anything to do with India. It is also not local jehadis. You need to keep something in mind. Local jehadis never bomb Pakistan. Their aim has always been to liberate Kashmir. So they bomb the Indian Army in Kashmir.

The only religious violence in Pakistan is sectarian Shia-Sunni violence. This is like the Hindu-Muslim violence in India, except it is carried out by very small sectarian terrorist organizations. Like Sapah-e-Sahaba. However, they tend to specifically target Shias, in mosques etc.......

Car bombs and suicide bombers are a very new phenomenon in Pakistan. And these are the tradmarks of Al-Qaeda. The fact that this was in front of a KFC is another sign. Al-Qaeda has made Pakistan a target, ever since the USA started bombing Afghanistan and Iraq. And Pakistan became a, ``front-line`` state.

I think it is about time for the USA to end this ridiculous, ``War on Terrorism,`` and move out of Iraq etc. That is what people in Pakistan should be protesting against. Since all this violence is part of that circle. The USA govt. continously states that they are trying to end this kind of terrorism Pakistand Jordan have seen. When, in fact, they are generating more and more terorrism. Al-Qaeda never bombed anything in Pakistan. However, since GWOT, they target US franchises in Pakistan, and invariably kill Pakistanis. The same thing recently happened in Jordan........

Al-Qaeda is not a Pakistani jehadi organization. It is a foreign jehadi organization, which is now active in Pakistan, after GWOT..........

At the very least, Pakistan needs to get out of this, ``Frontline state`` business. It was a frontline state against USSR and ended up holding the bag. It is a frontline state in GWOT, and will end up holding the bag. The USA is too far away to target, hence the Al-Qaedas of the world will target Pakistan and its President and PM etc. I still cannot see what benefits Paksitan has ever gotten from being a frontline state on anything related to American wars.

And it is time for the Israelis to get their heads out of their asses, and give Palestinians a country, so this whole circle of violence, that goes from Palestine to the Middle East to the USA to Afghanistan, to Pakistan etc. ends..........Before it kills all of us...........

Indo-Pak History via Mail Dost-mittar #499: ``Whatever he did, in India he is remembered and admired not because of his bloody conquests but as the great follower of Buddha who did wonderful things for the country.``

Noonh soe chuhway khaa kay billi challi Hajj ko (not you, but Ashoka).

I think this is forms the core point on where you and I disagree.........

I don`t consider South Asia of Ashoka`s time, and before and after, to be a, ``country.`` It was a country about as much as Europe was a country. Hence, anyone who started out from Bihar and conquered the whole place, within two generations, was the equivalent of Napoleon starting from Corsica and conquering all of Europe and declaring it his own.......

An invader is an invader is an invader. If he becomes Bhuddhist or not is immaterial. Ashoka didn`t retire to a monestry in Tibet and become a monk and ask for forgiveness and free everyone he had conquered. He solidified and extended(?) his empire. Whether one invades with a smile on one`s face and Bible in one`s hand, or whether one invades yelling Allah-o-Akbar, it is still an invasion and a conquest......

The term, ``benovolent invader`` is an oxymoron. However this is how Indians seem to view non-Muslim invaders. When you invade, you kill. Brutal killings with armies, throuhgout the land. Doesn`t matter if you are Bhuddhist. When you consolidate empires after invading, you crush uprisings. Doesn`t matter if you are a Bhuddhist.......Or if you are portrayed by Shahrukh in romantic movies.......

In all my interactions, here, I have yet to see a single Indian Hindu interactor criticize a single non-Muslim (or non-Christian) invader of South Asia. Not once. When, in fact, Muslim and Christian invaders, of South Asia, are a new(er) phenomenon. The history of South Asia had far more Hindu invaders, invading each others` civilzations. It is thus hard for me to not conclude that there is a strong bias in favor of invaders of local religions. They are considered unifiers and all their sins can be forgiven. However, Muslim invaders are considered foreigners and evivl, even if they were born in Delhi.

Unless of course, they start a new religion, called Din-e-Illahi and move aways from Islam. And marry 30 Hindu wives. Then the invasions become kosher. After that, it is ok for the invader to invade and kill Hindus.

Has anyone in India ever bothered to do the Math and figure out who, amongst the Mughals, must have killed the most Hindus, in proportion to the land they governed. In my calculations, it comes out to be Akbar (or Aurangzeb). It was, infact, Akbar who laid the foundations of a growing Mughal empire. He inherited nothing from Humanyun, who was constantly on the run. Akbar expanded it through invasions. He invaded from Kabul to Bengal! God knows how many Hindus he must have been killed. Yet he is considered the great Mughal king in India.........My guess is because he was accompanied by Hindu wives and not chanting Allah-o-Akbar when he invaded..........

Isn`t it better to simply look at invaders as invaders. Regardless of the religion they practiced. Isn`t that the big fuss that Indian interactors here have about Pakistanis (to a great degree, a correct fuss). Yet it is surprising to then see the same Indian Hindu interactors, be so biased in favor of Hindu and local religious invaders................

In such a line of thinking, Muslims will always be foreigners, i.e. it uses religion as the defining line for the civilization of South Asia.............

Just out of curiosity, could you highlight the names of some Hindu invaders of South Asian lands, whose actions you consider bad. Let`s set aside Ashoka, since you are apparently in love with him. What about Chandragupta? Do you consider him an evil foreign invader of South Asian lands?.........Or is he kosher also, because he is not a Muslim..........What about some others..........As a proud Punjabi, shouldn`t you be against such invaders, as much as you are against Ghaznavi............

Church Lures Gujarat Tribals to Christ Just out of curiosity, does anyone know the official policy of converting religions in Pakistan......I know, unofficially, people do it. And it i quite common between Shias and Sunnis.........But they are in the same religion.........

But what if Mohammad Yosuf decided to become Yosuf Yohanna again? What would happne? I had an English teacher who became a Muslim, and then went back to his Christian faith. Nothing happened to him........And I have friends who consider themselves athiests, even though they were born Muslims........I moved towards athiesm at one point in my life.........But none of us are famous or well-known public figures........

Are the individuals converting to Christianity, from Hinduism, part of a lower cast? Are their upper caste Hindus converting also? From what I have read, most of the Hindus who converted to Islam, historically, were from the lower caste. Which is why one finds very, ``upper caste`` Muslim names in South Asia, like Qureshi, and Ansari and Syed. Obviously these guys` ancestors did not migrate from Arabia. They were just given these names, to riase their castes, so to speak...........

Indo-Pak History via Mail Dost-mittar #468: ``There is something in the chowk format which seems to bring out the worst confrontationist in us. The format encourges insults, slights and confrontations instead of trying to learn from each other.``

I think people only abuse, when they run out of arguments. If I can prove to you that the sun comes out of the East, I don`t need to abuse you. It is only if I am trying to prove that the sun comes out of the West, and cannot do so, that I need to rely on abuse..........

To the best of my knowledge, while I enjoy heated debates, I have never abused anyone on this site. Nor have I indulged in name-calling. And I have been here for six years, or so. And I think I can say with a lot of confidence that I may have attracted more abuse than anyone else on this site. I get it from all directions. Men and women. Secularists and maulvis. Pakistanis of all ilks and Indians of all colors Including on a few odd occasions, you.....

Hence I don`t think you can put me in your category of confrotationists (in an abusing sense). So this rule does not apply to everyone. There are various different ways to look at it. A US reporter, when asked how he knows he is being objective, replied: When half my hate mail is from Republicans and half from Democrats, I know I am being objective.

That is the rule I use. As long as one is being abused from all directions, genders, and nationalities, and one does not have some single group of die-hard supporters, one can safely conclude that one is being objective..........

As for mainstream Indian media. I read it quite a bit. Yes, it certainly isn`t as bad as this site, in its anti-Pakistani-ness and anti-Muslimness. But it is still very biased towards the govts. official line, towards Pakistan. It toes the Indian govts` line on most other issues realted to Pakistan. For example, in the latest Delhi blasts, it declared Pakistan the culprit, within hours, the moment some govt. official muttered something. There was no call for an independent inquiry or proof. The Pakistani English media, takes exactly the opposite view, and criticizes the govt. if it declares India the culprit without proof..........

I would say Vereesh`s comments fall into the line of the Indian media. Not hatred, but more nuanced support of the Indian govt`s line on Pakistan..........

The Indian media, however, is not nearly as anti-Muslim in general (unlike most Indian interactors on this site).............

Indo-Pak History via Mail Dost-mittar #463: ``Your outlandish comparison of Ashok and Ghazni shows that you are ignorant about one or both of them. As far as I am aware, even during Kalinga campaign, Ashok did not kill non-combatants nor indulged in the destruction and looting of civilians.``

Hmm...Either I am ignorant or you are ignorant. Although, you seem to have already concluded that I am the ignorant person. I must admit I am amazed at the lengths people will go to, to idolize their historical figures. My comparison of any invader is based on one simple concept: Did he, or did he not invade other areas and kill other people. If he did, then he is an invader. Doesn`t matter, if he was a Hindu or a Muslim, or a Bhuddhist or Sikh. Unless of course, one wants to decide one`s heroes and villians based on religion. The exact concept you, yourself, regularly denounce.......

Read any objective history of Ashoka, and you will find a view different from yours. Here is some from wikipedia:

``Prince Ashoka attacked Pataliputra (modern day Patna), and beheaded all his brothers, including Susima, and threw their bodies in a well in Pataliputra. At that stage of his life, many called him Chanda Ashoka meaning murderer and heartless Ashoka........

Kalinga put up a stiff resistance, but they were no match for Ashoka`s brutal strength. The whole of Kalinga was plundered and destroyed: Ashoka`s later edicts say that about 100,000 people were killed on the Kalinga side and 10,000 from Ashoka`s army; thousands of men and women were deported.....one day after the war was over, Ashoka ventured out to roam the city and all he could see were burnt houses and scattered corpses.... `` (wikipedia.com)

So, let`s stick with history. It was only after this that Ashoka denounced such deeds. But he kept on invading South Asia. This is my point. Lets call a spade a spade. An invader is an invader. It is wrong to elevate invaders, based on religion. As wrong for Hindus as it is for Muslims...........

``There is not even a single Indian who does not think of Akbar as a Muslim. He is not even a hero to all Indians.``

Akbar was an invader also. I am quite sure he killed a lot of Hindus. Probably moreso than his son and grandson. My comments on Akbar were in reply to Anil`s comments where Anil stated, ``BTW, Indian historians, recognize both Ashoka (more Buddhist than Hindu) and Akbar (hardly Hindu and certainly Muslim) as two genuine Emperors of India.``

Let`s cut through the fairytales, and acknowledge every invader as an invader, and base them on the number of people they killed and people they invaded. Not by their religion, or where their religion orignated from, or their ethnicity etc..............This is the whole concept various Indians (correctly in my opinion) accuse Pakistanis of. Why is it so difficult for our Indian colleagues to apply the same rule onto themselves......

If today I kill 100,000 Indians and become Bhuddhist, will you forgive my murders? If not, then why are you so bent upon forgiving Ashokas. Even though, even after becoming a Bhuddhist, he kept going on with his empire...............

South Asian Earthquake: Don’t care… or don’t know? Urstruly #33: ``Lets face it. The 80% of all the relief that came to Pakistan was either donated by governments of Islamic countries or even more so by the people of those Islamic countries who have sent their aid thru Muslim and Islamic charities and relief organizations.``

This is both true and untrue....In ratio to size of economies, this is probably true.

However, overall, I believe the most help has come from your country, the USA. I think the total amount of money, is around $130 million. And then another $43 million raised by the people. But most of all, the biggest help have been Chinook and Blackhawk helicopters. Pakistan would have been in big trouble, without these helicopters........

After the USA, and in proportions to overall ecnomies of the countries, no doubt the most help has come from Muslim countries. Turkey gave $150 million. Saudi Arabia $133 million, plus around $40 million raised by Saudi citizens. And UAE gave $100 million. Kuwait, I believe, gave $100 million for Katrina. So I hope they gave at least the same here....

I think the USA will score a lot of points for goodwill in the areas. This is what the USA should be doing, if it wants to reach the, ``hearts and minds`` of Muslims. Instead of spending $300 billion in bombing Iraq. The USA will probably give a lot more. It has a lot invested in Musharraf.

I think Pakistanis will have moved closer to the Middle Eastern Muslim countries also. After seeing the amount of money and time they have invested in this tragedy..........