India Forum Archives
Sunday, February 08, 2004
  Pakistan, The Terrorist State
Posted by: Mudy Feb 8 2004, 10:14 PM
Old thread is in Trash can
The following links are background information on Pakistan: The Monkey Trap: A synopsis of Indo-Pak relations A landmark article that demolishes myths built up about Pakistan MUSHARRAF'S US VISIT: FACTS TO KNOW The Terrorist swamp that is Pakistan - Inside Jihad - How Pakistan sponsors terrorists in India Should Pakistan Be Broken Up? by Gul Agha which is a link to this great article: On the Frontier of Apocalypse by Christopher Hitchens (Nuclear Enabler - Pakistan today is the most dangerous place on Earth by Jim Hoagland) "Pakistan's Role in the Kashmir Insurgency" - Op-ed by Rand's Peter Chalk (This link is to a book called Making Enemies, Creating Conflict: Pakistan's Crises of State and Society. It is a collection of essays by Paks about Pak society and remains one of the finest critiques about Pakistan available on the net. ) Seymour Hersh Interview This is a list of Pakistani businesses that may be aiding and funding terror against India and other countries. Curricula and textbooks in Pakistan Most wanted list requested by India/List of terrorist sheltered by Pakistan Dictionary meaning of 'paki']The Enigma of Military Rule in Pakistan By Dr. Ahmad Faruqui
Posted by: Mudy Feb 8 2004, 10:20 PM
Posted by: Mudy Feb 8 2004, 10:28 PM Did a Pakistani aircraft, which had gone to Iran to deliver some equipment, stop in a Syrian airport on its way back to pick up Iraqi WMD "material"? Was it brought to Pakistan for safe custody? Pakistani sources are not not clear by "material" -- only documents or something more? B. RAMAN
Posted by: k.ram Feb 8 2004, 10:29 PM
Posted by: Mudy Feb 8 2004, 10:53 PM
Pakistani to keep nuke riches
Ah! they are not going to punish him, according to Islamic law. Why? Why Pakistani remember using Islamic law, when they have to punish women? frusty.gif
Posted by: Mudy Feb 8 2004, 11:15 PM Global vision Mr Gaddafi has been involved in the last couple of years with efforts to free Western hostages - first of all people held by Muslim guerrillas in the southern Philippines, more recently captives of the Taleban in Afghanistan. He says he does not act for the Libyan Government but as head of the Gaddafi Foundation known as Charity. In a speech at the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London, Mr Gaddafi set out an idealistic vision of how ethnic and religious conflicts could be resolved through federal democracy like that in Switzerland. Using a projector, he showed a map of a Federal Republic of the Holy Land where Arabs and Jews would live in harmony. It would be made up of several states - including one centred on Tel Aviv bearing the name Sharon. Another map proposed a Greater India taking in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, thus solving the Kashmir dispute at a stroke. Mr Gaddafi's ideas echoed his father's many grandiose plans for Arab and African union - which have got nowhere.
Posted by: Mudy Feb 8 2004, 11:34 PM TOKYO - A top-ranking North Korean defector said the North launched a uranium-based nuclear weapons program in 1996 with the help of Pakistan, a Japanese newspaper reported Sunday. Hwang Jang Yop, a former mentor to North Korean leader Kim Jong Il, told the Tokyo Shimbun in an interview that a top military official told him eight years ago about an agreement with Pakistan to develop an enriched uranium weapons program. .....
Posted by: SSRamachandran Feb 9 2004, 12:15 AM
I am sure it is a part of the deal the RAPEs made with Xerox. If they take away his wealth , he will start singing like a canary and give out names of all the generals and commanders. biggrin.gif
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 9 2004, 02:00 AM
QUOTE (Mudy @ Feb 8 2004, 10:20 PM)
Mudy Aap Ki Seva Mein Prastoot Kartey Hain : According to intelligence sources close to FP, following on from a secret deal with India over Kashmir and removal of the scientists behind Pakistan’s nuclear programme, Musharraf has moved onto the next stage of implementing the US plan for the region. That of strengthening the US control over Afghanistan, disbanding Pakistan’s premiere intelligence agency the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) and purging the military of anti-US hardliners. By taking such actions under the cover of the war against terrorism, Musharraf will complete the process of dismantling Pakistan as a regional strategic power. On January 28, 2004, the US newspaper, The Chicago Tribune, was utilised by the US State Department to publish a politically sensitive article aimed at inciting a response from the anti-US hardliners in the Pakistan military and intelligence agencies. The article, which quotes unnamed military sources, claimed that the Bush administration had laid down plans for a military operation against Al-Qaeeda in Afghanistan, which would include US action inside Pakistan. The article was then instantaneously covered by many publications in the US media and later picked up by the world media. The attempt to incite was clear from the article’s claim that Musharraf would be complicit with the US in executing the operation. The article quotes unnamed military sources as saying; “We are told, we are going into Pakistan with Musharraf’s help”. After recent assassination attempts on Musharraf, such a leak by a military official is highly political considering that the US regards the survival of Musharraf as vital to her plans in the region as well as the fact that such sensitive disclosures would jeopardise any US operation. The article follows a build up of statements by Musharraf after the assassination attempt on his life. The statements have been designed to focus attention on Al-Qaeeda as the hand behind his assassinations and the resurgence of the Taliban as the cause of instability in Afghanistan and Pakistan’s northern and border areas. In an interview to the Washington Post on the 25th Jan. 2004, Musharraf said: “The start of the planning for the assassination coincided with that(threat by Al-Qaeeda leader Ayman Al- Zwahiri)” By focussing on Al—Qaeeda and the Taliban, Musharraf has provided the US with the necessary reasons to maintain its presence in Afghanistan and Pakistan. At the recent Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Musharraf called for an increase in the US-NATO inspired ISAF force and even provided the US with the excuses to deploy its forces on Pakistan’s border when he said : “I think he (Osama Bin Laden) might be on the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan, giving him the opportunity of crossing and recrossing”. The different unnamed military sources used by the Chicago Tribune clearly indicate that the leaks were not coincidental. Rather the leaks were deliberate as part of a Musharraf-US trap to purge those elements in the ISI and the military opposed to what is considered by them as Musharraf’s treacherous path to weaken Pakistan and build India as the pr-eminent power in the region. The US generally considers the anti-US and hard-line elements in the ISI as the biggest threat to its regional plan for India, Afghanistan and China. The US media and State Department officials have been utilised quite extensively in order to highlight the role of the ISI as that of supporting terrorism against US troops and Karzai in Afghanistan and of inhibiting its action in Pakistan’s tribal belt through its alleged backing of a resurgent Taliban and Al-Qaeeda. On the 1st of October, 2003, Richard Armitage, US deputy Secretary of State accused some in the Pakistani security establishment of being less than enthusiastic about working with the United States in its plan towards the region when he said; “I personally believe President Musharraf is intent on being supportive of President Karzai. The ability of the government of Pakistan, particularly the military of Pakistan, to operate in the federally administered tribal areas is significantly inhibited…. I personally believe that President Musharraf is genuine when he assists us in the tribal areas and he has from inside of the border but I do not think that affection for working with us extend up and down the rank and file of the Pakistani security community.” As indicated by Armitage’s comments, the US has been careful to distance Musharraf from the anti-US elements in the ISI to the extent of highlighting a lack of control by Musharraf over it. According to an editorial in the Washington Times, a publication close to the US State Department on the 18th of November, 2003; “Gen Musharraf's leadership is also limited. Pakistan's military and intelligence community see Afghanistan not as a neighbour and partner, but rather as a place where Pakistan can broaden its strategic depth. This faction is keen on competing against Indian influence in Afghanistan and resists cracking down on former Taliban officials, in the belief they can someday rise to power and re-establish Pakistan's sway over Afghanistan." The US estimates that by eliminating the ISI , the Taliban resistance is likely to collapse as is the will of the dominant anti-US Pashtuns. Afghanistan is strategically key to realising the US oil pipe dream from Central Asia to India and key for India’s vital growing energy needs and trade to Central Asia. India’s access to the Caspian oil reserves is also vital for the US plan to build India as the regional power to counter China as in the event of conflict, India will need to guarantee energy flows. It has been an open secret that the Taliban have been operating freely from the border regions and tribal areas. Musharraf has taken no steps to curb this. Rather, Musharraf has lured the ISI into a US trap. Musharraf is preparing for the ISI what he prepared for the fighters in Kashmir. In the case of the Kashmiri fighters, Musharraf used the Indian authorities to eliminate the Kashmiri fighters through the transfer of intelligence information on locations and bases. In the case of the ISI, Musharraf will provide the US with the necessary information and excuses to deploy within Pakistan. The US will utilise the notion of Musharraf’s limitations as a basis for US operations in Pakistan and the border regions in order to eliminate the ISI. With the ISI Afghan desk already closed down, Musharraf will move to disband the remaining ISI infrastructure. FP intelligence reports have already confirmed that days after Vajpayee’s visit to Pakistan in January 2004, the US ambassador to Pakistan, Nancy Powell, spoke to General Parvez Musharraf about disbanding the Inter-Services Intelligence. According to the intelligence reports, the US wants the ISI to be broken up and its tasks assigned to other existing intelligence agencies, and in case that is politically controversial, to build accountability into it by special monitoring of the DG ISI’s office, and parcelling off policy planning to outside think-tanks. The dismemberment of Pakistan’s premiere intelligence agency is unlikely to be complete without a purge of hard-line sympathisers from the military ranks. The annual reshuffle on March 2004 is the likeliest timing for this. Alternatively, a trap may be set within the military hierarchy, which will invite a coup against Musharraf from loyalists pretending to be hardliners opposed to Musharraf’s pro-US policies. In this way the US will strengthen in a comprehensive manner its control over Pakistan’s security set-up. Former Pakistani intelligence and military personnel being recruited by institutions close to the State Department have also increased US intelligence influence. The Washington Post has recruited Kamran Khan, former Pakistani Military Intelligence turned journalist, as the “insider” who has already aided the Post in maligning Pakistan’s nuclear scientists and is likely to aid US intelligence agencies in continuing to link the ISI with terrorism. Pakistan’s secrets are not difficult to come by as the US already has a former Pakistani Chief of army staff, Jehangir Karamat working with a US think tank, the Brookings Institute. The dismemberment of the ISI will put the final nail in the coffin as regards Pakistan’s strategic influence. The Pashtuns in Afghanistan will be forced to accept the writ of the pro-Indian Northern Alliance and the Kashmiri’s will be forced to accept the solution of Kashmir on India’s terms. With US Presidential elections due in 2004, President Bush will be looking for successes in its policy towards the region. Musharraf will no doubt be called upon to aid the President. De-fanged (ISI Marginalized, Pro-Islamic Fundamental Jrhadi Type Army Officers Removed) and De-Nuked Riff Raff and Lotastaan will now have to depend more and more on the Lotastaani Rogue Elements. Let us see what Bush, Powel & Co. Inc can do. Cheers
Posted by: Mudy Feb 9 2004, 02:50 AM NUCLEAR REVELATIONS RAISE SERIOUS QUESTIONS By Daniel Sneider Since the end of the Cold War, the main American national security worry has been rogue states, hostile countries that operate outside the boundaries of international law. The recent revelations of Pakistan's exports of nuclear technology around the globe suggest we face a different threat -- rogue allies. Pakistan is supposedly our ally in the war on terror. It claims to cooperate in pursuing Al-Qaida and the remnants of the Afghan Taliban movement, which continue to operate from within Pakistan. But Pakistani nuclear scientists and their military friends have endangered the security of this country far more than any rogue enemy out there. Aside from handing the keys to atomic bomb-making to countries such as North Korea and Libya, they may have provided the instruments of nuclear terror to Al-Qaida itself. Pakistani leader General Pervez Musharraf claims to have halted this proliferation and put the country's nuclear program under tight control. But what he seems most interested in doing is insulating the military, which runs the nuclear program, from any real investigation. The man at the center of the nuclear black market, scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan, was pardoned by Musharraf in exchange for a staged television confession that exonerated anyone in the Pakistan government of complicity. Musharraf told the country that a mere 11 individuals, none of them military, were involved. This whitewash is not surprising, but that doesn't make it less alarming. It means that there can be no real confidence that the Pakistani government is really rooting out this proliferation danger or even that it has stopped its trade in nuclear secrets. Musharraf's refusal to fully cooperate with international agencies to shut down these operations or to permit monitoring of Pakistan's nuclear program should only deepen our suspicions that a coverup is in the works. The response of the Bush administration to this is equally disturbing. It heaps praise on Musharraf, expressing confidence that ``serious efforts'' are being made to stop the nuclear trade. cool.gif Pakistani rumors -- and these have reached Washington -- offer an explanation for this soft-pedaling: The Bush administration is launching an operation to catch Osama bin Laden and his top leadership in the area along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border and needs Musharraf's cooperation. Whether that is true or not, there is little question that the United States has been reluctant to push our rogue ally too hard for fear of losing his help. There are even more reasons to question this logic in light of the revelations about Khan's 15 years of help to Libya, North Korea, Iran and who knows who else. He provided not only the technology to enrich uranium for bombs but actual designs for nuclear warheads. Anybody with a proven design in hand is a significant step ahead. What if this technology and information was also being provided to terrorists? Experts have believed that an organization like Al-Qaida would find it almost impossible to build a nuclear warhead. ``But if they had a proven bomb design, who knows how it would change their calculation on whether it is worth trying,'' says nuclear terrorist specialist Corey Hinderstein at the Institute for Science and International Security. And with Pakistan, this is not idle speculation. There is widespread sympathy for radical Islamic views within the nuclear establishment and the military. Two recently retired senior scientists -- Bashiruddin Mahmood and Chauduri Abdul Majeed -- met several times with Osama bin Laden and other senior Al-Qaida leaders to discuss weapons of mass destruction. Mahmood publicly described Pakistan's nuclear capability as the ``property of a whole Ummah [Muslim community].'' Both men were detained and questioned in the fall and winter of 2001 but never arrested or charged. Pakistani officials claimed to have found no evidence they passed secrets. Two other scientists also wanted for questioning about their links to bin Laden were shipped off to Burma and out of sight. Where are all these men now? Can we really trust earlier denials? Did the Pakistani government cover this up too? These are only some of the questions that demand answers from our rogue ally. And it is time for Washington to ask a more serious question -- with allies like this, who needs enemies? biggrin.gif DANIEL SNEIDER is foreign affairs columnist for the Mercury News. His column appears on Sunday and Thursday. You can contact him at
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 9 2004, 03:43 AM
Folks, Every time I allude to the dumb Lotastaanis I feel that may be, just may be, I am a wee bit harsh on them. Here we have the Lotastaani Calendar with the Lotastaani Month of February having 31 days : user posted image Yes Sir - Lotastaanis : Thy other name is Stupidity pakee.gif Cheers
Posted by: Viren Feb 9 2004, 09:42 AM
PAKISTAN SHINNING !! pakee.gif Pakistanis nabbed in Jordan with $20m in fake bills
AMMAN: Three Pakistanis have been caught red-handed in Jordan trying to pass on 20 million dollars worth of counterfeit US banknotes, the al-Rai newspaper said on Saturday. One of the Pakistanis, who were identified only by their initials, had contacted a Jordanian who promised to handle the 20 million dollars, the pro-government paper said. The trio was arrested with the fake cash in a sting set up by the kingdom's anti-corruption squad following a tip-off from their Jordanian contact. The Pakistanis, aged 26, 27 and 36, are to appear before the state security court. —AFP
Is there any country on this planet that has not been at the receiving end of Pakiness. May the soul of Jinnah rest in peace guitar.gif
Posted by: Reggie Feb 9 2004, 12:45 PM
And here are the Pakistanis moving their global narco-terrorist operations in Africa. Bet Hamid Gul and the ISI is involved. GOI should keep a close watch over this. Some of the farm killings appear to be drug-related. South African police say that Pakistanis have bought up several farms after the white owners were killed and began planting poppies of Central Asian origin.
Posted by: k.ram Feb 9 2004, 08:40 PM
Posted by: Viren Feb 9 2004, 08:43 PM
TRICKY MUSH'S KISS OF DEATH FOR THE US B.RAMAN February, 9, 2004 Mr.President, Respected Senator John Kerry and other Democratic Presidential aspirants, At a time when the political leaders and people of the United States have started debating the important domestic and foreign policy issues of the day in preparation for the Presidential elections due later this year, one issue which deserves to receive the highest priority is the dangers of a nuclear jihad emanating from the soil of Pakistan. 2.If you could kindly ask your campaign staff to list out all the major jihadi terrorist incidents of the world starting from the explosion at the New York World Trade Centre in February,1993, you would find that all of them had one thing in common: Many of the terrorists involved were either Pakistani nationals, or foreign nationals who had lived for some years in Pakistan or attended its madrasas or received training in the camps of Pakistani jihadi organisations supported by its Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) or in camps run by the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghan territory. A document of the USA's Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) declassified under the Freedom of Information Act last year had highlighted the role of Pakistan in the creation and sustenance of not only the Taliban, but also Al Qaeda. 3. If you could kindly ask your campaign staff to list out all the statements issued by Islamic fundamentalists and jihadi terrorists such as Osama bin Laden since 1993 highlighting their religious right and obligation to acquire and use weapons of mass destruction (WMD) to protect their religion, you would find that except for a warning issued by the Chechen terrorists in 1995 in which they had threatened to capture a Russian nuclear power station and blow it up, all other statements and warnings had emanated from the Pakistan-Afghanistan region. 4. The Islamic world has dozens, if not hundreds, of fundamentalist and jihadi organisations. Kindly do ask your campaign staff to research for statements speaking of the religious right and obligation of the jihadis to acquire and use WMD, which might have come from outside the Pakistan-Afghanistan region. They would hardly find any. The concept of the so-called nuclear jihad was born in the madrasas of Pakistan and bin Laden borrowed it from them. 5. If you could kindly ask your campaign staff to list out all reported and verified instances of clandestine proliferation of military nuclear technology and materials to other states, they would find a hand of Pakistan in each and every instance---either that of the Pakistani political leaders or of its military-intelligence establishment or of its scientific community or all of them together. 6. Evidence of Pakistan's clandestine procurement of military nuclear technology and materials has been there since 1979. The US and the other members of the international community did not take serious notice of it because this procurement was meant to give to Pakistan a capability to counter India. The international community felt that this posed a threat only to India and not to others. It was, therefore, not highly excited over it. 7. In 1990, President George Bush, your distinguished father, Mr.President, invoked the Pressler Amendment against the State of Pakistan and imposed severe sanctions against it after convincing himself that Pakistan had clandestinely acquired a military nuclear capability and had in its arsenal an useable atomic bomb. Two years thereafter, the prestigious "Washington Post" came out with a story that after having acquired a military nuclear capability, Pakistan had started sharing it with Iran. 8. This sharing started under Zia-Ul-Haq two years before President Bush invoked the Pressler Amendment and hence was not in retaliation against his action. It was started at a time when Pakistan was projecting itself as the frontline ally of the US in its covert war against the then USSR. 9. Why did Iran want this capability? To use it against India? No. To be able to use it against Israel and the USA. Pakistan knew it. And yet, it agreed to help it. While overtly projecting itself as an ally of the US, Pakistan agreed to covertly help Iran which was openly calling for the destruction of Israel and projecting the US as the "Great Satan". 10. In 1986, President Ronald Reagan ordered the bombing of some installations in Libya in retaliation for the involvement of the Libyan intelligence in a terrorist attack in West Berlin in which some US soldiers were killed . Shortly thereafter, Col. Ghadaffi, the Libyan leader, approached Pakistan for its assistance in acquiring a military nuclear capability. Gen.Zia-Ul-Haq, then in power in Islamabad, declined since he was angry over Ghadaffi's support to the members of the family of the late Zulfiquar Ali Bhutto, whom he had sent to the gallows in 1979. 11. After coming to power in late 1988, one of the first acts of Benazir was to clear the sharing of nuclear technology with Libya. Why did Libya want a military nuclear capability? To threaten India? No. To threaten Israel and the US. While overtly projecting herself as a greater friend of the US than Zia, Benazir agreed to help Libya, which too, like Iran, had vowed to destroy Israel and to teach the US a lesson for its bombing of Libya in 1986. 12. In 1993, Pakistan's missile programme ran into difficulties. Its programme for the indigenous production of the Hatf series of missiles was a flop. Its clandestine purchase of missiles from China had come under increasing US scrutiny. Mr.James Baker, the then Secretary of State, had taken serious notice of the transgressions of the missile technology control regime by Pakistan and China and had imposed two-year sanctions against them. China, while continuing to sell short and medium-range missiles to Pakistan despite the sanctions, refused to sell long-range missiles. 13. To whom did Pakistan turn for help? To North Korea, another sworn enemy of the USA. Benazir Bhutto, after becoming the Prime Minister for a second time,flew to North Korea and signed an agreement under which Pyongyang agreed to sell medium and long-range missiles to Pakistan. The so-called Ghauri missile fired by Pakistan in April,1998, in order to intimidate India was nothing but North Korea's Nodong. 14. Kindly ask your campaign staff to get hold of the press clippings of all the statements made by her after this successful test. They would find how many times she had claimed credit as the person who made Ghauri possible when she was the Prime Minister without specifying how. 15. Those were the years when Pakistan's economy was in a state of collapse due to the sanctions under the Pressler Amendment, successive failures of the cotton crop and the consequent suspension of production in many of its textile mills and other reasons. And yet, Pakistan managed to pay for the missiles to North Korea. How? Partly by supplying wheat to North Korea and by meeting its consequent shortfall by importing wheat from the USA and Australia . And partly, through cash payments in US dollars. Pakistan did not have enough foreign exchange to pay for its own imports. And yet, it found foreign exchange to make part-payments for the missiles. Where did it get the US dollars from? From the ISI's heroin trade and from post 9/11 cash flows from the US and others. . 16.If you could kindly ask your campaign staff to collate all the reports of the period regarding the state of the North Korean economy, you would find that many of the leading economists of the Western world had predicted the collapse of the North Korean society due to millions of starvation deaths. This did not happen. Wherefrom did North Korea get wheat for its starving millions and US dollars for its exchequer? From Pakistan. It used wheat produced by US and Australian farmers to sustain a rogue state, which along with Iran and Libya, was a sworn enemy of the US. 17. In the late 1990s, North Korea decided to acquire a military nuclear capability. To whom did it turn for assistance? Pakistan. It readily agreed to help Noth Korea. Why did North Korea want this capability? To threaten India? No. To threaten Japan and the USA. 18.Since 1992, Pakistan has been repeatedly caught transfering or sharing its military nuclear technology and materials with states which were the sworn enemies of the US and some of whom had called for the destruction of Israel. The State of Pakistan has never once suffered the punitive consequences of its blatant transgressions. It never had to worry about finding alibis, pretexts or excuses for denying its culpability. The US State Department found them for Pakistan. 19. After the latest exposures of the role of the rogue scientists of Pakistan in assisting Iran, Libya and North Korea, President Pervez Musharraf has enacted an elaborate charade of investigating the rogue scientists while vehemently denying any State culpability. Not many even in Pakistan take seriously his stand that the state had nothing to do with the transgressions. 20. Wherefrom did he get the idea of making a distinction between the State and its entities dealing in nuclear and missile development? From the US. Apart from the sanctions imposed by the then President Bush in 1990 and by Mr.Bill Clinton in 1998, which were directed against the State of Pakistan, all other sanctions were against the Khan Research Laboratories (KRL), the nest of nuclear rogues, as if the KRL, owned and run by the state of Pakistan, is an independent entity acting on its own. The KRL and A.Q.Khan, its evil genius, shrugged off the sanctions which merely said the KRL cannot import any material or technology from the USA as if it was importing it in the past. 21. Last year, the US State Department imposed a fresh bout of sanctions against the KRL for its missile trade with North Korea. State Department spokesmen, including even Secretary of State Colin Powell, went out of their way to specify that the latest sanctions had nothing to do with reports of Pakistan's transferring military nuclear technology to North Korea, which, according to them, remained unproved. 22. Now, it has not only been proved, but even admitted by A.Q.Khan and his dirty dozen. Musharraf, who approved this sharing in order to get long-range missiles from North Korea to intimidate India, pretends as if he was surprised and shocked by this. And the US has chosen to go along with his charade. 23. Since the New York World Trade Centre explosion of February 1993, there was a cascade of evidence regarding the role of Pakistan, its ISI and its State-sponsored jihadi organisations in acts of jihadi terrorism in different parts of the world. The US chose to close its eyes to them. The result 9/11. It has now become a cliche to describe 9/11 as a wake-up call for the US. 24.Since 1992, there has been a cascade of evidence regarding the role of Pakistan and its rogue scientists in helping the the sworn enemies of the US and Israel in acquiring a military nuclear capability. Not having learnt the right lessons relating to Pakistan from 9/11, the US continues to treat the state of Pakistan and Musharraf with kid gloves as if they are not responsible. 25. When state and non-State actors acquiring this capability from Pakistan use it against the USA one day in an act of nuclear jihad which they have vowed to wage against it, it would be too late even for another wake-up call. Large parts of the USA would have been destroyed and millions of its citizens sent to their eternal sleep. 26. I take the liberty of enclosing an open letter to US citizens titled "Saddam Hussein and Pervez Musharraf" written by me on April 23 last year. Wishing you a vigorous campaign and with warm personal regards, Yours sincerely, B.Raman, Chennai. Paper no. 670, 23. 04. 2003 SADDAM HUSSEIN & PERVEZ MUSHARRAF An Open Letter To American Friends by B.Raman Dear friends of the USA, The US has successfully overthrown President Saddam Hussein of Iraq. Before and during the war, President George Bush repeatedly emphasised that this was not a war against Iraq and the Iraqi people, but against the dictatorial regime of Saddam for harbouring international terrorists, for acquiring weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and for destroying democracy and suppressing his people. 2. Addressing a joint press conference in September last year, President Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair of the UK referred to the dangers of the leakage of Iraq's WMD into the hands of terrorists and said that his removal and the seizure of his WMD stocks were, therefore, necessary in the interest of international peace and security. 3. Now that Saddam is gone, let us examine the track record of Pakistan and its military dictator, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, under all the three heads used against Saddam, namely, support to terrorists, proliferation of WMD to rogue States and terrorist groups and suppression of democracy. 4. Let us take support to terrorism first. The following facts speak for themselves: * In March,2003, the Lahore police filed a case in the High Court against a doctor accused of collaborating with Al Qaeda. The High Court ruled the charge inadmissible even at the preliminary stage. It pointed out that Al Qaeda had not been banned in Pakistan as a terrorist organisation under the Anti-Terrorism Act and hence belonging to it or collaborating with it was not an offence. The Government said that by oversight it had not banned Al Qaeda and promised to do so immediately. It is yet to be done. * According to a report dated April 11,2003, of the Associated Press of Pakistan, a Government-owned news agency, during a visit to Peshawar in the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) the previous day, Musharraf was asked about the activities of Al Qaeda in Pakistani territory. He replied (to quote the APP):"I do not know any Al Qaeda. " That is exactly what Saddam had said when Gen. Colin Powell, the US Secretary of State, during one of his interventions in the UN Security Council, accused him of complicity with Al Qaeda. * In the beginning of 2002, bin Laden and other leaders and members of Al Qaeda moved into Pakistan from Afghanistan to escape capture by the American special forces searching for them in the mountains and caves of Afghanistan. Initially they took shelter in the mosques and madrasas (religious schools) of the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) and the Federally-Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) of Pakistan adjoining the Afghan border. They then spread to the interior towns and cities of Pakistan, away from the border as they were afraid that the US special forces operating in Afghan territory might cross into Pakistani territory and arrest them. * Musharraf denied that they had crossed over into Pakistani territory and taken shelter in its towns and cities. Despite this, officers of the USA's Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) established the presence of Abu Zubaidah, the then No. 3 of Al Qaeda, in Faislabad, a big town in the Punjab province of Pakistan, in March,2002; of Ramzi Binalshibh, another top leader of Al Qaeda at Karachi, Pakistan's biggest and most important city, in September,2002; and of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, described by US and French counter-terrorism experts as bin Laden's operations chief and as the man who orchestrated the terrorist strikes of 9/11 at Rawalpindi in March, 2003. Rawalpindi is called the twin city of Islamabad, Pakistan's capital. It is where the General Headquarters (GHQ) of the Pakistan Army are located. It is where Musharraf has his house as the Chief of the Army Staff (COAS). It is where many retired and serving officers of Pakistan's Army and Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) live. When confronted by the FBI with evidence of their presence in these cities, Musharraf had no other alternative but to arrest them and hand them over. Apart from these three instances, there is not a single case since 9/11 in which Musharraf's police and intelligence agencies, on their own without pressure from the FBI, had established the presence of the absconding leaders of Al Qaeda and taken the initiative in arresting them and handing them over to the US. * Abu Zubaidah was living in the house of a leader of the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET), a Pakistani terrorist organisation, with its headquarters at Muridke, near Lahore, which has a mosque and a guest house constructed by bin Laden. bin Laden used to stay in this guest house and pray in this mosque during his visits to Pakistan in the 1990s. All the terrorists, who participated in the 9/11 terrorist incidents, had stayed in this guest house on their way to Al Qaeda's training camps in Afghan territory and on their way back to the US for carrying out their terrorist attacks. The LET is a member of bin Laden's International Islamic Front (IIF). Along with Jaish-e-Mohammad (JEM), another member of the IIF, it had organised an attack on the Indian Parliament in December, 2001. After this incident, the US State Department designated the LET and the JEM as Foreign Terrorist Organisations under a 1996 law. Under US pressure, Musharraf too declared them as terrorist organisations and banned them on January 15,2002, and arrested their leaders and cadres. But, he did not extend the ban on their activities to Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (POK), the Northern Areas (Gilgit and Baltistan) and the FATA. The POK and the Northern Areas are adjoining the Indian border. It is from there that the ISI organises terrorist operations in Indian territory, using these and other Pakistani terrorist organisations, which are members of the IIF. The FATA is adjoining the Afghan border. It is from there that the remnants of Al Qaeda, the Taliban and Gulbuddin Heckmatyar's Hizbe Islami organise attacks on the US forces operating in Afghan territory. After some weeks, Musharraf released the arrested leaders and cadres of the LET and the JEM on the ground that there was no evidence of their involvement in terrorism. These organisations started operating openly again under new names and played an active role in the various anti-US demonstrations in different Pakistani cities during the war in Iraq. Prof.Hafiz Mohammed Sayeed, the leader of the LET, visited Rawalpindi and participated in an anti-US demonstration there and made a speech calling for a jihad against the US. He has since claimed that some of his men had been "martyred" in the jihad against the US forces in Iraq and buried there and promised financial assistance to their families. The annual conventions of the LET are attended by many serving and retired officers of the Pakistani military and its nuclear and missile establishment. * Ramzi Binalshibh was found living in a flat in Karachi belonging to a local member of the Jamaat-e-Islami (JEL) of Pakistan. Khalid Sheikh Mohammad was arrested from the house of a women's wing leader of the JEI in Rawalpindi. The JEI is the most important and active Islamic fundamentalist party of Pakistan, which is virulently anti-US and fiercely pro-Taliban and pro-Al Qaeda since 9/11. It is very close to Pakistan's military and intelligence agencies. Lt.Gen.(retd) Hamid Gul, former Director-General of the ISI in the 1980s, is an active member of the JEI. In the 1990s, he used to be the head of the Pasban, a militant wing of the JEI. Since 9/11, he and the JEI leaders have been alleging that the 9/11 terrorist strikes in the US were carried out not by Al Qaeda, but by Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency, to defame Islam and provoke the US into attacking Islamic countries. As proof of this, Gul has been alleging that none of the Jewish persons working in any of the establishments in New York's World Trade Centre attended office on 9/11 on secret instructions from Mossad and that, as a result, no Jewish person was killed. In a media briefing at the ISI headquarters after the arrest of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Maj.Gen.Rashid Quereshi, the media spokesman of Musharraf, strongly defended the JEI against allegations of its involvement with Al Qaeda. He claimed that the involvement of some members of the JEI in sheltering some Al Qaeda leaders did not mean that the JEI as an organisation was involved. The JEI is the leading member of the six-party fundamentalist coalition called the Muttahida-Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) which came to power in the NWFP after the elections of October, 2002. In Balochistan the MMA has formed a coalition Government with the pro-Musharraf Pakistan Muslim League ( Qaid-e-Azam). The impressive electoral performance of this coalition in October last was facilitated by actions of Musharraf such as breaking Benazir Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party Parliamentarians (PPPP) in NWFP and withdrawal of the pending cases under the Anti-Terrorism Act against the members of the coalition who wanted to contest the elections. After coming to power, the coalition released all the cadres of terrorist organisations still in detention. It has provided shelter to the surviving members of Al Qaeda, the Taliban and Hizbe-Islami in the mosques and madrasas of the NWFP and Balochistan and asked the provincial police not to co-operate with the FBI in its investigations and raids for arresting the absconding terrorists. * Amongst other terrorists against whom cases were withdrawn by Musharraf to enable their election was Maulana Azam Tariq, the leader of the Sunni extremist Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan (SSP). Its militant wing called the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LEJ) was banned as a terrorist organisation by Musharraf himself on August 14, 2001, and the SSP was banned on January 15, 2002. Despite these bans, the Election Commission did not disqualify the candidature of Maulana Azam Tariq, who managed to get elected to the National Assembly. The LEJ, which is also a member of bin Laden's IIF, was designated by the US State Department as a Foreign Terrorist Organisation last year following its involvement, along with the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen (HUM) and the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HUJI), in the kidnapping and murder of Daniel Pearl, the US journalist ; the murder of the wife of an American diplomat and their daughter through a grenade attack in an Islamabad church; a suicide car bomb explosion outside a Karachi hotel which killed some French submarine engineers; another suicide car bomb explosion outside the US Consulate-General in Karachi; an attack on a group of German and other foreign tourists travelling by road to Xinjiang in China along the Karakoram Highway; and attacks on Christian establishments in different parts of Pakistan. Despite this, Maulana Azam Tariq remains untouched and moves around without any action against him. (He has since been assassinated) * The HUM, under its then name of Harkat-ul-Ansar (HUA), was designated by the US as a Foreign Terrorist Organisation in October,1997, because of its involvement in the kidnapping of some American and other Western tourists in India's Jammu & Kashmir (J&K) in 1995. One of these kidnapped tourists, an American, managed to escape from custody. The fate of the remaining is not known, but they are feared dead long ago. Despite this, Musharraf has not yet formally banned the HUM as a terrorist organisation under Pakistan's Anti-Terrorism Act. Nor has he banned the HUJI. Both the HUM and the HUJI are also members of bin Laden's IIF. Last year, the HUM started operating under the name HUM (Al-Alami meaning International). Some of its leaders have recently been convicted by a Karachi court and sentenced to death for their confessed involvement in the planning and execution of the car bomb explosion outside the US Consulate. Despite this, there is as yet no ban on this organisation. (Since banned) * Musharraf has been making contradictory statements on Al Qaeda and bin Laden. Sometimes he says he is not aware of any Al Qaeda. On other occasions, he says there could be some members of Al Qaeda in Pakistani territory and claims to be co-operating with the US in arresting them. Initially, he said that bin Laden must be dead. Then he said that while there was a possibility that bin Laden might be still alive, he was definitely not in Pakistan. He has recently admitted the possibility that bin Laden might be in Pakistan, but denied any knowledge of his whereabouts. All the recorded video and audio cassettes of bin Laden calling for jihad against the USA and Israel were handed over to Al Jazeera either in Karachi or Islamabad. The Pakistani authorities have till now not taken any effective action to prevent the dissemination of these cassettes (calling for terrorist attacks) from Pakistani territory. * The case relating to the kidnapping and murder of Daniel Pearl is being adjourned month after month under some pretext or the other. A special anti-terrorism court had found Omar Sheikh and his accomplices guilty and sentenced Omar himself and another person to death. Others were sentenced to life imprisonment. They went in appeal against the conviction. The hearing in the appeal is yet to start and has already been delayed for eight months. The Karachi media has been alleging since July last that Fazal Karim, a terrorist who has admitted to having slit the throat of Pearl was in the custody of the Pakistani authorities and that for some reason they have not prosecuted him. Till recently, the Pakistani authorities denied these reports. Only earlier this month, in response to a court directive in a habeas corpus case have they admitted his whereabouts, but they are still silent on his involvement in the murder of Pearl and are avoiding explaining why they are not prosecuting him. * Under the UN Security Council Resolution No.1373., the Pakistani authorities were required to freeze the bank accounts of terrorist organisations. Before doing so last year, the ISI tipped off these organisations of the impending action, thereby enabling them to withdraw or transfer the bulk of the money to other accounts in different names. As a result, only Rs. 900 were found in the account of the JEM, US $ 252 in the account of Al Qaeda held in the name of Ayman-al-Zawahiri, its No. 2, and Rs. 4742 in the account of the HUM. Pakistani Rs. 65 are equivalent to one US dollar. 5. How about US and other Western civilians killed by terrorists operating from Pakistani territory? Here are the facts and figures: * The assassination of two CIA officers outside the CIA headquarters in Langley by Mir Aimal Kansi, a Pakistani national belonging to the SSP, in January,1993. He was found guilty by a US court and was recently executed in the USA. When his body arrived in Pakistan, speeches were made by the fundamentalist members of the NWFP and Balochistan provincial assemblies hailing him as a martyr in the Islamic cause. * The explosion in the World Trade Centre in New York in February, 1993. Ramzi Yousef, a Pakistani national, was one of the principal accused in the case. He escaped to Pakistan after the explosion. He and Khalid Sheikh Mohammad went to Manila and planned to blow up a number of US aircraft. The Filippino authorities were alerted to their presence and activities following a fire in their flat. They escaped to Pakistan, where Ramzi was arrested by the Benazir Government in 1995 and handed over to the USA where he has since been convicted. * The kidnapping and murder of five Western tourists by the HUM in J&K in 1995. * The assassination of an American diplomat and two US oil company executives in Karachi in different incidents in 1995. The SSP was suspected. * The 9/11 terrorist strikes in US territory, which resulted in the death of over 3500 innocent civilians. The perpetrators of these strikes stayed in the guest house of the LET at Muridke while on their way to Afghanistan for training and on their way back to the US. The money for the operation was transmitted to them through Pakistan. Khalid Sheikh Mohammad and Ramzi Binalshibh, both of whom had assisted bin Laden in orchestrating these strikes, were found and arrested in Pakistani territory. * The kidnapping and murder of Daniel Pearl in Karachi in 2002. * The murder of French submarine engineers in Karachi in 2002. * The murder of the wife of an American diplomat and their daughter in an Islamabad church in 2002. * The car bomb explosion outside the US Consulate in Karachi in 2002 killed many Pakistani civilians, but there were no American casualties even though the bomb was directed at the Consulate. 6. Saddam Hussein had ruthlessly supressed both Shia and Sunni fundamentalism. He had banned loudspeakers in mosques, madrasas, receipt of foreign money by religious elements,and involvement in political activities by Mullas and Imams. How about Musharraf? * In January,2002, Musharraf had promised to put an end to the use of madrasas for promoting terrorism, but he has not yet done so. He put severe restrictions on the political activities and demonstrations of non-religious parties in order to prevent them from mounting a challenge to his rule. He got the leading lights of these parties involved in a plethora of fabricated cases to prevent them from contesting the elections. He banished Nawaz Sharif, former Prime Minister, from the country and prevented Benazir from returning to the country by threatening to arrest her if she did so. * But, he gave all facilities to the religious fundamentalist parties for holding public meetings and demonstrations. He withdrew all pending cases against them, even under the Anti-Terrorism Act, to enable them to contest the elections. * Before Musharraf staged the coup and seized power in October,1999, religious fundamentalist parties in Pakistan never used to get more than about three per cent of the votes polled. Thanks to the assistance from him, they got 11 per cent in the October elections and have come to power in two provinces, which are vital to the US from the point of view of its war against terrorism. If Musharraf continues to favour and assist them in the same manner, they may one day come to power in Islamabad itself and get their finger on the nuclear button. Despite all this, he is looked upon by the US as a stalwart ally and showered with one economic bonanza after another. 7. How about proliferation of WMD by Pakistan to rogue states and terrorists? Again let facts speak for themselves: * Pakistan has had a long history of a military supply relationship with the rogue state of North Korea, which poses a serious threat to the security of not only the East Asian countries, but also the USA itself. * In the 1980s, it allowed clandestine military supplies from North Korea for Iran to transit through its territory. * Under an agreement signed with North Korea in 1993, it has been receiving from North Korea medium and long-range missiles capable of carrying nuclear weapons. * It paid for these missiles by diverting wheat purchased from the USA and Australia and in cash since 9/11, by taking advantage of the large cash flow from the USA and other countries. But for these wheat diversions and cash payments, the rogue State of North Korea would not have been able to withstand the economic sanctions of the international community against it as it has done. * In return for the missiles, Pakistan also trained North Korean nuclear scientists in its establishments, allowed North Korean scientists to attend its nuclear tests at Chagai in May 1998 and transferred uranium enrichment technology to North Korea. Pakistani nuclear scientists have been frequently visiting North Korea. 8.How about dangers of terrorists getting hold of WMD? The only country in the world where this danger is real is Pakistan for the following reasons: * Pakistan is the only state-sponsor of international terrorism in the world which has a large WMD capability acquired through the assistance of China and North Korea. * There is sizeable penetration of Islamic fundamentalist elements into its Armed Forces and scientific establishment. * Pakistan is the only Islamic country in the world,where fundamentalist and jihadi organisations speak of the right and religious obligation of the Muslims to acquire WMD and use it, if necessary,to protect Islam. They project their WMD capability as belonging to the whole of Islamic Ummah. They describe their atom bomb as the Islamic bomb. Bin Laden picked up his nuclear concepts from the mullas of Pakistan. * Last year, at the instance of the FBI, Pakistani authorities had to detain two of their retired nuclear scientists (Sultan Bashirudeen and Abdul Majid) for visiting Kandahar and maintaining contact with bin Laden. Though sufficient evidence to warrant their prosecution was not found,their bank accounts were frozen under the UN Security Council Resolution No. 1373 and they have been kept under surveillance. * A.Q.Khan, the self-styled father of Pakistan's atomic bomb, used to visit Iraq and North Korea clandestinely and Musharraf had to remove him from active duty in the nuclear establishment under US pressure. 9. Pakistan has a facade of a democracy since October last. Is it real democracy? * Under Pakistan's Constitution, the President of the country is to be elected by an electoral college consisting of the Federal Parliament and the provincial Assemblies. Since Musharraf was not confident of the support of the members of the non-religious parties, he got himself elected as the President in a rigged referendum for which there is no provision, before ordering the elections of October. * Under Pakistan's electoral laws, a serving Government servant cannot contest elections to any office. Even after leaving Government service, he or she cannot contest for two years. Musharraf granted himself a special exemption from this provision to enable him to continue to hold charge as the COAS even after getting himself elected as the President. * Under the rules of appointment and promotions of the Pakistani Armed Forces, a COAS can hold office only for three years from the date of his appointment. Musharraf has granted himself a special exemption from this rule. He has already held office as COAS for four years and intends doing so for another five years. He says this is necessary in Pakistan's supreme national interest. * Under Pakistan's Constitution, all amendments to the Constitution are to be voted by a two-thirds majority by the two Houses of the Federal Parliament and, in some cases, also approved by the provincial Assemblies. Before the elections, Musharraf, under a Legal Framework Order (LFO), promulgated a number of constitutional amendments granting himself the powers to appoint the chiefs of the armed forces, the judges and chief justics of the provincial and Supreme courts and the Governors of the provinces; to dismiss the elected Prime Minister and his Council of Ministers; to constitute a military-dominated National Security Council; and to dissolve the Parliament. He has rejected the persistent demand of the opposition that he should resign as the COAS, seek re-election as the President in the manner prescribed in the Constitution and submit the LFO to the Parliament for its approval by a two-thirds majority. (He has since conceded some of these demands ) 10.If Saddam murdered democracy, so has Musharraf. An objective consideration of what has been stated above would show that Pakistan is a fit case for regime change through pre-emptive action by the USA and the rest of the international community, but we do not suggest military action against it. Military action is always messy, creates more problems than it solves and kills a large number of innocent civilians for the misdeeds and crimes of their rulers. What is called for is political and economic pre-emptive action as follows: * Stop all economic assistance to Pakistan so long as Musharraf continues in power. * Force him to resign and hand over full powers to the political leadership. * Force the Army to go back to the barracks and obey the political leadership. * After the political leadership assumes full powers, resume all economic assistance and seek its co-operation to deal with terrorism originating from Pakistani territory, to stop flow of WMD technology to rogue States like North Korea and to prevent the terrorists and jihadis from getting hold of its WMD assets. God bless America and give it the wisdom and foresight to act before it is too late.
Posted by: Ajgir Feb 9 2004, 08:58 PM WASHINGTON: Amid reports that al-Qaeda may already have acquired tactical nuclear weapons , Pakistan’s military ruler Pervez Musharraf pledged on Sunday that there would never again be any proliferation from his country. "Please let it not be thought that the same proliferation activity will start again," Musharraf told NBC’ s Tom Brokaw in Islamabad. "Never. That will never happen." Too late, according some reports and analysts. The Arabic newspaper Al Hayat reported Sunday that al-Qaeda was already in possession of small nuclear weapons, possibly bought from Ukrainian scientists in 1998. Reports in the US too express fears that the horse may already have already bolted from the stable, and blames Pakistan for the frightening spectre. Despite the flurry of disclosures, each more serious than the previous, Musharraf and his foreign minister Kasuri have tried to deflect and detract criticism " Pakistani nuclear scientists and their military friends have endangered the security of this country far more than any rogue enemy out there," foreign policy analyst Daniel Snyder wrote over the weekend. "Aside from handing the keys to atomic bomb-making to countries such as North Korea and Libya, they may have provided the instruments of nuclear terror to Al-Qaida itself." Peace
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 9 2004, 10:01 PM
LOTASTAANI POACHERS TO BE TRAINED AS GAMEKEEPERS ISLAMABAD: The US Ambassador in Pakistan Ms. Nancy Powell said on Monday that United States will assist Pakistan to promote legislative culture in the country. She was speaking at a function here to launch a US-funded project "Strengthening National and Provincial Governance in Pakistan". She said the United States will provide 14 million dollars for the three year project aimed at strengthening the capacity of parliamentarians and legislative staff both at federal and provincial levels. She was confident that the program would help parliamentarians perform their responsibilities as representatives of the people. She said the legislators will also get an opportunity to have an exchange of views with parliamentarians of other countries on legislative governance. Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 10 2004, 12:38 AM
The first generation of Pakistanis that was middle-aged or older at the time of independence is now in its grave. The second generation is preparing for it. The third has yet to address the problem, and the next generation flounders in search of a solution to its predicament. That solution can never be a foreign curriculum. If following a Cambridge curriculum was the answer, more enlightened nations than ours would have adopted it more extensively, rather than moving away from it, as Malaysia and India have done, to name only two ex-colonies. Even countries with smaller populations than Pakistan have had the self-respect to develop their own curriculum, tailored to their own national needs and objectives. Over here (IN LOTASTAAN), education is gradually breeding a caste system as rigid and uncompromising as that of the orthodox Hindus. The Brahmins go to English-medium schools and then go abroad for higher studies; the Kashatriyas go to army schools and then to military academies; the Vaisyas go to Urdu medium schools or madressahs; and the untouchables get the education they cannot pay for.
Muslims of Pakistan practicing the Caste System – attributed to the Yevil Yindoos – 57 Years after Partition and then have the temerity and gall to blame India for its Hindu Caste System, which, is being eradicated slowly but surely in India takes the cake. furious.gif Cheers
Posted by: Mudy Feb 10 2004, 01:26 AM
Send VP Singh, Laloo, Mulayam and Mayawati to LOTASTAAN, to build strong foundation of LOTASTAAN.
Posted by: rajesh_g Feb 10 2004, 01:41 AM
Will the real mommy/daddy of puke bum plz stand up ??? I am the mother of Pakistani bomb: Benazir Monday, 09 February , 2004, 15:42 Washington: Former Pakistan Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto has declared herself as the 'Mother of Pakistan's Nuclear Program'. Talking to a group of Pakistani journalists, Bhutto, who is currently in self-exile, said that it was she who had protected Pakistan's nuclear program when it was under grave threat. According to the Daily Times, she said that when she was the Prime Minister, "There were moves afoot to have Pakistan declared a terrorist state and she had fought off all the challenges." Bhutto further went on to say that she had gone to North Korea and obtained missiles for Pakistan and paid in cash for them. Pakistan had all the money it needed then, and there was no need for any exchange deals to be made with anyone, she added in apparent criticism of the present regime's policies. ROTFL.gif
Posted by: rajesh_g Feb 10 2004, 01:58 AM
via sulekha newshopper Honour and dishonour HUMAYUN GAUHAR There are so many facets to the tragedy of Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan that one doesn't know where to begin. There is the aspect of personal and national tragedy. There is the facet of personal and national shame. There is the aspect of justice and retribution. There is the culpability of successive rulers who made another false god. There is the heartbreak of a people who deified another idol of clay. There are the demands of balance and wisdom on which the future of 150 million people depends. There is the question: why do we have the need for idols when we are the children of the greatest God, for in making idols we skate on the very thin ice of 'shirk', placing another besides the true God who is the greatest. Why the need for heroes when we claim mankind's greatest hero, Muhammad [PBUH] as our own? Where lies the deficiency? Where to begin? When to end? The writer gropes into dark corners of the collective mind and the crevices of the tortured national psyche. So great is the tragedy that he will be exploring week after week, article after article, not only to understand but also as a catharsis. There is temporal justice and there is Divine justice. The humiliation in the public confession of Dr. Qadeer and his request for forgiveness was Divine justice indeed. When he tripped off the lofty pedestal on which a grateful nation had placed him and fell to the depths of avarice, God's words sprang spontaneously to mind: Wa tu-'izzu man-tashaa-'u wa tuzullu man-tashaa: "You exalt whoever You will, You debase whoever You will." It makes one get goose pimples. We are not new to the hall of shame and sorrow. When a drunk and debauched general refused to respect the will of the people and another demented general surrendered to India, the army as an idol broke and so did the country. It took years to patch them together again. We felt no shame when the popular leader of rump Pakistan made it easy for that drunk and debauched general to violate the people's will. After India unleashed nuclear terror on South Asia that same popular leader set us on our quest for 'the bomb'. That he was hanged was cause for deep shame. That he was hanged after a questionable trial compounded our shame. That his daughter whom a guilt-ridden nation brought twice to power fell to the same primeval human weakness of greed become avarice and was found guilty of corruption by a foreign court was yet another moment of shame. And now when we discover that our latest idol was made of clay we are faced again with shame and sorrow. The fault lies not in our stars but in ourselves that we are underlings consigned to regular bouts of distress and ignominy. Perhaps it was Divine justice too that temporal justice pardoned Qadeer Khan. Taking into account his services, his pardon gave just the right balance to a dangerous situation. Perchance it was Divine punishment to a people who deify clay heroes and try to mend them with their tears when they break. Such a people will continue to suffer indignities. Let me quote verse 26 from the chapter in the Holy Quran entitled 'The Family of Imran': "Say: 'O Allah! Master of the Kingdom! You give sovereignty to whoever You will You take sovereignty from whoever You will. You exalt whoever You will You debase whoever You will. All good is in Your hands. You have power over all things." Sovereignty here pertains to nations whose people refuse to realize that corrupt leaders and clay gods don't just fall out of the sky, they make them. Worse, nations whose people knowingly persist in telling lies and spreading falsehood to prop up corrupt leaders and clay gods are in danger of losing the sovereignty that God has bestowed on them. They should refer to verse 41 of chapter 2 of the Quran entitled 'The Cow' in which God talks of the Fall of a Nation while addressing the children of Israel. We fool ourselves that this is advice and admonishment addressed exclusively to the Jews. They are but an example; it is meant for all Mankind. "Do not cover truth with falsehood, Suppressing what you know to be right." And in verse 48 of the same chapter: "Remember the favour when you were exalted above all nations. Remember the Day when every one will have to account for his deeds, When neither intercession nor compensation will avail, Nor shall the guilty receive any help." Seen clinically, Dr. Khan only did the job he was paid for. The people deified him not only because he helped greatly to make their country a nuclear power but also because hardly anyone ever delivers. Thus when he was discovered to have jeopardized the very security of the nation that he had done so much to protect, a credulous, hero-worshiping people ran to defend him. Everyone was shattered. "If we can let so many plunderers go Scott free, why must our hero be punished?" asked the majority. "If we can hang the prime minister who was the true father of the nuclear programme, why can we not slaughter a holy cow?" asked some. These were the horns of the dilemma that we were in danger of getting impaled on. In the event, the decision to pardon the hero after he made a full public confession was the best that could be made out of a terrible situation. What President Musharraf meant when he said that protecting Pakistan comes before protecting the honour of our hero was, 'Not that I love Dr. Khan less but that I love Pakistan more'. Perhaps our greatest tragedy is that we have never been able to publicly inquire into wrongdoing, not to mete out punishment but as a national cleansing process. Such a cleansing process could possibly be just the medicine we need. Not only do we deify false gods we also glorify false friends even if it damages our security. A people who cannot differentiate between fair weather and foul weather friends are pitiable indeed. For decades we have been glorifying Iran and Libya, praying for leaders like theirs and naming roads and stadiums after them. When push came to shove, when it came to the crunch, when it was time for true friends to stand up and be counted, they capitulated without a whimper in pathetic contrast to their earlier bombast and bravado. So much for religious zeal and revolutionary fervor. They left us in the lurch. Not to put too fine a point on it, our Muslim brothers first corrupted our scientists and when they were caught put us in grave jeopardy without blinking an eyelid. In contrast, communist China has given us more help than any Muslim country ever has. So who's the real Muslim then? And in even starker contrast neither the government nor the press of our worst enemy, India, tried to embarrass us during our discomfiture. We should learn a lesson from this. At the very least, we should not blithely make 'Muslim brothers' out of people before they become true Muslims. That western media would make the most of it was to be expected. But what are we to make of our own who dance to their tune? There come times in the lives of nations when its people put aside their differences and unite behind the common cause of saving their country. Look at how America united after September 11. Not so our confused congenital cynics whose hatred of whoever is in power so outweighs their survival instinct that they will keep dancing to the western tune till the bells on their ankles break. Sadly, the greatest cynics are those who have got the most from Pakistan, the greatest patriots those who have got the least. The greatest cynics are the 'Has-Beens', the 'Wannabes' and the 'No-Hopers'. The greatest patriots ask only for their basic rights. Little do the cynics realize that they are what they are because of Pakistan. Damage Pakistan and you damage yourself. Diminish Pakistan and you diminish yourself. Destroy Pakistan and you destroy your soul. Lose Pakistan and you lose your identity. They would prove that that our governments were involved in nuclear proliferation and spread the scare of rollback. They have another thought coming. Never, never, never. What a far cry we are from the people intended by God: "This is how we ordained you to be a people most balanced so that you may be a model to others and the Prophet a model to you." [2:143] E-mail queries and comments to:
Posted by: rajesh_g Feb 10 2004, 02:00 AM
Notice the number of times the guy talks about false gods and such.. rolleyes.gif And the anguish and yet the reluctance to give up on the ummah is just too much for our man. All this while he is finessing that comedy show that mush put up on PTV... tv_feliz.gif
Posted by: rajesh_g Feb 10 2004, 02:08 AM biggrin.gif Let people fight cold war, Gul tells army By Our Staff Reporter LAHORE - Former ISI Chief Lt. Gen (Retd) Hamid Gul said Saturday that nobody could snatch nuclear capability from Pakistan as it was in safe hands. He, however, said we were in a state of cold war in which the political parties, parliament, free Press and judiciary should play their role. Addressing a condolence reference organised by Majlis-e-Quaid-i-Azam in memory of Prof. Munawar Mirza at a local hotel Saturday, Gen Hamid Gul said that the political parties seek U.S. approval for whatever they do. He said Pakistan was facing an onslaught but we should never go down without fighting irrespective of the results. He said hardships do come but the way the nations react to the crisis was important. "War is imposed on those who shy away from it and those who stand eye-ball to eye-ball come out victorious", said Gul. He said every crisis provided an opportunity and this was not a battle that revolved around fixed line of action but a conflict of maneuvers, which started after 9/11. He maintained that Pakistan was the name of unfinished revolution. It was not just a piece of territory but a land, which had to implement a system. India was not the only state opposing this system but also Israel and U.S. "Their purpose is deadly while our role is weak", said former army chief. Hamid Gul warned that regular armies do not fight cold wars, but it was politicians and democratic institutions. Army should go back to barracks forthwith and this task should be assigned to civil govt to resist threats, Gul demanded. Hameed Gul said war was imminent but we should fight outside our own territory. If we could not fight war beyond our borders, the same would be fought in our streets and roads, he added. He said Pakistan's sovereignty was at stake and "Let each of us light a candle to contribute our share. This is imperative when the darkness is grim". Earlier, renowned journalist Mujibur Rehman Shami said the present situation was provocative. He said there was no atomic bomb when Pakistan was created. "It is the unity, faith and discipline and the political and moral force which created Pakistan". He said those who talked of confederation with India were being misled. "We can be friends but not one", said Shami. President of Majlis-e-Quaid-i-Azam Syed Sajjad Haider said that the onslaught on Muslims and Pakistan was an attempt to stem growth of Islam. Prof. Dr. Muniuruddin Chugtai said Pakistan was facing difficulties due to wrong policies of the rulers but we should unite and strengthen our faith. Brother of Prof. Munawar Mirza, Prof. Muzaffar Mirza, Habib Gul, and Dr. Hasnat Gillani also addressed. Nizami pays rich tributes to Prof Munawar Editor, The Nation Majid Nizami paid rich tributes to Prof. Munawar Mirza, an expert on Iqbaliyat, a poet, laureate, educationist and author. Speaking at a condolence reference organised by Majlis-e-Quaid-i-Azam at a local hotel Saturday, he said that Mirza Munawar earned a distinctive position in understanding Iqbal. Nizami said he was his old associate and we both enjoyed unanimous views except once when we "differed". It was Ziaul Haq's period. I remarked that "Ziaul Haq is claiming he wanted to enforce Islam but what maximum he would do was simply regular offering of prayers on which Prof. Munawar differed with me". Had he been alive today, he would have agreed to my contention, he added. Majid Nizami said that there was a difference between a military dictator's mission and the mission of the Quaid and Allama Iqbal.
Posted by: abladabla Feb 10 2004, 06:49 AM
Read this article in one of the Pak's newspaper's. How shameless can they be..? Indian dedication to Machiavelli Masud Akhtar Shaikh The writer is a retired Colonel and freelance columnist Niccolo Machiavelli of Florence who died in 1527 at the age of 58, earned a name for himself on account of his cunning and unprincipled statesmanship. Ever since his death, crafty rulers guided more by political expediency than political morality take inspiration from this renowned guru. Those overly worrying about the internationally recognised norms of political conduct and principles can never beat the disciples of Machiavelli. This is a reality that has been sufficiently proved during scores of political bouts fought between the Indian leaders and their Pakistani counterparts over the past fifty-five years. While the Indian leaders blessed with political wisdom feel no hesitation in following Machiavelli’s teachings, Pakistani leaders keep fussing about their principled stand on every controversial issue. What they conveniently forget is that most of the successful nations of the world owe their success to the fact that they are adept at the art of twisting all principles in a manner that serves their own national interests. I am sure many of our politicians have never heard the name of Machiavelli or bothered to glance through his famous book The Prince. If the Pakistani politicians do not know Machiavelli, it would be futile expecting them to know Chanakya, another important guru of the Indian leaders who lived three centuries before the birth of Christ? Known for his legendary political wisdom, this "gentleman" was a minister to the Indian king Chandragupta Maurya. He left behind his masterpiece titled Arthashastra, an all-time guide for rulers. It advises them on how a king should wield political and economic power. Among the various strategies outlined in this book, are the ones the Indian leaders have been following religiously, at least since the time Pakistan was created. These include strategies for making and breaking alliances, using military power and treaties, employing spies and propaganda to weaken the opponents and to advance one’s own aims, and many other political formulas. If Pakistani politicians are really serious about making their Indian counterparts kiss the ground, they would be well-advised to give up their much abused prop of "principled stand", become true disciples of Chanakya and Machiavelli, carefully read The Prince as well as the Arthashastra, and then, employing the tactics recommended by these two gurus, outwit the Indians at the game they have been playing against us for more than half a century. One of the most practical maxims of Chanakya that the Indian leadership has been following in their dealings with Pakistan pertains to the concept of bravery. It says: "Bravery is of nine types; eight recommend running away from the scene while the ninth advises not to appear in the arena altogether." This is the rule the Indian leaders have been meticulously following ever since the fraudulent occupation of the state of Jammu and Kashmir by the Indian armed forces soon after Partition. They themselves took the Kashmir case to the United Nations and when they realised that the world body’s decision about a UN-supervised referendum in the disputed territory was going to work against India, they ran away from the arena. So scared were they about the outcome of a plebiscite that ever since then they have been spending all their energies to twist Pakistan’s arm so as to compel it not to refer the issue to any international body but to solve it bilaterally. Somehow their strong-arm tactics did succeed. The naive Pakistani leaders did not pursue the case at the UN for many long years, waiting for its bilateral solution. Little did they realise that India was now applying the second part of Chanakya’s maxim, ie, not appearing in the arena altogether. Thanks to the uprising of the people of the disputed territory over a decade ago, the nuclear explosion carried out by India, and the tit-for-tat nuclear blasts conducted by Pakistan, that the situation in the region became a source of extreme anxiety for the international community. The issue started echoing once again in the corridors of the UN and other world forums. The Indian prime minister was clever enough to extend a hand of friendship towards Pakistan during the tenure of Mian Nawaz Sharif. His visit to Lahore was intended to convince the world about his country’s "sincere" desire to live in peace with its neighbour whose very creation had been an anathema for most of his compatriots, including his own political party. Like many Pakistani simpletons, MNS was also taken in by this gesture of Mr Vajpayee. General Musharraf who did not think very high of MNS, snatched the reins of power from the latter through a coup, convinced in his own mind that he was clever enough to handle the crafty Indian leaders. His much-trumpeted visit to Agra followed. Everything seemed to be working entirely to the satisfaction of the Pakistani General and his team when the Indian side again acted on their Guru Chanakya’s advice and, through a pre-planned volte-face, ran away from the scene without taking shelter behind any face-saving pretext. Ever since the Agra fiasco, Indian leaders have been acting upon the second part of Chanakya’s advice by refusing to come to the arena at all. As a result of their bitter experience at Agra, they seem to have become convinced in the heart of their hearts that they cannot beat the Pakistani General in a dialogue, particularly the one revolving around the tricky Kashmir issue. Or maybe they have developed some sort of allergy against the very word "dialogue". On Pakistan’s part, both General Musharraf and his entire team of ministers and advisors have been crying hoarse in a bid to convince the Indian leaders to sit around the table and have a dialogue to sort out all disputes that have been the source of bitterness between the two nuclear neighbours. Instead of giving a positive response to this friendly gesture, India massed its troops on the international borders and the Line of Control in Kashmir, and took many other extreme steps to snap almost all ties with Pakistan. Lasting for over two years, this dangerous confrontation continued taxing the nerves of the international community that was all the time scared about the outbreak of a nuclear clash in the region with the resultant holocaust. After paying a very heavy price for these typically bullying tactics that had failed to produce the results India had been anticipating, and as a result of the mounting international pressure, Indian leaders once again had to run away from the arena. The moment they regained their breath after this mortifying retreat, their prime minister thought of throwing fresh dust into the eyes of the international community by extending once again a hand of friendship towards Pakistan, proposing the normalisation of relations between the two traditional rivals. Pakistani leadership and the naive Pakistani intellectuals were again taken in by this apparently sincere offer. Various tracks of diplomacy were activated immediately to give the world an impression that things were moving fast towards normalisation. The moment international pressure against India relaxed a little, Indian aversion to talks with Pakistan again asserted itself in the form of hostile statements from Mr Vajpayee and his foreign minister Mr Sinha. They both repeated their pet clamour about cross border infiltration, expressing their inability to have any dialogue with Pakistan till all cross border attacks were effectively controlled by Pakistan. Sinha also claimed that Kashmir was an integral part of India and therefore Pakistan had no right to dictate what India should do about that state. Everything has thus gone back to square one. The high hopes that Pakistani leadership had attached to the likely dialogue with Indian leaders and the prospects of an early normalisation of relations have been dashed to the ground. India, as a true disciple of Machiavelli and Chanakya, is mighty happy because its adherence to the teachings of these gurus has enabled it to throw a bluff that has successfully befooled both Pakistan and the international community for the umpteenth time in half a century. It is time the Pakistani leaders stopped begging India for a dialogue. They must now go back to their original stand that the Kashmir issue must be solved before any other contentious issue is taken up for solution. Let Kashmir not be sacrificed in return for petty benefits our traders and commercial tycoons have been anticipating since long.
Posted by: SSRamachandran Feb 10 2004, 07:00 AM
QUOTE (abladabla @ Feb 10 2004, 06:49 AM)
Read this article in one of the Pak's newspaper's. How shameless can they be..?
My be he is on some strong medication and having side effects. pakee.gif pakee.gif
Posted by: SSRamachandran Feb 10 2004, 07:08 AM
laugh.gif LATEST PAKI HUMILIATION ON BBC biggrin.gif Pakistan warned on nuclear trade Khan is widely seen in Pakistan as a hero for his nuclear work The US Secretary of State Colin Powell has demanded that Pakistan dismantle "by its roots" the secret network of nuclear technology deals. Mr Powell said that Pakistan had already done "quite a bit" to roll up the proliferation network. Islamabad has already announced that the disgraced nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan may face more questions. The government has also said it will share the findings of an inquiry into the leaks with the UN. 'Shared objectives' Mr Powell said he had urged President Pervez Musharraf to make sure that no more of the secret nuclear exchange network of Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan remained. The US secretary of state said he had received assurances that the Pakistani government shared his objective, and that Islamabad would share all the information it came up with. The Pakistani government has done quite a bit now to roll up the network... which has to be pulled up by its roots and examined to make sure we have left nothing behind Colin Powell, US Secretary of State The Pakistan government has already announced that it is prepared to share the findings of an investigation into the secret transfers with the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency. Islamabad has repeatedly stressed that it wants to eliminate the world black market in nuclear-related material. Correspondents say that because General Musharraf is a close ally of the US, its response so far to the leaking of Pakistani nuclear secrets has been muted. But at the same time the US has made no secret of its determination to investigate and stop the spread of technology and weapons. Pakistan earlier said that Dr Khan had not been granted a "blanket pardon" and may face further questioning. The government said an investigation into his leaking of nuclear secrets to other states was continuing. But officials also stress that Pakistan's nuclear arsenal is not in danger of falling into the hands of extremists. Foreign ministry spokesman Masood Khan said that the pardon given to Dr Khan was "conditional" and applied only to his confession made so far. Investigation He refused to say whether the case against the scientist could re-open if more incriminating evidence was found against him. Khan's confession shocked the nation Last week General Musharraf described Dr Khan as a "national hero" for his role in developing Pakistani nuclear weapons technology. The president granted a pardon after Dr Khan went on television and begged the nation's forgiveness for passing on information to Iran, Libya and North Korea. Masood Khan said the scientist had been co-operating with the authorities in the investigations and that his pardon was subject to his continued co-operation. He described allegations that there was nuclear technology on board a Pakistani C-130 cargo aircraft flight to North Korea in July 2002 as "utter nonsense". He said that while the flight had taken place it was only to allow Pakistan to pick up shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles. The spokesman described the revelations about the involvement of Pakistan's top scientist in proliferation as a traumatic experience for the country and its citizens. But he said it was a necessary exercise and the people had to go through this pain in order to convince the world that only a few individuals - and not the whole country - was involved in proliferation. Strict security restrictions have been imposed on Dr Khan and his associates. The government says they will not be allowed to resume their normal duties or activities. Relatives of six scientists detained in relation to the nuclear scandal have taken the government to court to challenge the legality of their continued imprisonment.
Posted by: Mudy Feb 10 2004, 09:04 AM Monday February 09, 2004 (1600 PST) BHOPAL: For most of the world, Pakistan's missile man Abdul Qadeer Khan is the man in disgrace for selling nuclear secrets but in one corner of this city he is still remembered as the boy who loved kites, swimming -- and not science. His childhood, spent in this Madhya Pradesh capital, is relived fondly by his cousins and friends who stayed on in India while their childhood pal moved to Pakistan in 1952 with his mother, four elder brothers and two sisters, reports Indo Asian News Services news agency. His father, who chose to stay back in India, died here years ago. Establishing one more live link between India and Pakistan, his cousin and once his closest friend Abdul Basit Khan remembered how the architect of Pakistan's nuclear bomb loved flying kites. "His other passion was swimming in the lakes of this city. Little did we realise when he was in school that he would one day become the missile man of Pakistan," said Abdul Basit, who is 11 months younger than Qadeer Khan. Reliving memories of those days, he added: "Qadeer and I were the closest of friends." "He was a very mediocre student in school. He did not show any sign of becoming a scientist in his childhood. He did not have any knack for science," said 68-year-old Abdul Basit. "In fact, it was Qadeer's elder brother Abdul Hafeez who excelled in school," said Kailash, another old acquaintance of the family. Abdul Basit said ancestors of the family came from Afghanistan and settled in central India some 300 years ago. Qadeer Khan's father Abdul Gaffoor was headmaster in a school in neighbouring Hoshangabad district. After retiring in 1932, he shifted with his family to the Ginnori area, today a part of old Bhopal. Abdul Basit lives in a portion of the house where Qadeer Khan was born. Qadeer Khan, born in 1936, studied at the Alexandria High School and lived in Bhopal till he was 16. He seldom looked back, visiting Bhopal only twice since he left the country, though Abdul Basit is not sure of the years. But the bonds continue to be strong. Qadeer Khan's relatives in Bhopal are outraged that the Pakistani government could have charged him with selling nuclear weapons to Libya, North Korea and Iran. "He fell victim to the internal politics of Pakistan. Moreover, he is a Khokhar Pathan, a clan whose members can never be dishonest," said Abdul Basit, who was a teacher and today leads a retired life. "He cannot do anything without taking Pakistani leaders into confidence," added his friend Kailash, a retired English professor. Agha Abdul Jabbar, another cousin of Pakistani scientist, said: "We would have been happier if Qadeer had stayed back in India and worked for India's nuclear technology." Like Abdul Basit, Jabbar is also fuming over the charges that have been levelled against Qadeer Khan. "There are several contradictions in the reports about Qadeer," he said.
Posted by: Viren Feb 10 2004, 09:49 AM
he is a Khokhar Pathan, a clan whose members can never be dishonest,"
Give us a break liar.gif . The thief is a wanted man in Holland and has interpol alert on him. The crook stole from his very employers while in Europe. But then I believe it was Zia who said it's okay to lie (and steal, kill, murder, rape, pilage, plunder etc)
We would have been happier if Qadeer had stayed back in India and worked for India's nuclear technology."
Now this I agree. A muslim who loves India stays back, works hard, excel in his work and is today leading a comfortable life in the Rashtrapati Bhavan. Maybe Qadeer would have turned out like that only if he stayed in India wink.gif - all those Pakis are one bad influence I tell you pakee.gif. He migrates to Lottastan has to steal in foreign countries at the risk of loosing his neck. He is proclaimed as hero but the minute heat is turned on Pakis selling him short by making a offer he could not refuse: take the fall or spend rest of the life on a Cuban island in orange suit as a guest of US taxpayer. Think about it Xerox Khan, we kafirs could have kept in you in our biggest mansions attending to your every need instead you are now an international joke guitar.gif
Posted by: Mudy Feb 10 2004, 09:30 PM
no link Don't trust Pak on Osama: US media to Bush Press Trust of India Washington, February 10: The United States should not rely on Pakistan to produce Osama bin Laden as a captive in return for Washington turning a blind eye to Islamabad's proliferation activities, an American newspaper has said in its editorial. "If US officials are calculating that turning a blind eye towards proliferation will produce a tied and shackled Osama bin Laden, compliments of Pakistan, they are probably mistaken," the Washington Times wrote on Monday. "As Pakistani experts maintain, Islamabad fears that producing Bin Laden would lead to an incremental end to the US courtship. While a bin Laden capture can't be ruled out, such a move - if tactically feasible for Pakistan - would probably be poorly timed in Islamabad," the paper said. Washington should not soft-pedal its concern over nuclear proliferation, but should direct all actions through international organisations, it said, adding that nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan's apology does not put to rest proliferation issues.
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 10 2004, 09:33 PM RAWALPINDI, Pakistan, Feb. 9 — President Pervez Musharraf acknowledged for the first time on Monday that he had suspected for at least three years that Pakistan's top nuclear scientist was sharing nuclear technology with other countries, but argued that the United States had not given him convincing proof. In an hourlong interview conducted here in English, General Musharraf shared blame for the delay with Washington, saying it was not until October that American officials provided evidence of the activities of the scientist, Abdul Qadeer Khan. "If they knew it earlier, they should have told us," General Musharraf said. "Maybe a lot of things would not have happened." At the same time, General Musharraf said he had seen signs that Dr. Khan was sharing nuclear technology, including "illegal contacts, maybe suspicions of contacts," and "suspicious movement" connected to Dr. Khan's laboratory. But he said he was concerned that investigating Dr. Khan, a national hero for his role in developing its nuclear weapons, could provoke a political backlash. "It was extremely sensitive," he said. "One couldn't outright start investigating as if he's any common criminal." In Washington on Monday, a senior Bush administration official acknowledged that General Musharraf was not given highly specific information about Dr. Khan's activities until last fall. But the official noted that the United States conveyed more general warnings about Dr. Khan's activities starting in 2001. On Wednesday, President Bush is expected to give what one senior official at the White House described Monday evening as a "lengthy, detailed speech on what must change in the area of stopping proliferation." He is expected to include new proposals for dealing with rogue scientists and with countries that have not signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty — a delicate subject, because India and Israel, like Pakistan, have rejected it. General Musharraf said he forced Dr. Khan to retire from his post as head of a nuclear weapons lab in March 2001, to prevent him from transferring any more nuclear secrets. That is the first time the general has cited Dr. Khan's nuclear activities as the reason for his departure. "We nipped the proliferation in the bud, we stopped the proliferation," he said of Dr. Khan's removal. "That is the important part." But the nuclear black market supplied by Dr. Khan continued to operate for two and a half years, until last fall, American officials say. That network is one of the largest and most successful efforts at evading nonproliferation controls, and is suspected of being the source of nuclear weapons developed in Iran, North Korea and Libya, investigators say. [North Korea was dismissive of reports of Dr. Khan's activities, saying on Tuesday in its first reaction to them that his admission that he sold nuclear weapons technology to the North and other states was "nothing more than sordid false propaganda" spread by the United States, Reuters reported, citing a statement by the Foreign Ministry.] Before the exposure of Dr. Khan's network late last fall, Pakistani officials, including General Musharraf, had long denied that Pakistan was the source of nuclear technology for any other country. In repeated interviews, he never disclosed that he suspected that the nation's top nuclear scientist was spreading technology. His comments on Monday will only add to the debate over what is a murky episode. Some political and military analysts say Pakistan's earlier refusal to act against Dr. Khan and its effort now to bring the scandal to a hasty conclusion reflect at least tacit approval from the powerful army for his activities. They suggest that Dr. Khan received a full pardon in exchange for publicly stating that he alone was responsible for the proliferation. The president attributed his protectiveness to Dr. Khan's national stature and to political realities in Pakistan. "Since he had acquired a larger-than-life figure for himself, one had to pardon him to satisfy the public," he said. "And I think it has gone extremely positively." Many argue that what may appear to be evasions or deceptions simply reflect General Musharraf's quandary — how to appease both international pressure to crack down on a rogue proliferator and domestic pressure to protect Dr. Khan. General Musharraf said that after he had centralized oversight of the nuclear program in February 2000, he received reports from a scientist who had been "sidelined" by Dr. Khan that raised concerns about "some proliferation activity, some underhand proliferation going on," the president said. He also confirmed earlier reports that Pakistani agents had raided a cargo plane used by Dr. Khan in 2000, but had found nothing. "We got some suspicious reports through the security agencies — that there are some suspicions of some items to be loaded and taken somewhere in the plane," he said. "We were very sure there was some activity likely," said General Musharraf, who added that the scientist may have been tipped off. "But we didn't catch them red-handed." But General Musharraf seemed to have few answers about how Dr. Khan operated freely in a country where the nuclear arsenal is considered its greatest single asset. He said Monday that the brigadier general in charge of security for Dr. Khan's top-secret laboratory never reported anything. "He didn't, and frankly, he hasn't even now," the president said. "He in fact has said that yes, he regrets that he was inefficient, he couldn't unearth, he didn't know. He says he didn't know whatever was going on. And he swears by that even now." The general emphatically denied reports by American intelligence officials that Dr. Khan had struck a barter agreement with North Korea in which Pakistani nuclear technology was exchanged for North Korean ballistic missile technology. He said Pakistani cargo planes spotted in North Korea in July 2002 were picking up surface-to-air missiles Pakistan had purchased at the height of tensions with India. While he has previously said the government completed its investigation of the proliferation, he said Monday that the government was "still looking into the details" about what, beyond designs, had been transferred to North Korea. General Musharraf, who had said he would shield Dr. Khan from the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations watchdog group, softened his position slightly on Monday, saying, "We need to think about it." He has indicated that he is not eager for trials of six close aides to Dr. Khan in part because public trials would raise "the same sensitive issue of Dr. A. Q. Khan coming in again, getting invoked every time." He said that despite his suspicions, he had no idea how extensive Dr. Khan's network was, nor how long it had been operating. "We didn't know that this is so deep that it started somewhere in the late 80's," he said."We didn't know that at all. And frankly again, the sensitivity of the issue — we tapped it and we just sidelined this one individual." Even removing Dr. Khan from his post in 2001, he said, required hours of deliberation over how best to proceed. Dr. Khan was removed as head of the laboratory but was made a special adviser to the government, a post he was stripped of last week. Even on Monday, General Musharraf seemed ambivalent about whether Dr. Khan was victim or villain, patriot or traitor. "I don't know whether Dr. A. Q. was using the underworld or the underworld was using A. Q.," he said at one point. Well, the worms are coming our of the woodwork. If Al Qeeda Khan has Underworld connections then surely he has passed on “a few” Dirty Suit Case Bombs to the Terrorists. Cheers
Posted by: Viren Feb 10 2004, 11:12 PM YAHOO INDIA NEWS Tuesday February 10, 4:05 PM Now, Musharraf hires Bush's man as U.S. lobbyist Islamabad, Feb.10 (ANI): Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf has hired Frank Howard Jr., the man who managed President George W. Bush's election campaign in 2001, as his key lobbyist in Washington. Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan, the acting parliamentary leader of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz, disclosed this. Khan told the Dawn newspaper that Howard was running a public relations firm in Bethesda, Maryland, and had played an important role in the Bush-Cheney election campaign. He also claimed that Howard was staying at a five-star hotel here for the past many days, and was meeting a number of people. Demanding that the government should inform the nation about Howard's appointment, he said it was every citizen's right to know whether secret funds were being used to meet Howard's expenses. When contacted at his hotel, Howard confirmed that he was running a public relations firm named "Eagle" and was here on "business". (ANI)
Posted by: Mudy Feb 10 2004, 11:58 PM Islamic extremists invade U.S., join sleeper cells By Jerry Seper THE WASHINGTON TIMES Islamic radicals are being trained at terrorist camps in Pakistan and Kashmir as part of a conspiracy to send hundreds of operatives to "sleeper cells" in the United States, according to U.S. and foreign officials. The intelligence and law-enforcement officials say dozens of Islamic extremists have already been routed through Europe to Muslim communities in the United States, based on secret intelligence data and information from terrorists and others detained by U.S. authorities. A high-ranking foreign intelligence chief told The Washington Times in an interview last week that this clandestine but aggressive network of training camps "represents a serious threat to the United States, one that cannot be ignored." The official said as many as 400 terrorists have been and are being trained at camps in Pakistan and Kashmir. U.S. intelligence officials said the camps, located in the remote regions of western Pakistan and in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir, are financed in part by various terrorist networks, including al Qaeda, and by sources in Saudi Arabia. Pakistani Ambassador Ashraf Jehangir Qazi denied in an interview that terrorist camps are operating in his country, including the remote regions of western Pakistan or in Kashmir. "We have never accepted the allegation that there were training camps here, not now, not ever," Mr. Qazi told The Times. "These allegations have persisted despite our repeated denials. I assure you there is absolutely no reason to believe that any terrorist camps exist in Pakistan or Kashmir." Al Qaeda sleeper cells are believed to be operating in 40 states, according to the FBI and other federal authorities, awaiting orders and funding for new attacks in the United States. Financed in part by millions of dollars solicited by an extensive network of bogus charities and foundations, the cells use Muslim communities as cover and places to raise cash and recruit sympathizers. Last month, Pakistan and India announced a new round of peace talks on Kashmir, in which Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, the target of two recent assassination attempts, said Pakistan had agreed "not to allow the use of Pakistan's territory anywhere in the world" for terrorism. In announcing the talks, Gen. Musharraf said his military-led government would act to "eradicate" religious extremists in Pakistan. "We will get to them, I am sure," he said. But U.S. and foreign intelligence authorities said terrorist training camps have been documented in some of western Pakistan's remote areas and in the disputed regions of Kashmir, and that military officials and others in the Musharraf government have not fully disassociated themselves from al Qaeda or the former Taliban regime in Afghanistan. Some U.S. officials have privately expressed concern that members of Pakistan's intelligence community have assisted in the concealment of al Qaeda members and associates. In December, the government of India said terrorist training camps in Pakistan and Kashmir that had been closed after the September 11 attacks on the United States had been reactivated, mostly along the disputed border area near the so-called Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir. The Indian government said its army had photographs and other evidence of ongoing terrorist training, much of which was turned over to U.S. officials. That information included satellite photos and communication intercepts, U.S. law- enforcement authorities said, that documented 60 to 70 camps in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir as well as in Pakistan. Officials at the Indian Embassy in Washington declined comment. Since September 11, Pakistan has publicly ordered a clampdown on terrorism and arrested hundreds of suspected al Qaeda members and associates, transferring many of them to the United States. The captured include Abu Zubaydah, the organization's top recruiter; Ramzi Binalshibh, paymaster for the September 11 hijackers; and Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, chief of operations for Osama bin Laden and mastermind of September 11. One veteran U.S. law-enforcement official with an extensive history in counterterrorism said many of the training camps in the Pakistan- controlled regions of Kashmir are operated by the Harakat ul-Ansar, an Islamic militant group tied to bin Laden. The group's leaders joined with bin Laden in signing a February 1998 "fatwa" calling for attacks on U.S. and Western interests. Also known as the "Movement of Holy Warriors," Harakat ul-Ansar has been tied by U.S. and foreign intelligence officials to the January 2002 abduction and murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. Several other camps are being operated by an anti-U.S. Muslim group known as Lashkar-e-Taiba, according to U.S. and foreign intelligence officials. Listed by the State Department in 2001 as a terrorist organization, Lashkar-e-Taiba is the armed wing of the Pakistan- based religious organization Markaz-ud-Dawa-wal-Irshad. Eleven men, including nine U.S. citizens, were arrested last year in Virginia in what authorities called the "Virginia jihad." The men were accused in a 41-count grand jury indictment of engaging in "holy jihad" to drive India out of the disputed Kashmir territory. Six have since pleaded guilty. The indictment said some of the men traveled to Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorist camps in Pakistan, where they were trained in the use of various weapons, including small arms, machine guns and grenade launchers. The indictment also said the trips occurred both before and after the September 11 attacks.
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 11 2004, 05:20 AM TIME TO STAND FIRM Cheers
Posted by: Mudy Feb 11 2004, 05:48 AM
the seat of the IAEA. Watching the reaction of the Pakistan bashers, primarily from the US and Europe, and undermining their arguments within a non-apologetic framework has been a tiring but satisfying endeavour
The first is that no matter how honest we want to be, states like the US and the Europeans will not rest till they have managed to undermine Pakistan’s nuclear capability. This message comes clear when one is interacting with experts and government representatives from these countries. Already, they have delinked Pakistan from India in the context of nuclear capability and, frankly, there is nothing we can do to stop them from hounding us - short of giving up our capability
Posted by: SSRamachandran Feb 11 2004, 08:49 AM
I know it is from a left wing source. But a nice interview on Paki proliferation but with the usual India slamming by a paki...but the BBC guy was pretty straight forward AND HE CALLS MUSHY A LIAR ...HE ACTUALLY SAID L I A R
Posted by: SSRamachandran Feb 11 2004, 09:12 AM
lOOKS LIKE THE US IS SLOWLY TURNING UP THE HEAT ....OR AM i JUST DREAMING??? Pakistan's nuclear claim disputed Khan's public confession shocked the nation The US says it has been sharing information with Pakistan for several years about the illegal proliferation of nuclear weapons technology. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said the issue had been a long-standing concern for both countries. On Monday, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf said the US gave him evidence of the illegal deals of Pakistan's top nuclear scientist only last October. Last week, Abdul Qadeer Khan confessed he had sold nuclear secrets abroad. Dr Khan, regarded as the "father" of Pakistan's nuclear bomb, publicly admitted that he had supplied nuclear technology to North Korea, Iran and Libya through a black market. He was pardoned by President Musharraf on condition he would co-operate fully with the ongoing inquiry. Mr Khan insisted he had acted alone, but many experts are questioning how he was able to do this without the knowledge of the Pakistani authorities, the BBC's Jannat Jalil in Washington reports. Contradicting Musharraf "We have discussed non-proliferation issues with Pakistan repeatedly over a long period of time, and it's been an issue of concern to us and to President Musharraf," Mr Boucher said in Washington. Pakistan's President Pervez Musharraf He said American officials had from time to time given Pakistan what he described as "pieces of information" on the issue. The spokesman stressed that "certainly our non-proliferation dialogue with Pakistan goes back much further than" last October - as claimed by President Musharraf. But Mr Boucher said he could not give more details, because that might reveal where America was getting its information from. In an interview with the New York Times published earlier on Tuesday, President Musharraf said he had suspected for at least three years that Dr Khan was sharing nuclear technology with other countries. But he said that he needed proof and only got that with the help of Washington last October. "If they knew it earlier, they should have told us," the paper quotes the president as saying. "Maybe a lot of things would not have happened".
Posted by: Mudy Feb 11 2004, 11:20 AM How many are fundoos?
Posted by: vijnan_anand Feb 11 2004, 12:35 PM
Cricket tour to Pakistan likely to be called off TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 2004 06:40:39 AM ] NEW DELHI : The Indian cricket team’s proposed tour of Pakistan is likely to be called off. Security concerns are forcing the government to have a rethink on the issue. A three-member reconnaissance team has reported from Pakistan on the security aspects. On the basis of this report, the home ministry is understood to have advised that it would be prudent to call off the tour. The Board for Control of Cricket in India (BCCI) has called a meeting of cricketers in Kolkata tomorrow. The players would be apprised of the possible security risks, and their reaction would be taken to arrive at a final decision. Already, there is pressure from family members of Sachin Tendulkar and Saurav Ganguly to desist from undertaking the tour. Considered political reasoning has tilted the scales against the tour. Government leaders believe even if there is a 5-10% chance of an unexpected incident involving our cricketers happening, it could seriously erode the projected feel-good factor. In fact, it is precisely this feel-good factor which made the government initially press for an Indo-Pak cricket tour. It was felt that a resurgent Indian cricket team had a fair chance of beating Pakistan , thus adding to the sense of triumph among the countrymen. However, leaders now fear that should a security breach happen and the cricket team is exposed to danger, it would create an exactly opposite effect.
Posted by: Mahesh Feb 11 2004, 06:53 PM
OOPs.....How much more humiliation can possibly be heaped on Pakistan in this case??? Pakistan's nuclear claim disputed The US says it has been sharing information with Pakistan for several years about the illegal proliferation of nuclear weapons technology. rolleyes.gif State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said the issue had been a long-standing concern for both countries. On Monday, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf said the US gave him evidence of the illegal deals of Pakistan's top nuclear scientist only last October. liar.gif Also check out the following link on "unanswered" questions about the Pak Nuke programme and this embarrasing incident.
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 12 2004, 02:28 AM The first-ever show in Pakistan was abruptly terminated today due to a technical problem, says the Mumbai organiser Bunty Walia, of GS Entertainment. “These are all startup hiccups. In a way it’s good that we are recognising the problem areas in the initial stages. Once the Indo- Pak cinematic ties start, there won’t be any looking back,” says Bunty. This India-Pak show he says, is purely a `charity show’, for the underprivileged in Pakistan.I bet all the proceeds would go to the Lotasttani Generals’ Benefit Fund It could be rescheduled for February 18 or March 22. And contrary to reports, Shah Rukh Khan and Amitabh Bachchan are not a part of it. included Akshay Kumar, Shilpa Shetty, Jatin Lalit, Sunidhi Chauhan, and Shaan amongst others. And they are all perplexed at the turn of the events. Says a confused Akshay Kumar, “I had packed my suitcases and was all set to fly yesterday afternoon, and just before leaving I get a call from the organiser that’s it’s cancelled. I would love to perform there as we know the people in Pakistan genuinely like us.” He is waiting for the new dates. Shaan, who was excited about the event, says he is quite disappointed that things have turned out to be like this. “I have a feeling that the whole show has been cancelled completely.” I also hope that the shindig has been cancelled permanently. Cheers
Posted by: rajesh_g Feb 12 2004, 06:10 AM courtesy sulekha newshopper.. This is sooooo hilarious...
Posted by: Mudy Feb 12 2004, 07:14 AM
Posted by: Mudy Feb 13 2004, 11:41 PM
The Rediff Interview/Former ISI chief Hamid Gul February 13, 2004 Retired Lieutenant General Hamid Gul, former head of Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence directorate, tells Contributing Editor Sheela Bhatt that the only reason Pakistan does not dismember India is because "we never wanted to create problems with our Muslim population in India." A startling interview that gives a glimpse of the Pakistani mindset, something that will confront Indian diplomats as they begin peace talks in Islamabad on Sunday. Part I of the Interview: 'We are walking into the American trap' What are your views on reports indicting Pakistan for nuclear proliferation? Why should Pakistan be apologetic about it? Nuke proliferation started because of the US and Russia who have been distributing nuke technologies to their favourites. Israel is a undeclared nuclear power. Whether Pakistan has proliferated or not is not an issue at all. The important question is does a small country like Pakistan having bad experiences with India and three wars have right to possess nuclear weapons or not? The cause of war still exists over Kashmir. And we have not signed the proliferation treaty. How can you justify nuclear proliferation? Why are the Americans then distributing it to Israel? I fear the Americans will demand the joint custody of Pakistani nuclear assets. Or they may say that Pakistan will have to roll back. I remember when Morarji Desai was prime minister of India, it first came out that Pakistan has an Islamic bomb. Desai said, 'How does it hurt India? We have one and they have one.' It's a legitimate desire of any nation to provide for its security needs. Even America is not afraid of the Pakistani bomb. It is Israel that is afraid of Pakistani nuclear weapons. But President Musharraf has sided with America. (Interrupting) Under duress. I don't think his heart is in it. He has the same genes which I have. He was my student, he was my subordinate in the Pakistan army. We have served together. How can he be pro-America? Is Musharraf anti-Indian as some people claim? If you put aside Kashmir no Pakistani is anti-India. We like peace with India but not without settling Kashmir. Kashmir is Musharraf's only problem. What is the bigger issue? The American threat or Kashmir? You can't put it like that. We have to fight the American threats together. But it is not possible to surrender Kashmir to fight America together. But India and Pakistan's case is different. America is already on Pakistani soil. It doesn't matter. America is our bank account!! Just one uprising (against the American presence in Pakistan) and things will change. We are not afraid of the Americans, they can't fight on the ground. We are only concerned about their high-altitude bombers. India and Pakistan must find a solution to their high-altitude bombers. Why are you anti-India? I am not anti-India. I am against the imperial streak in the Indian psyche. The 1947 riots had a deep impact on my mind. The Indians always lean towards imperial powers. Look at your special relationship with Jews. And now you are with America. Jinnah was right when he invited Ambedkar to join Pakistan. About 5% to 6% Brahmins dominate India. Where are the lower classes? How do you define your own ideology? I am an Islamist. Islam is the final destiny of mankind. Islam is moderate, Islam is progressive. Islam is everything that man needs. It is not necessary to become a Muslim but it is necessary to adopt the principles of Islam. Naseem Azavi and Iqbal's writings have influenced my thinking. How do you see the future of Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif? Pakistan's future will lie in the hands of those who oppose America and who take a stand on Kashmir. Benazir will have to oppose Musharraf who is seen as pro-American. Unless she changes her stand of pleasing Americans, she has no political future. Pakistan has to redeem dignity and honour, which we have lost to the Americns. What will be the minimum demand from Pakistan to India over Kashmir? Musharraf is saying he expects the Chenab line to be accepted by India. Many Pakistanis might go with him but would Kashmiris agree with them? Also, our discomfort over the leaks of proliferation must not ease India. Dr (A Q) Khan is our hero. Nobody can dare touch him. If India has a problem with Pakistan why don't you give Kashmir to Kashmiris? Indians have a deep-rooted prejudice against Pakistanis. Not one Indian intellectual is ready to say that let Kashmiris have freedom. As ISI chief you have observed India. Do you still feel India can give their land to Pakistan? India will. India will give its land when it will be divided into many pieces. India will have to be break. If India does not give us our land we will go to war and divide India. This time America helped India. When you were ISI chief you were closely monitoring India… (interrupts) We never wanted to create problems with our Muslim population in India. Otherwise, believe me, India is so fragile. India has such weak joints that if we want we could strike these weak joints then India will dismember. But we don't want India to break. Weak joints? India is ridden with problems. I am not talking about Muslims. There are many other weak joints. Indians have strong fissiparous tendencies, which is absent in Pakistan. One can easily exploit it politically. Because of Indian Muslims it is not in our interest to break India.
Posted by: Viren Feb 14 2004, 02:36 AM
A prominent Indian weekly published in US carried this interview - a full page was dedicated to this fool Gul mad.gif
America is our bank account!!
and in the same breath he adds:
We are not afraid of the Americans, they can't fight on the ground.
Only a Paki will bite the hand that feeds it. pakee.gif
Because of Indian Muslims it is not in our interest to break India
LOL.....and we are reciprocating the gesture because of our hindus in Pakistan. tongue.gif
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 14 2004, 03:18 PM Summary Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf has begun warning his country that if it does not root out al Qaeda, the United States will. Analysis As part of its self-declared "war on terrorism," the United States has been involved in the Afghan theater of operations for more than two years, since it succeeded in overthrowing the Taliban government in late 2001 by employing a strategy heavily dependent upon local allies. Since then, U.S. efforts have followed a bifurcated path: maintaining some semblance of order in Kabul -- where the "national" government resides -- and bombing any concentrated pockets of resistance. The strategy makes sense. Unlike the Soviet occupation of 1979-1989, the United States is not attempting to control the entire territory of Afghanistan. Split as it is by the Hindu Kush mountains -- and a plethora of ethnic groups with little to no sense of a shared history -- the country probably is not capable of forming a unified state in the traditional sense. The least violent existence that Afghanistan can hope for is probably to have a very weak central government in which the various regional capitals -- Kandahar, Herat, Mazar-i-Sharif -- exercise de facto sovereign control. The U.S. strategy, then, is geared toward maintaining the fiction of a "united" Afghanistan, without providing any troops to enforce central rule. The NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) patrols only Kabul and the immediate surrounding area, while various regional militias rule their respective territories. The strategy is not exactly brilliant, but -- considering Afghanistan's history and geography -- it is probably one of the few that could work. As a side effect, it leaves al Qaeda and its sympathizers free to prowl largely where they will and conduct hit-and-run nuisance attacks. For al Qaeda, this is far from a happy state of affairs. Afghanistan can no longer be used as a major training facility, and the network has been funneling most of its fighters into Iraq. A smaller presence in Afghanistan is a more vulnerable one, so al Qaeda has done what any business would do under similar circumstances: move. The mountainous border region of the Afghan-Pakistani border region is porous, relatively unguarded and home to the Pushtun ethnic group that straddles national boundaries. Al Qaeda, unhobbled by state loyalties, has most likely moved its core personnel into this region, where it is more complicated for U.S. forces to operate. But more complicated does not mean impossible. The Bush administration is looking for the end game. Al Qaeda has proven unable to mount a major strike on U.S. targets since Sept. 11, 2001. The attacks that have occurred -- Casablanca, Bali, An Najaf, Riyadh, etc. -- have been far less ambitious in scope, carried out by affiliate groups and, most importantly, have not touched the U.S. mainland. The next major push from the United States will be an attempt to roll up al Qaeda's prime senior members themselves. As with all other major policy pushes in 2004, the White House has its eye on domestic politics as well. Melting down al Qaeda into a commemorative coin set to present to the American voter just in time for Nov. 4 would, of course, be a nice touch from a White House perspective. Doing that, however, means rolling into Pakistan with a lot more than a disposable State Department officer with snazzy shoes and a sharply worded demarche. Unlike Afghanistan, Pakistan is a real country with a real army -- and real nuclear weapons. Hence, at the highest levels, Washington has been tightening the screws on Islamabad -- most recently regarding the indiscretions of its nuclear development team. Musharraf has received the none-too-subtle message, and this week began preparing his country for the inevitable onslaught -- and spurring it into action so that the United States might not need to come calling with a whole division of troops when it comes. In a Feb. 10 interview with the New York Times, Musharraf made it clear that the onus of responsibility for the nuclear technology leaks was on the CIA, which he said had not provided any proof about the nuclear proliferation until quite recently. While the primary message of "don't blame me or push me around" came through loud and clear, there was also a secondary, more subtle, "Show me proof and I'll act." The buzz in Pakistan this week, at least according to the Daily Times, is that CIA Director George Tenet paid Islamabad a secret visit on Feb. 11. In short, Musharraf was preparing the public for what sort of terms would be necessary for him to cater to Washington's wishes, and Washington just might have provided the appropriate information about al Qaeda's new digs in Pakistan. That brings us to a more recent statement by Musharraf concerning militant activity. Speaking at Pakistan's National Defense College in Rawalpindi on Feb. 12, Musharraf said, "Certainly everything [within Afghanistan] is not happening from Pakistan, but certainly something is happening from Pakistan. Let us not bluff ourselves. Now, whatever is happening from Pakistan must be stopped and that is what we are trying to do." On Feb. 10, Musharraf outlined what Washington would need to do to get him to move. On Feb. 12, he made it clear to other power brokers within Pakistan what needed to be done. Stratfor expects a third, more direct, statement to tumble from Musharraf's lips in the near future. The issue now is simply one of timing. The Afghan-Pakistani border currently is difficult to navigate: Mountains plus winter equals no tanks. Once spring arrives, however, the United States can roll in and -- in theory -- nab all the appropriate personalities, just in time for the Democratic National Convention in July. If the Bush administration can pull it off, more Democrats than Howard Dean will be screaming. The plan is not quite as neat as it seems. Northern Pakistan is rugged territory, but people actually live there and like it. Most are none too pleased with what the United States has been doing across the border in Afghanistan of late. This region, dubbed the Northwest Frontier Territories, is heavily Pushtun and is rife with al Qaeda supporters. Rolling into it would not be pretty. In the hopes of heading off what would likely be a bloody U.S. intervention in Pakistan, Musharraf is trying to make the case for a against al Qaeda and its supporters in these tribal areas. The Pakistani president is in quite an uncomfortable position, attempting to balance his role as a trusted U.S. ally in the war against militant Islamism, while leading a country where anti-Americanism is at a fever pitch. Despite Musharraf's attempts to proceed with caution, decisions resulting from the U.S. pressure are critically injuring his Musharraf has long stressed that his government furnished the United States with only minimal assistance in terms of logistical support, intelligence-sharing and so forth, and that Pakistani troops are not committed to campaigns outside the country. Both Interior Minister Syed Faisal Saleh Hayat and Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed routinely deny that U.S. intelligence and military forces are engaged in any operations in Pakistan against al Qaeda/Taliban suspects, particularly when arrests are made or suspected militants are killed in shoot-outs. Hayat and Ahmed have gone to lengths to underscore that Pakistani forces are doing the actual work, while the United States is merely providing intelligence and logistical support in the background. U.S. troops conducting a large-scale operation inside Pakistan would take away the Pakistanis' we're-doing-it-ourselves factor and could well fracture the Pakistani military, not to mention prompt a backlash from the public. But Musharraf has no illusions about where he falls on the U.S. priority list. If destroying al Qaeda once and for all means losing the Pakistani president, well, the United States has survived Pakistani regime changes before. Therefore, Musharraf issued an oblique warning to his country that it needs to do a housecleaning -- before the rat-a-tat of U.S. M16s is heard across the Northwest Frontier. It is unclear just how Musharraf will be able to muster the support necessary for this latest step his government has had to make in the wake of Sept. 11. Initial signs are promising. So far jirgas (councils) of the Utmanzai and North Waziristani tribes have decided to set up militias to hunt down foreign militants. It is far too early to evaluate the tribes' seriousness -- much less their success -- in the matter, but it is obvious that the political dialogue has been sparked. Islamabad does not have much time to get results. Warmer weather soon will set in, and the ISAF already is taking over policing duties in Afghanistan from U.S. forces, which will free up even more U.S. forces for a counterinsurgency offensive, should Islamabad fail to get the job done. Cheers
Posted by: Sunder Feb 14 2004, 10:39 PM
QUOTE (Peregrine @ Feb 14 2004, 03:18 PM)
Check out the in the article... smile.gif pakee.gif
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 14 2004, 11:19 PM
QUOTE (Sunder @ Feb 14 2004, 10:39 PM)
Check out the in the article... smile.gif pakee.gif
Sunder : Would it help if Stratfor changed it to Lota-Locator? Cheers
Posted by: Mudy Feb 15 2004, 11:35 AM
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 15 2004, 03:38 PM pakee.gif
WASHINGTON, Feb 14: Pakistanis are the third largest nationality with 82 detainees being held at the US military prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Pentagon documents seen by Dawn show.
Most of the Islamic Allies of the You Knighted States of Umrica are very well represented i.e. Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, Bahrain including one member of the Bahraini royal family and Turkey are the prominent ones. Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 15 2004, 11:28 PM Cheers
Posted by: Mudy Feb 15 2004, 11:30 PM
A crook knows how to do business with other crook brother. specool.gif
Posted by: Mudy Feb 15 2004, 11:40 PM,00050002.htm?headline=Air~Force~plane's~falling~tanks~kill~two~soldiers~in~Pakistan~» Islamabad, February 15 Two fuel tanks fell from a Pakistani Air Force plane after take off on Sunday and hit a guard post on the ground at a base in northwestern Pakistan, sparking a fire and killing two soldiers, an official said. The external tanks dropped off a Chinese-made A-5 jet because of "technical malfunctioning" at the base in Peshawar, about 145 kilometres northwest of the capital, Islamabad, said Pakistan air force spokesman Air Commodore Sarfaraz Khan. The two soldiers died on the spot. It was unclear whether the soldiers were hit by metal from the tanks or died from the fire, which was quickly extinguished. Khan said officials were investigating why the tanks detached from the aircraft.
Posted by: rhytha Feb 16 2004, 12:35 AM
Peregrine, now look what u have done dry.gif , is ranked 1st for search keyword LOTASTAAN and LOTASTAANis, because u r replacing all LOTASTAAN for TSPstan laugh.gif
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 16 2004, 02:13 AM
QUOTE (rhytha @ Feb 16 2004, 12:35 AM)
Peregrine, now look what u have done dry.gif , is ranked 1st for search keyword LOTASTAAN and LOTASTAANis, because u r replacing all LOTASTAAN for TSPstan laugh.gif
rhytha : Congratulations are in order to your Forum where we humble posters add a few moments of mirth to the daily routine of Life by using the appropriate terminology. Well you know the reason why I address TSP as Lotastaan. Here is the image again : Now please try Lotaism on Google - You will get 55 Results. Now that Lotastaan is world known thanks to the India-Forum I would like to ensure that the Eastern Terrorist State be known on the "net" as Bhookhanangadesh Do you think it is worth it? Cheers cheers.gif
Posted by: SSRamachandran Feb 16 2004, 02:52 AM
thumbup.gif thumbup.gif thumbup.gif thumbup.gif clap.gif cheers.gif India forum ...Hip Hip Hooray
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 16 2004, 03:38 AM
rhytha : is ranked 1st for search keyword : Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 16 2004, 05:15 AM
Posting here but think Humour Thread would have been more appropriate : KARACH: Both the Port Qasim Authority (PQA) and the Karachi Shipyard and Engineering Works Ltd (KSEW) have locked horns on the issue of the controversial construction of its pilot boats. Sources at the shipping industry told The News on Saturday; that the KSEW failed to build two pilot boats ordered by the PQA in accordance to the directed specifications Sources said that though the PQA had placed the orders at the KSEW for the construction of two pilot boats with the minimum speed limit of 20 nautical miles per, however the boats received by the PQA have speed limits of a mere 12-15 nautical miles per hour. As I write this piece, negotiations are underway between the Port Qasim Authority and the KSEW to amicably settle the matter at the very earliest. "PQA is demanding refund of certain amount that it has paid in advance to the shipyard," they added. Interestingly, though the PQA had paid around $12 million for the construction of each of the pilot boats for the Karachi Shipyard, the price of such boats in the international market is around $9 million or even lower, sources said. Sources were of the view that the PQA needs to obtain fast pilot boats and tugboats in order to efficiently match international standards. "PQA has more than 35 kilometre long channel and it requires pilot boats that are quick. With these boats the pilots would need more time to board violating* ships due to their limited speed of the boats," sources added. They said that most of the channel of the PQA is unlit as the channel lights have been filched** and lack of security prevails in the port area***. Neither vessels berth, nor sail out to sea during nighttime, they added. Only those ports are considered efficient that has good navigational equipment and modern craft so that berthing and sailing out activities of the vessels could be performed without any difficulty. As such, insurance companies usually claim extra premium on the vessel meant for PQA", sources claimed. When contacted for their side of the story, a KSEW official declined to make any comment in this regard for the time being. * : Violating Ships visit Lotastaani Ports? pakee.gif ** : Lotastaani crooks steal lights from Port Channel Lighting System. Toba Toba. *** : I hope the Indian Cricket Team will not be made to Play in this Area If KSEW cannot build proper Pilot Boats then what kind of Sgista 90B Submarines will the be building for the Lotastaani Navy? Flush.gif Folks : I am sure that there will be an Arbitration between PQA and KSEW. If same is in London then I will try to get some of the Pleadings just as in the ”Rice mixt mit mice shidt” Case. ROTFL.gif Cheers
Posted by: Viren Feb 16 2004, 09:45 PM
Here we go once again...........take number 93205833... ACTION tongue.gif
Posted by: Mudy Feb 16 2004, 10:04 PM Looks like AQK is planning to leave Lootastaan for medical check up. biggrin.gif And now I waiting for him to expose Paki Army. biggrin.gif,00430005.htm
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 17 2004, 04:56 AM ISLAMABAD – As India and Pakistan get ready to kick start the first round of composite dialogue on Feb 16, the AJK and valley based Jihadi organisations have been clearly told to pack up and leave. “We’re clearly told to pack up and leave,” said a credible source from a valley-based organisation engaged in guerrilla fight with the Indian occupation forces. Nuclear rivals India and Pakistan are locked in a 56-year long battle for Himalayan region of Kashmir, a territory both the neighbours share and claim. Commander of Hizbul Mujahideen Salahuddin, Jamiatul Mujahideen leader General Abdullah, Tehrikul Mujahideen leader Sheikh Jamilur Rehman, Commander Usman, Naib Amir Jaish-e-Mohammed Mufti Abdul Rauf, Harkatul Mujahideen leader Maulana Farooq. Lashkar-e-Taiba representative Zakiur Rehman and Al-Badr leader Bakht Zameen reportedly attended the meeting with senior government officials who asked them to deescalate. “So far there is no de-escalation but the real test would come once the snow melts in the mountains. “The Jihad Council (a conglomerate of eight major fighters organisation) is watching the situation very closely,” said the source, however, adding, “There are no final decisions yet as the situation would be clearer by the time snow melts on the mountains.” “There’s a clear sense of changing times in the camps of these organisations as we are hard hit by Pakistan government’s decision to monitor our activities and place strict vigilance on our fund collecting activities,” said the source. The source said that the Jihad received a serious setback as during the last year majority of operational commanders from almost all the active organisations were killed. However, he refused to relate the developments to new-found understanding between India and Pakistan. “There’s no dearth of motivation or resolve in our camps but the only problem is times have changed and we’re facing a lot of difficulties in our operations,” said the source. The source also contended that during the meeting with commanders soon after the January 6 declaration, President Musharraf clarified that the mention of word terrorism in the joint declaration was in the context of overall security environment of the world and explained Pakistan’s stance of fight against terrorism. Both India and Pakistan moved decisively towards a composite dialogue on after signing a joint declaration which calls for resolution of Kashmir dispute according to the satisfaction of both the countries and also included a pledge from Pakistan that it would not allow its territory to be used for terrorists activities in any manner. Commenting on the emerging scenario in the backdrop of Pak-India composite dialogue Hizbul Mujahideen spokesman Saleem Hashmi told The Nation that his party has not slowed down the Jihad against the occupation forces in the valley nor Pakistan has asked them to wind up. “The armed struggle would continue till the solution of the Kashmir issue,” said the spokesman. “As President Musharraf had once said that he could only plead for an end to armed struggle as he didn’t have any control on the movement in Kashmir. “There’s no change in our policy of struggle against the Indians. In fact the other day 14 Indian personnel were killed in a mine blast,” said Hashmi. The spokesman said that the outfit bought their arms from the open market and no country is a particular supplier of arms to them. “We buy our arms from open market. In fact we are manufacturing land mines with our own resources and expertise. We’ll keep the fight on,” said the spokesman. “We’re not against Indo-Pak talks. But it’s a trilateral issue and it should be resolved in accordance with the UN resolutions,” said Hashmi. Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 17 2004, 09:58 PM Drop the bomb! : By I Hassan - Cutting edge It is extraordinary how propaganda can make black, white or evil, good. The way the eulogising of the nuclear bomb in this country has made the most evil thing into a lifesaver is really worth going into deeper. In the process the perpetrator, Dr Qadeer Khan has been turned into a worshipful saint. A major part of the latter process has been done by the doctor himself spending 50 million rupees of our money (he had the key to Pakistanis treasury for 30 years) in praise of himself. With this, money he is said to have bought editors, publications and even a whole edition of a book written by a foreigner and published overseas in which the writer had written a whole chapter on the great doctor, exposing him. The doctor bought up the whole edition of the book (every single copy, whenever it was to be found) removed physically the section pertaining to him and having his own version of himself printed, inserted that into each copy of the book, rebound it, making it appear as the original and distributed the book. This operation was out of the 50 million rupees expended for self-praise. One must be moved at the audacity of it but one must note the efficiency of it, for he is a hero! What is heroic about building the weapon of mass destruction? Those who did so, 60 years ago, are as evil as he and those who used it then on a defenceless people, Japan, were the biggest criminals in the world, and this particularly when the Japanese were already parleying for surrender and peace. A notion has been spread that a nuclear bomb is a shield for us, and makes us invulnerable. Nothing could be further from the truth. A nuclear bomb is so horrendous that every nation would devise means for ensuring that they are not at the receiving end. The best method of achieving that is to neutralise the one who is likely to throw bombs at one. In the case of India and Pakistan, admittedly India had the bomb first. As long as Pakistan did not have one, Pakistan was safe for India could not fear and did not fear that Pakistan would drop one on India. The destructive power of the bomb is such that, whoever drops it first, is the winner. In order to escape the fate of being the first recipient, it is evident that the moment there is a threat from an adversary, to pre-empt that threat, the threatened party is obliged to adopt this course. In Pakistan, the bomb is made out to be a deterrent. This is a fools’ paradise. First of all, it needs to be said that despite the fact that India has not once attacked Pakistan, and the latter has started each of the three wars with India. The fact that India had a nuclear bomb did not deter Pakistan from attacking India, and particularly at the time of Kargil, India could have retaliated with a bomb. That would have put paid to Pakistan. That India did not do that goes to the credit of India. If India remained ‘deterred’ despite provocation on three times, then the only bomb we have to fear is our own which attracts retaliation and retribution. The only deterrence is not to have the bomb. This has already been proved. Each time Pakistan has fought India, the latter has not used the bomb. As said earlier, each time Pakistan was not deterred by India’s bomb. If Pakistan continues to pat its bomb, in the end, India might be persuaded to use it and terminate the whole thing. Since it has been proved that the best deterrence is not to have the bomb, it is better to get rid of it sooner, than later. The billions of dollar that have been wasted in lining the pockets of the good doctor Qadeer, could have been used for building Pakistan in education, health care and general welfare of the people. What is the point of this rivalry with India? We are a small nation vis-a-vis India, the same as Nepal. We should settle down without tilting at the windmills. We should live in peace with India as good neighbours. The approach now adopted by both the countries is right. We should stop bomb toting. We would have nothing to fear. In the last few months we have seen : 1. Three Articles in respect of the Education System in Lotastaan which brainwashes its pupils with hatred for Hindus and India. 2. Two or Three Articles confirming that Lotastaan wrongly attacked Jammu & Kashmir in 1947. 3. An Article stating Lotastaan started all the Four Wars. 4. Articles stating Lotastaan lost all the Wars it initiated with India 5. Jinnah demanded 50% Share in the Government, Administration etc. for the Muslim League and the post of Prime Minister as a prime condition to keep India United. 6. Articles about Brainwashing of and totally wrong information to the Lotastaani Public. Is this the revenge that Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee is taking for Riff Raff not Saluting him in Lahore? Pr is the price being extracted for Cricket tour, Rail, Bus, Air and Ferry Services and the Peaces talks? If so then ABV has “Prayoogofied” his Chanakian Vidhi on Riff Raff. Cheers.
Posted by: Viren Feb 17 2004, 10:08 PM
Posted by: Mudy Feb 18 2004, 02:20 AM There is no Plan B. The TINA ('There is no alternative') argument has always been the plea of bankrupt minds. Over the past years, the world could have created an alternative, if its leaders had the capacity and the will to imagine one. K.P.S. GILL The present situation in Pakistan presents an urgent challenge, not only for nations within the South Asian region, but for the entire international community and the leaders of the global war against terrorism. These challenges have been underlined by a continuous succession of disturbing disclosures since 9/11, and by the near complete uncertainty of prospects for the future. Over the past months, the question has been frequently asked by a number of senior government officials and responsible diplomats from several countries: what is to be done with Pakistan? A fundamental transformation is inevitable over the coming years, but is it being facilitated by the near exclusive reliance on the questionable commitment and survival of the country's current dictator, General Pervez Musharraf? It is useful to ask, under the circumstances, is there a 'Plan B' for Pakistan? There appears to be little evidence of any structured alternative even being considered by the 'international community', or any of its constituent nations. The world, it appears, has fallen victim to the seduction of the TINA ('There is no alternative') factor. But the TINA argument has always been the plea of bankrupt minds. Over the past years, the world could have created an alternative, if its leaders had the capacity and the will to imagine one. Such an enterprise at constructing, if not a programme for regime change in Pakistan, at least one for an alternative successor regime (not just a modus vivendi with whichever General grabs the presidency after Musharraf), is critical for a number of reasons. For one, the country's own leadership has proven chronically incompetent, and Pakistan is, to all effects, now being run from the outside: most of its critical decisions in the recent past have been coerced by external pressure. More significantly, the internal dynamics that obtain in Pakistan today will not survive the end of the present year, after which the tensions that already exist within the system will become unbearable. Musharraf, if he sticks to his word, will no longer be the Army Chief after the year-end. Though the new chief would be 'his man', it is not clear how long such loyalties would abide - which is why Musharraf has been extremely reluctant to relinquish the post. In any event, a duality between the President and the Army Chief would lead to further and necessary erosion in Musharraf's authority and would significantly increase political uncertainty in the country (it is useful to recall that General Zia-ul-Haq held on to the post of military chief throughout his Presidency for precisely these reasons). Such uncertainty is already rising, and Musharraf has been immensely weakened over the past months. A dictator's authority is inevitably undermined by determined attempts at assassination, and the two on Musharraf's life last December have deeply damaged him, underlining his vulnerability in the eyes of the Pakistani people, and of his enemies. Ambivalent supporters now find it easier to distance themselves from the President, and political opportunists will be tempted to bring out the long knives. There is a concomitant loss of authority among the masses as well, and this can only worsen over time, as he becomes more isolated within a hardening security bubble, more dependent on selective inputs from a narrow coterie. The loss of authority and growing isolation is already visible in Musharraf's decision to move his residence and military headquarters from Rawalpindi to Islamabad, signalling the raw fact that the President is no longer safe among his own people ......... The degree to which Pakistan threatens global security remains deeply underestimated because of a peculiar characteristic of its transgressions. Despite the great evil it has wrought, there is no single, iconic figure that dominates its offences against the norms of civilization - no 'lunatic' Saddam Hussein, Muammar Qaddafi or Kim Jong Il. It is the entire state apparatus that has internalised terrorism as an instrumentality of state policy, and successive regimes and leaders have pursued the same policies, irrespective of their proclaimed political proclivities. This makes it harder, both to comprehend and to control what Bernard-Henri Levy has described as "the biggest rogue of all rogue states of today… what is taking form there, between Islamabad and Karachi, is a black hole compared to which Saddam Hussein's Baghdad was an obsolete weapons dump." There have been ample warnings, and these have gone unheeded to disastrous effect in the past. It is the tragedy of all nations and their leaderships that they fail to learn until the bodybags come to their own doorsteps; and even then, they learn very slowly. That is why evil triumphs; not because it is stronger, but because we choose to look the other way
Posted by: Mudy Feb 18 2004, 04:50 AM Please help them argue.gif DAY 2: Both sides agree how to talk, Foreign Secys will unveil map today JYOTI MALHOTRA ISLAMABAD, FEBRUARY 17: Pakistan has reiterated that it would be willing to use its ‘‘influence’’ in Kashmir to end terrorism, but that India must also create the conditions which will enable Islamabad to do so. As bureaucrats from both sides wrapped up their deliberations today in the nearby hill resort of Murree, in which a nuclear restraint regime as well as the Kashmir issue are likely to top the reinvented composite dialogue agenda, Pak Foreign Minister Khurshid Mehmood Kasuri told The Indian Express that ‘‘it would be in Pakistan’s interest that Kashmir pacifies once the talks start and there is peace in the Valley.’’ Kasuri was echoing what has widely come to be accepted by a large number of strategic thinkers, people in the Islamabad establishment as well as among Kashmiris. That President Musharraf’s order to ‘‘end the jehad’’ across the Line of Control in the Kashmir valley is for real, that it is already having a salutary effect in that infiltration has come down considerably, as well as the fact that Islamabad is now looking at New Delhi to ‘‘create conditions’’ that will help reinforce its recent order. Kasuri was not willing to be drawn into details of what he would like New Delhi to do, reluctantly pointing out that it was also in India’s interest to ‘‘end human rights violations in the Valley.’’ He said that would have ‘‘an enormous impact’’ on the Pakistani people as well as the large Kashmiri constituency across the country ‘‘which was impossible to ignore.’’ Kasuri said he was very happy with the manner in which the current talks had taken place—Foreign Secretaries Shashank and Riaz Khokhar will wrap up this round tomorrow by announcing time-frames and modalities—and that Pakistan was committed to discussing all issues, ‘‘without full stops and commas.’’ Kasuri added: ‘‘We have to come to grips with reality. We have to stop hurting each other.’’ Meanwhile, it is learnt that a Pakistani proposal to discuss a ‘‘strategic restraint regime’’ in which both sides could also discuss nuclear deterrence has also been placed on the table. Such a proposal is essentially a rewrite of the Lahore 1999 MOU on nuclear CBMs, with the additional proviso that when it is discussed at the Foreign Secretary-level, officials on both sides with an expertise on nuclear affairs, will also attend the meeting. Officials from both sides also declined to comment on moves each of them could make to take forward the ‘‘process’’ of dialogue on Kashmir, saying that this did not form part of the ‘‘substance’’ of the current round of talks. But sources confirmed that Islamabad would very much like New Delhi scale down troops in the valley and at least replace those guarding the LoC with paramilitary forces such as the BSF and the CRPF. In turn, even as New Delhi is, in principle, prepared to look at these suggestions, it would like a complete and guaranteed end to cross-border infiltration. The Foreign Minister’s argument of needing New Delhi’s help ‘‘to resolve Kashmir’’ has been echoed again and again here over the last few days. Analysts and officials have pointed to the ‘‘fundamental change’’ that has been in the making in Pakistan over recent months, comparing this turnaround in Kashmir to the one that Musharraf made on Afghanistan under pressure by the US after 9/11. Mahmud Durrani, a retired major-general involved in the Track II process between India and Pakistan pointed out that India’s ‘‘coercive diplomacy’’ of mobilising its forces on the border on most of 2002, when the average Pakistani lived under the constant war, international pressure after 9/11 as well as the nuclearisation of the sub-continent, were catalysts for persuading Musharraf to call for an end to the Kashmiri jehad. Kasuri admitted that the Pakistani government was in touch ‘‘with all sides’’ in Kashmir, even though it believed that the group led by Geelani was the largest group there, that ‘‘we will nevr sell you, keep you engaged and try and find a solution that is acceptable.’’ In this respect, he said, India should take advantage of the fact that President Musharraf, ‘‘an elected President who happens for another year to be chief of army staff,’’ is in power in Pakistan. Describing it as a ‘‘window of opportunity’’ for India to come to an agreement, Kasuri also hastened to add that he was not ‘‘laying down any time-lines or preconditions, but was only talking common sense.’’
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 18 2004, 04:51 AM Cheers
Posted by: Mudy Feb 18 2004, 05:22 AM
thumbup.gif Wilson John In this season of peace, cricket could become the spoiler
Posted by: Hauma Hamiddha Feb 18 2004, 07:40 AM
It it is best that everyone simply desist from watching this criminal cricket activity. If the whole series is forgotten without being watched it would be the best thing that could happen. The main issue here is that the Pubistanis need something to perk up their jihad. At least beat the hindus and apostates in cricket if not on the maidan-i-jang is their logic. If we perchance do win a match there I greatly fear the players' safety. Remember what happened to Shrikant when we went there long ago?
Posted by: rhytha Feb 18 2004, 09:58 AM
QUOTE (Hauma Hamiddha @ Feb 18 2004, 07:40 AM)
Remember what happened to Shrikant when we went there long ago?
what happend to srikant when we went there a long time ago??
Posted by: Mudy Feb 18 2004, 09:36 PM
Good after checking whether jihadi factory is closed for good or not. Too long for Mushy to survive any way.
Posted by: Mudy Feb 19 2004, 12:44 AM
The enemy within By Najmuddin A. Shaikh In the current furore over the nuclear issue and its fallout not enough attention is being paid to what perhaps lies at the root of the problems that President Pervez Musharraf identified in his speech to the parliament as casting Pakistan in a negative light internationally and as threatening the domestic stability of the country. He had talked of militant operations in Afghanistan, cross-border terrorism in Kashmir, nuclear weapons proliferation and "an impression of our society being intolerant" as being the four allegations that Pakistan had to contend with. The president has since then acknowledged that while everything that is happening in Afghanistan is not attributable to cross border activity, there is also no doubt that certain things are happening in Afghanistan because of the people crossing over from the Pakistan side. Prior to this public acknowledgement action, on the military and political front had already been taken in hand to cleanse the tribal areas and the particularly troubled Waziristan area of Al Qaeda adherents. The American general in charge of American forces in Afghanistan is making monthly trips to Pakistan, not, as some extremists like to suggest, to pave the way for American military operations on Pakistan soil but to ensure better intelligence sharing and better coordination in military and political operations along the Afghan-Pakistan border. The optimistic predictions now being made by American commanders in Afghanistan that Osama bin Laden will be captured by the end of the year - an imperative for Bush's re-election prospects - flow from the expectation that better coordination will ensure that Osama and his followers are denied asylum and safe shelter on either side of the border and despite the relative inaccessibility of the remote reaches of the honeycomb of caves, they cannot remain undetected for much longer if they are indeed in the area. Many American observers believe that Pakistan cooperation has improved following the adoption of the new Afghan constitution and the restoration in that document of some measure of equity with regard to the distribution of power between the various ethnic groups in Afghanistan. I would prefer to believe that intelligence coordination has improved and we have been able, finally, to put our act together. What happens within Afghanistan is for the Afghans to decide and we must get our own people used to the idea that they cannot be the guardians of the interest of one or other group in that country. On the Indian front the unilateral declaration of a ceasefire on the LoC, its acceptance by India and the extension of the ceasefire, at Indian instance, to the Siachen area relates directly to the question of cross-LoC infiltration and the Indian charge of cross-border terrorism. Separately the landmark agreements reached at the Saarc summit have helped to create the atmosphere in which encouraging progress could and has been made on the resumption of the dialogue and on commencing the process of resolving bilateral problems. It is accepted in Islamabad that a long and difficult process lies ahead; that both governments will have to be wary of domestic pressure groups which for reasons of their own may seek to derail the process, that even while substantive progress in the formal dialogue may have to wait upon the completion of the Indian elections, further CBMs will have to be initiated; and that all steps will need to be taken to ensure that the current relatively relaxed ambience is not spoilt by intemperate statements. An encouraging factor perhaps is that all parties in India seem to realize that seeking better ties with Pakistan is a vote-getter in the political climate that currently prevails in India. Another encouraging fact or is the relative restraint exercised by the government and other Indian politicians on the A.Q. Khan affair. On the nuclear issue it can be anticipated that every day will bring new stories on the extent of the proliferation. The western media will also continue to cast doubt on the claim that Dr. A. Q. Khan acted entirely on his own. Pakistan's efforts to convince the world otherwise and to suggest that the investigation in the West should also focus on the western companies and individuals who formed part of the proliferation under ground or on identifying the nationality of the scientists working on these programmes may continue. This may not succeed but happily the principal preoccupation at the official level in the western world remains not on painting Pakistan as the villain of the piece but on eliminating the proliferation underworld operators and the possibility of further leaks from Pakistan. Pakistan will perforce cooperate recognizing that it needs to take resolute and comprehensive actions to restore a measure of credibility and to pre-empt any official requests for investigations about the degree of official involvement in the past proliferation practices of Dr. A. Q. Khan. It would seem, therefore, that in greater or smaller measure steps are being taken to tackle these identified issues in substantive terms. On the issue of extremism, or as the president put it "an impression of our society being intolerant" the indicators, to say the least, are mixed. The president admitted in an interview to the NY Times published on February 9 that little has happened. According to the Times report, "When he spoke about his own efforts to combat fundamentalism in Pakistan, he conceded that some areas, like reform of hard-line Islamic religious schools, or madressahs, had proceeded slowly." You must understand, I don't have a magic wand," he said. He said his biggest problem was getting the lower rungs of Pakistan's government to function. "There is really a very big gap between policy formulation and policy implementation," he said. "For a developing country, this gap is very large." On the other hand the PML(Q) spokesman has been quoted as saying that the MMA is now to be inducted into the government. If this happens, the problems of reforming the Madressahs or of changing the Blasphemy laws will be compounded. For the MMA it is an article of faith that the Madressahs must not be subject to scrutiny, nor should they be coerced into adopting a more comprehensive curriculum. It will not then be merely a problem of a gap between formulation and implementation Addressing a women's conference the president talked about initiating a debate on the Hudood Ordinance but such a debate is hardly likely to occur unless the ministry of religious affairs or some other government organ gives it official sanction and perhaps funds the efforts of one or other women's NGO in this direction. The MMA is not the party that will as part of the government permit, leave alone, encourage such a debate. The large majority of Pakistanis who oppose the narrow, intolerant interpretation of Islam and the misinterpretation of the ideology of Pakistan put forward by the religious parties have taken heart, at least since 2001, from the president's public statements that seemed to show that he and his government shared this sentiment. In a series of statements quoted below, the President made clear his personal views and hopefully those of his government. "Islam is vibrant and forward-looking. But more than that, we claim it is the most tolerant of faiths. How does the world judge our claim? It looks upon us as terrorists. We have been killing each other. And now we want to spread that violence and terror abroad. Naturally, the world regards us as terrorists."(President at Seerat Conference on 050601) "There is no external threat which can do any harm to us. We are capable of handling any external threat. The enemy lies within and this element of religious and sectarianism may pull us down." (President speech on 041003). "Increasingly, our image is being shaped by the extremist actions of a tiny minority that exists on the fringes of Muslim societies...... "We must not allow them to hijack our religion, to preach religious and sectarian hatred with impunity, and to tarnish the image of Islam and Muslims. (President's speech at OIC summit October 16, 2003) There is no doubt that the evils of extremism engendered by intolerant and narrow vision of Islam was foisted on us by a ruler who regarded this as the only means of securing a measure of public support and by the mistaken notion that resistance to the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan required an appeal to Islamic Jihad rather than to Afghan nationalism. The latter assumption on the part of the anti Soviet coalition led to the import into Pakistan and Afghanistan of extremists from all parts of the Islamic world and the setting up of the politically oriented Madressahs that have now become the bane of our existence. But all this came to an end more than 15 years ago. Much should have been done to rectify the damage done during the dictator's rule and the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. This did not happen. The armed forces did nothing to persuade the politicians who theoretically wielded power to curb the extremists. There was in fact the well founded fear that Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif was planning to use the Senate majority he hoped to achieve in March 2000 to declare himself "Amir-ul-Momineen and to introduce his version of the Nizam-i-Mustafa. Many Pakistanis welcomed his overthrow in October '99 primarily because of the fear of what he had planned for the country. It has now been almost three years since the president made his ground-breaking speech at the Seerat conference. Yet the promise of returning Pakistan to the moderate polity envisioned by our Founding Fathers remains unrealized. There is an opportunity provided by the current international environment as much as there is by the impatience of the silent majority of Pakistanis. We cannot afford to miss the opportunity. The writer is a former foreign secretary of Pakistan.
Posted by: Mudy Feb 19 2004, 10:20 AM
liar.gif Per capita income to touch $600, claims Shaukat Fareed calls for incentives to promote corporatisation process By Nadeem Malik ISLAMABAD: Per capita income would rise from $492 to $600 during the current fiscal year, claimed Finance Minister Shaukat Aziz here on Wednesday at a ceremony organized by the Invest Forum. The large inflow of remittances to the tune of $4.24 billion helped GDP per capita to increase from $420 to $492 last year. The continued momentum of workers’ remittances is expected to positively influence the per capita level during 2003-04. According to the official data, remittances totalled $2.26 billion during July-January period of the current fiscal year, against $2.53 billion of the first seven months of 2002-03. Almost one-third of the population lives below the poverty line in the country, despite some elusive macroeconomic data on the external sector. Shaukat said overall GDP growth is also expected to cross the 5.3 per cent target for the year, and hoped that the country would achieve 6 per cent growth next year, a level it consistently maintained between 1960-90. However, the political and economic turmoil during the 90s tapered off to little above 4 per cent. Aziz said 35 per cent growth in the machinery imports and rapid growth in the large-scale manufacturing sector (13.56 per cent in the 39 selected industries during the first half) indicates the pick up in the economic activity. liar.gif
Posted by: Krishna Feb 19 2004, 10:25 AM
QUOTE (Mudy @ Feb 18 2004, 10:50 PM)
liar.gif Per capita income to touch $600, claims Shaukat Fareed calls for incentives to promote corporatisation process By Nadeem Malik ISLAMABAD: Per capita income would rise from $492 to $600 during the current fiscal year, claimed Finance Minister Shaukat Aziz here on Wednesday at a ceremony organized by the Invest Forum. The large inflow of remittances to the tune of $4.24 billion helped GDP per capita to increase from $420 to $492 last year.
U have a better chance of winning the lottery than that! laugh.gif laugh.gif pakee.gif
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 19 2004, 04:52 PM
Two interesting Articles from the Financial Times : Will post both in full if required Cheers
Posted by: Mudy Feb 20 2004, 05:36 AM By M.V.Kamath The trouble with Pakistan has always been the arrogance of its elite, its dream of wanting the world to accept it as on par with India. The arrogance stemmed from its deeply-felt belief that Hindus could easily be subjugated, that they had been first under Muslim and later British rule and that they had only to be threatened for time to succumb. That belief was once given expression to by Ayub Kahn who said that one Pakistani soldier was equal to a dozen Indian sepoys. He was not joking. He sincerely believed in that dictum. And it was that which led Pakistan to fight three wars with India only to lose all three. In every department of knowledge India was out-distancing Pakistan and it was when India took the lead in nuclear armament that Zulfikar Ali Bhutto proclaimed that Pakistan would compete with India in this field too even if it took a thousand years to achieve that object and Pakistanis were forced to eat grass tell then. Such was the hatred of India among the Pakistani elite. The sole and unerring aim of the Pakistani elite was to acquire parity with India. If India became a nuclear power it was felt that Pakistan necessarily had to become one and possibly a bigger one at that. And nothing would be allowed to come in its way of acquiring status even if, as Bhutto said, Pakistanis had to eat grass. The Americans did not like that one bit. Indeed, during a visit to Lahore in August 1976, then US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger offered Bhutto material and political support if Pakistan were to abandon its plan to acquire nuclear weaponry. Bhutto wouldn't listen, Kissinger had then to warn him that if he wouldn't listen "we can destabilise your government and make a horrible example of you". This is precisely what the US Government must have told Musharraf as well. This time Musharraf had to give in. He plainly had no alternative. But despite what Kissinger said, there was a powerful section in the US State Department which hated India with as much passion as did Pakistan and in the end if was this faction that had the last word. This faction was willing to pamper Pakistan as much as possible, so long as Islamabad was willing to obey its dictates in other fields. Thus Washington wanted Pakistan's help to get back door entry into Beijing. Gen. Haq was only too willing to oblige. When Washington wanted Pakistan's help to get the Soviet Union out of Afghanistan that help too was made available for the mere asking. There was nothing that Pakistan was unwilling to do, as long as it had the freedom to pursue its nuclear dreams. Hatred of India was all. It is not that the United States was ignorant of what Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan was up to. Every move of his was carefully watched. Between Pakistan and the US there was tacit blackmail. It suited one faction in the US State Department to see Pakistan checkmate India. It met two vital needs of the US: One was to keep India down; another was to use Pakistan to needle the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. So Abdul Qadeer was given a free hand. Apart from wishing to outdo India, Pakistan had another dream: to lead the Islamic world from Morocco in the west to Afghanistan in the east and to set up a contemporary Ottaman Empire. To possess nuclear arms, thus, was a must. And financial support came from Saudi Arabia. This too was only too well known in Washington which chose to turn a blind eye. Pakistan was all too blatant about its ambitions. The Kahuta Research Laboratory over which Dr Khan presided and was not accountable to anyone was only one aspect of Pakistan's nuclear ambitions. Year after year Islamabad would hold international workshops on such subjects as "Vibrations in Rapidly Rotating Machinery" indicating that Pakistan was in the know of all that need to be known in the matter of manufacturing nuclear bombs. Simultaneously Dr Khan and his cohorts would publish a number of papers on the subject and only the truly dumb would not have understood their meaning. And during all this time Dr Khan had the full support not only of the civilian rulers like Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, he had even the more solid backing of the Pakistan Armed Forces and its leaders like Gen. Mirza Aslam Beg and Gen. Jehangir Karamat. Dr Khan was not accountable to anybody nor were his expenditures ever audited. He had a free hand. He had become a national icon, the man who was thumbing his nose at India. He was above law. There were two other Islamic countries which harboured ambitions similar to that of Bhutto, namely Libya and Iran. These were freely provided with technical information on development of nuclear bombs. How much Dr Khan made in the process, finance-wise and how much the corrupt Pakistan Generals too made, is anybody's guess. At one point in time when India had acquired technological know-how to make missiles, the Generals were agreeable to sell nuclear secrets to North Korea in exchange for Korean-made missiles. Indeed General Karamat himself visited North Korea in 1997 to strike a deal with Pyongyang. All this was known to Washington which, for its own reasons, decided to keep quiet. But the mastermind behind all these transactions was Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan, as Lt Gen Khalid Kidwai, Commander of Pakistan's Strategic Planning and Development Cell was to reveal to the Pakistan media. But behind Dr Khan was the hand of the Pakistani Armed Forces Establishment. It was quite well known to the US that Dr Khan had visited North Korea 13 times in five years. Such visits can't be kept a secret for long. The truth had to come out some time. It has come out now. And the western world is furious. What seems certain is that the US Government deliberately leaked out the information of Pakistani plans to leak nuclear technology to Iran and Libya to the New York Times and Washington Post. When these two papers published long articles of Pakistani perfidy, the cat was finally out of the bag. Reports suggest that both Secretary of State Powell and his understudy threatened Musharraf that if he doesn't get rid of Dr Khan he may have to pay very dearly for his disobedience. So a plan was hatched in Islamabad. Sacking Dr Khan who had become a national icon would have invited fundamentalist wrath. So, Dr Khan had to be persuaded to admit to trafficking in sales of nuclear technology. He was then to be pardoned in an excessive show of mercy. Musharraf went to the extent of saying that Dr Khan could retain his ill-gotten wealth. That would shut his mouth. For reports were going the rounds that if he was punished Dr Khan would spill the beans on all the Pakistani Generals who had been privy to his activities. That would have included Musharraf himself. As of the moment Musharraf has barely saved himself and his reputation. But overnight as it were Pakistan has been shorn of its nuclear capabilities. There are reports that US forces have all but taken over all of Pakistan's nuclear capabilities which now are under American custody. That robs Musharraf of his one strong bargaining point with India on the Kashmir issue. He will now have to give in to India, whether he likes it or not. Scared that his country may suffer the same fate as Saddam Hussain's Iraq, Libya's Col. Gaddafi has already capitulated to the US. It is now Musharraf's turn to capitulate fully to Washington or face consequences such as Henry Kissinger threatened Bhutto with. That could be either dethronement or death. When the US gets mad it stops at nothing as Gen. Huq must have realised as he faced death in a plane accident. But what next? One must go back to October 1981 when The Economist (London) published an article by a former lieutenant of Bhutto, Mustafa Khar. In that four-page article Khar advised the then Pakistani regime against becoming a total satellite of the United States while suggesting a long-term deal with India. As was noted in The Future of Pakistan (page 44): "Khar's article dismissed any reliance on the Muslim world as a utopian dream, attacked a pact with the USSR as unrealistic and argued that only India could guarantee the present frontiers of Pakistan. These views, as Khar himself noted, were remarkable for a Punjab politician. The point is, however, they did not fall from the sky. They represent the thinking of an important layer of policy-makers in the United States and also inside the Pakistani civil service. Khar presented his option as a way of preventing total dependence on the United States..." Could Musharraf possibly be thinking along these lines? Consider the following: Once, Pakistan has now to give up all hope of building an Islamic Bomb for exclusive use of Islamic countries. Two, just as Libya has capitulated, so has Musharraf to capitulate as well, if he wants to survive. Three, only India can save Pakistan from further ignominy. But for that to happen Pakistan has to give up its dreams of taking over Kashmir. On the contrary it has to make its peace with India. Given the choice between remaining a slave of the United States and making peace with India, even the fundamentalists of Pakistan would prefer the second alternative. For Pakistan the game is up. It allowed itself to be used by the United States all these years in the hope that it would be recognised as a nation on par with India. That dream now lies shattered. Islamabad has come to realise that all these years it was taken for a ride, though it was through its own willingness. For Pakistan those rosy days are now over. It is acknowledged that it is India that is the major power in South Asia. The US has made its choice and willy nilly Pakistan has to accept it. Pakistan's dream of being accepted on par with India has turned into a nightmare. For it the honourable course is to accept Indian as Big Brother to save itself from further disenchantment. What Kissinger threatened he will do to Bhutto, Powell has now done to Musharraf. And deservedly, too. That is why it is not unreasonable to expect that Musharraf will come to terms with India and that, too, on Indian terms. One can only hope that this time India will not allow itself to be fooled as it did in Simla. The days when Pakistan could manipulate the US to suit its plans are over. For its own good it must make peace with India. And who knows but that emerging in the not too distant future will be a Confederation of India and Pakistan?
Posted by: Kaushal Feb 20 2004, 05:43 AM
As always MV Kamath is right on the money.
Posted by: rajesh_g Feb 20 2004, 06:33 AM
And who knows but that emerging in the not too distant future will be a Confederation of India and Pakistan?
Kaushal, What are your thoughts on this ?? Regards..
Posted by: Kaushal Feb 20 2004, 01:22 PM
A confederation between India and TSP is problematic for the foreseeable future and can only be regarded as a distant prospect.In fact i would not be surprised if a significant proportion of the Paki intelligentsia support such a move. But that is precisely the point. The reasons for which such a confederation is attractive to TSP are the same reasons for which it is not attractive to India. First things first. let us have a few decades of peace between the 2 countries and gain a minimum modicum of trust. And then we can go further. A confederation is not high on list of priorites for the subcontinent. Before that would happen I would like to see a confederation of India , SriLanka and Nepal and a greater outreach to SE Asia.
Posted by: Viren Feb 20 2004, 09:42 PM
QUOTE (Kaushal @ Feb 20 2004, 03:52 AM)
A confederation is not high on list of priorites for the subcontinent.
If I remember correctly, ABV has already talked about single currency, linking economy and ease on trade and travel. blink.gif
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 20 2004, 11:04 PM thumbup.gif ISLAMABAD: Pakistan has expressed its belief that India may agree to discuss a strategic nuclear restraint regime with it as the two countries are set to hold parleys on a host of confidence building measures as part of the eight-point composite dialogue agenda, chalked out at the just-concluded "There is a possibility they ( would show interest in the subject because they do realise the dangers involved if there is no restraint regime between the two countries at all," Foreign Office spokesman Masood Khan told a seminar on India-Pakistan relations here on Thursday. Khan said he did not think India would reject the strategic nuclear restraint regime proposal out of hand. Emphasizing the importance of such a regime, Khan said accidental and unauthorised use of nuclear weapons presented a scary scenario for the two countries. He also said the two sides had some history of discussing a restraint regime and making some progress. About the future talks, he said it was premature to comment what the two would discuss but "we have conventional wisdom behind us". As per the agreed roadmap, the nuclear CBMs would be discussed along with and peace and security issues when they meet in May or June this year. Before that expert-level talks on nuclear CBMs would be held in May. Lotastaanis asking for Nuclear Restraint – Methinks Lotastaan must be Nuke Nude Cheers cheers.gif
Posted by: Viren Feb 20 2004, 11:11 PM
QUOTE (Peregrine @ Feb 20 2004, 01:34 PM)
"There is a possibility they ( would show interest in the subject because they do realise the dangers involved if there is no restraint regime between the two countries at all," Foreign Office spokesman Masood Khan told a seminar on India-Pakistan relations here on Thursday.
Yeh Lo! This very FO of Lottastan had refused India's offer of no-first use back in '99. pakee.gif Here's the related statement :
Posted by: Mudy Feb 21 2004, 12:05 AM
Pakistani Linked to Illegal Exports Has Ties to Military By DAVID ROHDE Published: February 20, 2004 ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, Feb. 19 — A Pakistani businessman who has been linked to the illegal export from the United States to Pakistan of high-speed switches has longstanding ties to the country's powerful military, according to documents filed in an American court and interviews here. The switches can be used as triggers for nuclear weapons. Humayun Khan, the Pakistani businessman whose office address was the final destination for the shipment last fall of 66 triggers, confirmed in interviews that he and his father had been suppliers of equipment and technology to the Pakistani military for the last 20 years. Mr. Khan insisted that he had not been involved in the effort to smuggle the American-made triggers to Pakistan. "I know it's my address, and everything is pointing to me and my company," Mr. Khan said as he sat in the offices here of his company, Pakland P.M.E. "Frankly speaking, if I want to deal in these things, I would never be so stupid as to use my own company." But documents Mr. Khan presented to bolster his argument as well as court papers filed in Washington provide evidence that he did business supplying the Pakistani military with restricted technology. The court documents are part of the case against Asher Karni, an Israeli businessman living in South Africa who was arrested on Jan. 1 by federal agents in Denver and charged with illegally exporting the sophisticated switches to Pakistan by way of South Africa. Mr. Karni is now in custody awaiting trial in Washington, D.C. Mr. Karni told the American manufacturer of the switches, PerkinElmer Optoelectronics of Salem, Mass., that they would be sent to hospitals in South Africa for use in treating kidney stones. American law enforcement officials said "voluminous" e-mails to Mr. Karni detail Mr. Khan's repeated requests between June and September 2003 for the trigger switches. Before the switches were sent out of the United States to Mr. Karni's company in South Africa, they were disabled at the request of federal law enforcement officials, and became part of a sting operation. In other e-mail messages in the court records, Mr. Khan wrote repeatedly to Mr. Karni between May 29 and June 16 of last year to inquire whether he could purchase infrared target detectors for Pakistani Air Force fighter missiles. The United States bars the sale of such equipment to Pakistan without American government approval. Mr. Khan himself produced letters showing that he tried to buy oscilloscopes, magnetometers, telemetry systems and airplane guidance systems from American companies in 2002 and 2003. He said all the devices were for civilian companies. American nonproliferation experts said the items Mr. Khan sought to buy also had military applications. President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan has spent the last month trying to quell a nuclear proliferation scandal involving Abdul Qadeer Khan, a scientist who is called the founder of the country's nuclear weapons program. On Feb. 4, Dr. Khan, who is no relation to Humayun Khan, confessed to providing nuclear technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea for more than a decade. A day later, General Musharraf granted a full pardon to the scientist. He said no other military or government official had been involved in the proliferation. He later declared that his government had stopped all Pakistani nuclear hardware smuggling when it removed Dr. Khan from his post in March 2001. Pakistani officials declined to comment on the Karni case and the trigger devices. Syed Anwar Mahmood, the government's information secretary, said Thursday that Pakistan had received no official notification of the investigation of Mr. Karni. "The concerned people say they can't comment on it because they have not been approached officially on it," Mr. Mahmood said. In interviews Humayun Khan said his company supplied civilian companies and equipped college and high school chemistry, physics and television repair laboratories. He said he purchased equipment for the Pakistani military only occasionally. Mr. Khan produced a letter from an Islamabad construction company asking that he purchase a sophisticated oscilloscope made by Tektronix, a Beaverton, Ore., company. The Pakistani construction company said it had never issued such a letter. Mr. Khan also provided a letter from a television company that he said had requested another Tektronix oscilloscope. An official from the television company said he could not remember placing such an order, and did not respond to subsequent requests for comment. Mr. Khan said that his company employed only four people and that military supplies made up only a small part of his business. At different points he suggested that a former employee, smugglers or his brother, a bitter business rival, might have framed him. In a telephone interview, his brother, Faisal Khan, denied any role in the case. Mr. Khan said he knew Mr. Karni as a supplier of electronic equipment, and had made contact with him to buy several pieces of American-made equipment that were not dual-use items — that is, that could not be used to make nuclear or other weapons. American investigators have said the high-speed switches were ordered for a group called AJKMC Lithography Aid Society. Mr. Khan showed a letter from the group dated Dec. 27, 2003, saying the switches had gone to hospitals in Pakistan and Sri Lanka. But the group's letterhead listed its address as Humayun Khan's office in Islamabad. Mr. Khan said he could not explain why the group had used his office address. He said did not know who they were, and had had contact with the group only by e-mail. He said his e-mail records had been destroyed the day before by a computer virus. Alisha Goff, a spokeswoman for Tektronix, said that Mr. Khan was an independent distributor in Pakistan for the company and that all shipments made to his company had been approved by the Department of Commerce. She said most of the company's customers in Pakistan were schools and telecommunications companies. She said all shipments to Mr. Khan's company had been stopped, pending the criminal investigation into the trigger case. Eric Lichtblau contributed reporting from Washington for this article
Posted by: Mudy Feb 21 2004, 12:25 AM
In some fora there is a voting on - What Bond Paki- The Bond of Nationalism [ 6 ] [23.08%] Flush.gif The bond of Patriotism [ 5 ] [19.23%] ROTFL.gif THE BOND OF ISLAM [ 15 ] [57.69%] Total Votes: 26
Posted by: Hauma Hamiddha Feb 21 2004, 01:04 AM
QUOTE (Peregrine @ Feb 20 2004, 12:34 PM)
Lotastaanis asking for Nuclear Restraint – Methinks Lotastaan must be Nuke Nude
Peregrine, I would like to believe that view point too and as you say when they call for restraint it may mean nuke-nudity. The tone generally supports the possibility that the nukes are attentuated. However, we should also concede the possibility that in reality it is not total loss of nukes, but the nukes have come under US control and can be used only under Uncle's watchful supervision. So we may need to better understand what designs Sammy has for us.
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 21 2004, 04:32 AM
Hauma Hamiddha, This raises the question : Can the USA be comfortable in having the Lotastaani Nukes under its control but in Lotastaani Custody? If in Lotastaani custody then despite all USA’s controls the Nukes could well find their way into Terrorists’, like the Al Qaeeda’s, hands. The USA’s requirements of India is unfettered access to the American MNC’s be they peddle grain or fast food + drink or other domestic products like toothpaste and soap. In addition they would want India to buy Boeing Passenger planes and may be even American Defence Goods. Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 21 2004, 11:12 PM RAWALPINDI, Feb 20: Pakistan People's Party chairperson Benazir Bhutto and Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz Quaid Nawaz Sharif will return soon. This was stated by Alliance for Restoration of Democracy leaders while speaking at a protest camp set up by the People's Youth Organization at Chandni Chowk on Thursday. Those who spoke at the protest camp included Jehangir Badar, Zumarad Khan, Akhtar Mehmood and Chaudhry Maqbool. Aagay Aagay Dekhiye Hota Hai Kya Cheers
Posted by: Mudy Feb 22 2004, 12:22 AM
Bin Laden between a hammer and a hard place By Syed Saleem Shahzad ....... Another crucial side to the operation is an overhaul within the Pakistani army "to purge the elements allegedly sexed up with al-Qaeda and the Taliban", the source said, referring to those elements in the army and the intelligence services with sympathies for these groups. The shakeup follows the recent arrest of several militants of Uzbek origin, as well as an Arab named Waleed bin Azmi, in a raid in the eastern district of the Pakistani port city of Karachi. About a dozen militants managed to escape, while the captured ones were handed over to agents of the US Federal Bureau of Investigation, who found during their interrogations that the operators had been besieged near Wana, South Waziristan, but they were given an escape route, allegedly by officers of the Pakistan armed forces. The operators fled to Karachi, but were rounded up thanks to the local police's intelligence network. The US presented these facts to Pakistani President General Pervez Musharraf - not the first time such incidents have been reported, but this time with the demands that the officers be taken to task and that US officials be allowed to take part in the inquiries to understand better the nexus between Islamists and officers in the Pakistani army. Several officers are now expected to be arrested. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 22 2004, 04:14 PM
Hauma Hamiddha : An Interesting Article : clap.gif The short-range, single-stage, solid propellant Haft has a range of less than 100 kilometres and a maximum payload capacity of 500 kilograms. The Shaheen series of solid-propellant missiles have a range of between 300 kilometres to 2,000 kilometres. Ghauri III may have a range of up to 3,000 kilometres (Abdali and Ghaznavi may have a longer range but Pakistan has no known submarine suitable for firing missiles with nuclear payloads). If the credibility of our nuclear deterrent really depends on airdropped atomic weapons then we have 60 A-5s and 32 F-16s. The A-5s have a combat radius of 600 kilometres and a maximum payload capacity of 1,000 kilograms. The F-16s practicing ‘toss bombing’ techniques have a combat radius of 850 kilometres and a payload capacity of 2,000 kilograms. Washington D.C. is 12,006 nautical kilometres from Chagai. New York is 11,697 nautical kilometres from PAF Samungli. Los Angeles is 8,355 nautical kilometres from Dalbandin Air Force base. Conclusion: Our entire arsenal is India-specific. Why is America then targeting our Bomb? Peep into Pakistan through American eyes. On 5 July 1997, General Mohammad Zia-ul-Haq toppled Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto in a bloodless coup. Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was hanged on 4 April 1979. A military general sacked Prime Minister Mohammad Khan Junejo. General Mohammad Zia-ul-Haq died a violent death. Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif are both in exile. General Pervez Musharraf has been coming out a survivor through a series of assassination attempts. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was in Rawalpindi. Ramzi bin al-Shibh, the organizer of the Hamburg Cell, was caught in Karachi. Abu Zubaydah was grabbed in Faislabad. Waleed bin Attash, the man accused of masterminding the bombing of the USS Cole, was captured from a Karachi suburb. Then came the mother of all terror threats. Dr A.Q. Khan supplied weapons of mass destruction to Bush’s ‘axis of evil’. We have been playing with snakes for too long. How dose the US Department of State now defines Pakistan? An ally in the ‘war on terrorism’. A politically instable ally with a landmass of 778,720 kilometres, socially explosive with a "rare mix of terror, fundamentalism and nuclear weapons-the scariest place on earth." There once was a snake charmer named "God-saved". According to some estimates God-saved caught some 10,000 snakes in his lifetime by using no more than a forked stick to pin the snake down which was then picked up by bare hand (in the late 19th century, at the London Zoo, live snakes were fed to larger more exotic ones housed in the Zoo). A regular zoo-goer asked him his name. "God-saved" he replied. "And profession". "I charm snakes" replied God-saved. "God won’t save you for very long" came the response from the zoo-goer. India has enough weapons-grade plutonium for a hundred bombs and six unsafe guarded heavy-water nuclear power plants. According to other reports "a force of 60 warheads carried on 20 Agnis, 20 Privthis and the rest on aircraft" is in place (the two-stage Agni is based on Soviet and German technology while the Privthi is based on U.S. Scout). India currently operates pilot-scale centrifuge as well as laser uranium enrichment plants. None of these facilities are subject to international non-proliferation safeguards. Israel’s Dimona nuclear reactor has been the source of plutonium for nuclear weapons. Israel’s inventory includes warheads for mobile Jericho-1 and Jericho-2 missiles. Some published estimates put Israel’s stockpile at 400 nuclear weapons. Christians have the Bomb. So do Hindus and Jews. Why is our Bomb such a threat? Republic of India is a stable federal republic with an effective bicameral parliament. Medinat Yisra’el is a stable parliamentary democracy where a unicameral Kneset is in full control. Islamic Republic of Pakistan is politically instable, socially volatile with no institution in control of anything. We have already indicted ourselves. Britain, Germany, Switzerland, Malaysia, Sri Lanka or Turkey is not under trial. An indicted serial killer submitting his only defence that other murderers are on the loose is bound to be lynched. We say that personal greed was behind proliferation. Dr Mohammed ElBaradei says, "Dr. Khan was not working alone. Dr. Khan was part of a process." That process indeed was our governing ideology behind proliferation. We don’t see ourselves the way the world sees us. We have a hero. The world considers our hero to be the "criminal of the century".We have convinced 140 million that the Bomb is the best thing that has happened to us. Some 5 billion people outside Pakistan feel that the Bomb is the worst thing that happened to Pakistan. We see ourselves as the architect of a nuclearised Ummah. The world sees us as the most dangerous proliferator in history. We think that our Bomb has brought us prestige and influence. The world sees our nuclear technology as "the greatest threat before humanity today." The real question for the world outside Pakistan is if a country that cannot safeguard its nuclear arsenal were allowed to possess such dangerous technology. Our Bomb, in effect, is not being targeted. It is our ideology of proliferation that is being challenged by the world. Our Bomb is not being targeted. It is our instability that is under scrutiny. It is the way we run our politics that is making us ineligible from becoming part of the nuclear club. It is the way our leaders run the affairs of our state that, in America’s eyes, disqualifies us from membership to the nuclear club. Possibly the Lotastaani people are being prepared for the Real News to break out i.e. Lotastaan is Nuke Nude Cheers
Posted by: arindam Feb 22 2004, 09:33 PM
QUOTE (Kaushal @ Feb 20 2004, 05:43 AM)
As always MV Kamath is right on the money.
As always MV Kamath is right on the money.
I actually disagree with Kamath on this. I do not believe that Musharraf has turned over a new leaf - I believe that he's just buying as much as he can, before the Nov elections in the US. Here're some sets of things that have led me to this position: 1. In the last week, Saleem Shehzad has reported that there is unrest amongst the army corps commanders, about Musharraf diluting the "kashmir cause". Musharraf to pacify, the most promising nexxt COAS candidate, suggested that unless India responds favorably to "Pakistani peace initiatives", he will restart terrosim in Kashmir with new vigor, this summer. 2. So, what is Muisharraf's position - according to the Friday Times, Musharraf has been going around negotiating with his terrorist brethren (LeT, Hizbull etc.) to accept the Chenab plan. So, the Chenab plan, which envisions the valley going to Pakistan is Pakistan's minimalist position - I'm not saying that he'll get this, but these are not India's terms. 3. During the just concluded meeting in Islamabad between India and Pakistan, on each day a PDP politician was assasinated in Kashmir. This is not easy and requires planning, since most of these politiocians have fairly good protection these days. Clearly, Pakistan was using terrorim to send a message to India - so, no change in using terrorism as an integral part of state policy by pakistan. 4. Within an hour or two of the conclusion of the above mentioned confab, Hafeez Sayeed held a open meeting in an open field right in the middle of Islamabad (in one of its most posh areas, according to Amy Waldman of Wash Post), promoting jihad against India to a large crowd of jihadis - no action taken. 5. In the last two months, as reported by Pioneer, HT and Asia Times, Musharraf has strengthened both infiltration activities into Gujarat, as well as the organization of Islamist terrorist groups taking action against India in the North East. Islamic Chattra Shibir, ISI and Pakistani army proxxy groups, have strengthened the organization and focus of these groups, just in the last 2 months. 6. If you neglect the statements of politicians just before an upcoming election and focus on statements made by Kashmiri activists from PoK and also the Indian army, we know that Pakistan has moved its camps to PoK and has not dismantled them. Neither have any key terrorist leaders of Pakistani terrorist groups (such as LeT) been arrested, even though LeT activists been caught trying to effect blasts during Republic Day and recently at the Delhi airport. The reason I mention LeT, is that it is perhaps the group that is almost completely integrated with the Pakistani army. 7. In spite of the fact that, Musharraf "banned" donations to terrorist groups yet again this Eid, the results have been far different. Friday Times, reports that the collection of donations this year, exceeds last year's in spite of the ban. The ban it would seem was meant for the consumption of the foreign press. I have seen nothing specific in actions, that would tell me that Musharraf has changed his position significantly - my point is that he cannot do so, given the nature of the Pakistani army and Pakistani society. Pakistan still insists on holding the gun of terrprism against India, to try and get its way against India - however, misplaced this thinking may be. Just my two cents.
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 23 2004, 02:26 AM Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 23 2004, 04:40 AM BRUSSELS: Western defence allies have agreed to include India and Pakistan in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation Partnership for Peace (Nato PFP) after concerted persuasion by the US. The arrangement would allow the nuclear rivals to consult the alliance of 19 Western states (Nato) in the event of direct threat to their internal and external security, a credible defence source in Brussels told The News. The Nato PFP is the best practical mode of preparation for states interested in becoming Nato members; however, participation in the PFP does not guarantee any entry into Nato. For those countries that do not aspire to Nato membership, PFP provides a primary link to the alliance. The US diplomats and Nato leaders, the source indicated, would soon initiate structured discussions with New Delhi and Islamabad on the prospects of Pakistan and India’s inclusion in the Nato PFP. Nato’s discussions with Moscow on this issue are already in progress, the source said. Several Islamic countries including Qatar, Jordan, Kuwait, Egypt and Tunisia have already conveyed to Nato headquarters in Brussels, their intentions to join the defence alliance, while seven countries - Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia - are expected to join Nato by the time of the alliance’s next Summit in May 2004. These countries have already demonstrated their willingness and ability to meet the political, legal and military obligations and commitments of Nato membership, the source said. Movers and shakers at the alliance’s headquarters in Brussels want to establish an effective Nato-Pakistan nexus in any form because of Islamabad’s excellent performance in several international peace operations. The Nato plans to take control of several international military operations under UN mandate and Pakistan, according to the source, is seen as a major potential contributor to such future operations. With its ever-expanding role in Afghanistan, the Nato plans to go into Iraq this summer, the source said. The route of Nato Partnership for Peace (PFP) was introduced as a gateway for access to the defence alliance after the end of the Cold War. Some countries out of those who had joined the PFP in 1990’s are set to become full members of the Nato. The central organs of the Partnership For Peace (PFP) are the Steering Committee at Nato Headquarters and a planning organ, the Partnership Coordination Cell, at Mons, Belgium (at the same location as Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe). The Nato has been a Euro-centric institution for 55 years. The defence alliance wants to change its geographic focus with the change of time. Military sources in Brussels say that many important members in the Nato, including the US want to make an expanded Nato the military arm of the United Nations. To achieve this agenda the Nato is endeavouring to get the muscles required for this gargantuan task. "The Nato leaders believe that such muscles can only be provided by the countries with a proven record of good relations with the United States and Europe. India and Pakistan are reckoned in the category of such countries by Nato experts," a report on expansion of the Nato underlines. The Nato PFP will play a key role in associating non-Western countries to the Nato security systems. The PFP military exercises will provide an important incentive to the countries being tipped to join the Nato PFP. The Nato allies would also invite observers from the potential PFP countries to future bilateral and multilateral exercises, the source indicated. Cheers
Posted by: Viren Feb 23 2004, 08:01 PM
QUOTE (Peregrine @ Feb 22 2004, 07:10 PM)
Western defence allies have agreed to include India and Pakistan in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation Partnership for Peace (Nato PFP) after concerted persuasion by the US.
Ain't that great? Now at every NATO meet, "Western Defence Allies" will hear the 'K'word till they too get sick of it - like OIC or SAARC etc.. Silly question on all this NATO expansion: If NATO is all inclusive of every Tom, Abdul and Harry - who is it against?
Posted by: Mudy Feb 23 2004, 09:52 PM
If NATO is all inclusive of every Tom, Abdul and Harry - who is it against?
Sam is creating his new colonies.
Posted by: Reggie Feb 23 2004, 10:47 PM
No link, but Complete text of the speech made by Sher-e-Kashmir, Late Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah, in UN Security Council (February 1948). I have heard with patience, attention and respect the statements made by the representative of Pakistan and members of the Security council, as well as the statements made on various occasions by the members of my own delegation. The Security Council will concede that I am probably the one man most concerned in the dispute because I happen to come from that land which has become the bone of contention between the two Dominions of India and Pakistan. I have been quoted profusely on either side, and rightly so, because I have had the fortune-or, should I say, misfortune of leading my countrymen to freedom from 1931 onwards. In this task, I have suffered a great deal. I have been imprisoned not once or twice, but seven times, and the last imprisonment carried with it an aggregate sentence of nine years. There are many troubles in Kashmir. I have heard patiently to the debate in the Security Council, but I feel that I am rather confused. After all, what is the point in dispute? The point in dispute is not that the sovereignty of the Prince is in question, as the representative of Pakistan stated yesterday. After all, I have suffered the punishment of being sentenced to nine years imprisonment for saying what the representative of Pakistan said with regard to the Treaty of Kashmir of 1846. I am glad that he said in the Security Council, where he is immune from any punishment. Therefore, I am not disputing that point and that it is not the subject of the dispute before the Security Council. The subject of the dispute before the Security Council is not the mal-administration of the Princely State of Kashmir. In order to set right that mal-administration, I think I have suffered the most, and today, when for the first time, I heard the representative of Pakistan supporting my case, it gave me great pleasure. After all, what is the dispute between India and Pakistan? From what I have learned from the complaint brought before the Security Council by my own delegation, the dispute revolves around the fact that Kashmir acceded legally and constitutionally to the Dominion of India. There was some trouble about the demarcation of the Kashmir administration within the State, and the tribesmen from across the border have poured into my country. They have been helped and are being helped by the Pakistan Government, with the result that there is the possibility of a greater conflagration between India and Pakistan. India sought the help of Security Council so that Pakistan might be requested to desist from helping the tribesmen, and to desist from supporting the inside revolt, should I say, against the lawful authority. I should have understood the position of the representative of Pakistan if he had come boldly before the Security Council and maintained: "Yes, we do support the tribesmen; we do support the rebels inside the State because we feel that Kashmir belongs to Pakistan and not to India, and because we feel that the accession of Kashmir to India was fraudulent." Then we might have discussed the validity of the accession of the State of Kashmir to India. But that was not the position taken by the representative of Pakistan. He completely denied that any support was being given by the Government of Pakistan to either the tribesmen or those who are in revolt within the State against the constituted authority.How am I to convince the Security Council that the denial is absolutely untrue? I am sitting before the Security Council at a distance of thousands of miles from my country. I have fought many battles, along with my own men, on the borders of Jammu and Kashmir. I have seen with my own eyes the support given by the Pakistan Government, not only in supplying buses but in providing arms, ammunition, direction and control of the tribesmen and I have even seen the Pakistan Army forces from across the border. The denial has come so flatly that it becomes very difficult for me to disprove it here before the Security Council, unless the Security Council accedes to our request to send a commission to the spot and to find out first whether the allegations brought before the Security Council with regard to the aid given by the Government of Pakistan are correct or incorrect. If they are incorrect, the case falls; if they are correct, then the Security Council should take the necessary steps to advise the Government of Pakistan to desist from such support. But then, this simple issue has been confused. On the one hand, the Pakistan Government says, "We are not a party to the trouble within the State. The trouble within the State exists because the people are fighting against the mal-administration of the Jammu and Kashmir Government." Yes, we are fighting, we have been fighting against the mal-administration of that State since 1931. We have been demanding democratisation of the Government there. But how is it that today Pakistan has become the champion of our liberty? I know very well that in 1946, when I raised the cry "Quit Kashmir," the leader of the Pakistan Government, who is the Governor-General now, Mr. Mohammed Ali Jinnah, opposed my Government, declaring that this movement was a movement of a few renegades and that Muslims as such had nothing to do with the movement. The Muslim Conference, which has been talked about so much, opposed my movement and declared its loyalty to the Prince. The representative of Pakistan now says that Sheikh Abdullah, once the supporter of "Quit Kashmir", has joined hands with the Maharaja of Kashmir, and that in one of my public speeches I declared that I wanted the Maharaja to be the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir-not the Maharaja of Jammu only, but the Maharaja of entire State. I should like to correct the misreporting of my speech. I did deliver that speech in Jammu, which is the winter capital of our country, but it was in a different context. As the members of the Security Council have already heard from the head of my delegation, some massacres did occur in the Jammu Province. After the Kashmir Province was raided by the tribesmen, and after thousands of Hindus and Sikhs were uprooted from the villages and towns in the Kashmir Province and found their way into the Jammu Province, there was some very bad retaliation. I could not go to Jammu Province to control that situation because I was busy with the raiders in Kashmir Province. However, as soon as I had some time, I flew down to Jammu Province, addressed a gathering of 60,000 Hindus and Sikhs in Jammu city, and gave them some plain advice. I told them clearly that this policy of retaliation would bring no good to them as Hindus and Sikhs and would bring no good to their leader, because while they could retaliate in one or two districts where they formed the majority, and could even wipe out the Muslim population in these one or two districts, the State happens to have a population which is 80 per cent Muslim, and it would be impossible for them to wipe out the entire Muslim population. The result would be that the Prince, whom they wanted to support, would remain the Prince of only two districts, and not of the entire State of Jammu and Kashmir. I told them that if they wanted him to be the Prince of Jammu and Kashmir, they would have to change their behaviour. That was the speech I delivered, and that was the context in which it was made. However, I have already stated how this trouble started. It is probable that the representative of Pakistan would admit that when India was divided into two parts, my colleagues and I were all behind prison bars. The result of this division of India was to start massacre on either side. Where Muslims in the West Punjab formed the majority, the killing of Hindus and Sikhs started and this was retaliated in East Punjab. All along our border, massacres of Hindus and Sikhs, on the one hand, and Muslims on the other hand, were a daily occurrence. But the State of Jammu and Kashmir, and its people, kept calm. The result was that thousands of refugees, both Muslims and Hindus, sought refuge in our State and we rendered every possible help to all of them. Why was that so? It was because I and my organisation never believed in the formula that Muslims and Hindus form separate nations. We do not believe in the two-nation theory, nor in communal hatred or communalism itself. We believed that religion had no place in politics. Therefore, when we launched our movement of "Quit Kashmir", it was not only Muslims who suffered, but our Hindu and Sikh comrades as well. That created a strong bond of unity between all the communities, and the result was that while Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims were fighting each other all along the border, the people of Jammu and Kashmir State — Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs alike-remained calm. The situation was worsening day by day and the minority in our State was feeling very nervous. As a result, tremendous pressure was brought to bear upon the State administration to release me and my colleagues. The situation outside demanded the release of workers of the National Conference, along with its leader, and we were accordingly set free. Immediately we were liberated from prison we were faced with the important question of whether Kashmir should accede to Pakistan, accede to India, or remain independent, because under the partition scheme these three choices were open us as, indeed, they were open to every Indian State. The problem was a very difficult one, but I advised the people of my country that although the question was very important to us, it was a secondary consideration. The all important matter for us was our own liberation from the autocratic rule of the Prince for which we were fighting and had been fighting for the past seventeen years. We had not achieved that goal, and therefore I told my people that we must do so first. Then, as free men we should have to decide where our interest lay. Being a frontier State, Kashmir has borders with both Pakistan and India, and there are advantages and disadvantages for the people of Kashmir attached to each of the three alternatives to which I have referred. Naturally, as I have indicated, we could not decide this all important issue before achieving our own liberation, and our slogan became "Freedom before accession". Some friends from Pakistan met me in Srinagar. I had a heart- to- heart discussion with them and explained my point of view. I told them in plain words that, whatever had been the attitude of Pakistan towards our freedom movement in the past, it would not influence us in our judgement. Neither the friendship of Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru and of Congress, nor their support of our freedom movement, would have any influence upon our decision if we felt that the interests of four million Kashmiris lay in our accession to Pakistan. I requested them not to precipitate this decision upon us but to allow us time, supporting our movement for the while. I added that once we were free they should allow us an interval to consider this all important issue. I pointed out that India had accepted this point of view and was not forcing us to decide. We had, in fact, entered into a standstill agreement with both Pakistan and India, but the leader of the Indian delegation has already explained to the Security Council what Pakistan did to us. While I was engaged in these conversations and negotiations with friends from Pakistan, I sent one of my colleagues to Lahore, where he met the Prime Minister of Pakistan, Mr. Liaqat Ali Khan, and other high dignitaries of the West Punjab Government. He placed the same point of view before them and requested that they should allow us time to consider this vital question, first helping us to achieve our liberation instead of forcing us to declare our decision one way or the other. Then, one fine morning while these negotiations were proceeding, I received news that a full-fledged attack had been carried out by the raiders on Muzaffarabad, frontier town in the Kashmir Province. The representative of Pakistan has stated that immediately upon my release I went down to Delhi to negotiate the accession of Kashmir to India. That is not a fact. He probably does not know that while in jail I was elected President of the All India States People’s Conference, and that immediately upon my release I had to take up my duties. Accordingly, I had called a meeting of the executive of that Conference in Delhi, a fact which I had conveyed to the Prime Minister of Pakistan. Indeed, I had told the Prime Minister of Pakistan that immediately upon my return from Delhi I should take the opportunity of meeting him personally to discuss my point of view with him. I did not go to Delhi to conclude any agreement on behalf of Kashmir because, although released, I was still considered a rebel. I might inform the representative of Pakistan that although I am beyond doubt the head of the Administration of Kashmir State, I am not the Prime Minister. I am head of the Emergency Administration, and that not because the Maharaja of Kashmir wished it. In fact, I do not know whether the Maharaja wishes it even now. I hold the position because the people of my country wish me to be at the helm of affairs in Jammu and Kashmir State. When the raiders came to our land, massacred thousands of people—mostly Hindus and Sikhs, but Muslims, too—abducted thousands of girls, Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims alike, looted our property and almost reached the gates of our summer capital, Srinagar, the result was that the civil, military and police administrations failed. The Maharaja, in the dead of night, left the capital alongwith his courtiers, and the result was absolute panic. There was no one to take over control. In that hour of crisis, the National Conference came forward with its 10,000 volunteers and took over the administration of the country. They started guarding the banks, the offices and houses of every person in the capital. This is the manner in which the administration changed hands. We were de facto in charge of the administration. The Maharaja, later on, gave it a legal form. It is said that Sheikh Abdullah is a friend of Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru. Yes, I admit that. I feel honoured that such a great man claims me as his friend. And he happens to belong to my own country; he is also a Kashmiri, and blood is thicker than water. If Jawahar Lal Nehru gives me that honour, I cannot help it. He is my friend. But that does not mean that, because of his friendship, I am going to betray the millions of my people who have suffered along with me for the last seventeen years and sacrifice the interests of my country. I am not a man of that calibre. I was explaining how the dispute arose—how Pakistan wanted to force this position of slavery upon us. Pakistan had no interest in our liberation or it would not also have opposed our freedom movement. Pakistan would have supported us when thousands of my countrymen were behind bars and hundreds were shot to death. The Pakistani leaders and Pakistani papers were heaping abuse upon the people of Kashmir who were suffering these tortures. Then suddenly, Pakistan comes before the bar of the world as the champion of the liberty of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. The world may believe this, but it is very difficult for me to believe. When we refused the coercive tactics of Pakistan, it started full fledged aggression and encouraged the tribesmen in this activity. It is absolutely impossible for the tribesmen to enter our territory without encouragement from Pakistan, because it is necessary to pass through Pakistan territory to reach Jammu and Kashmir. Hundreds of trucks, thousands of gallons of petrol, thousands of rifles, ammunition, and all forms of help that an army requires, were supplied to them. We know this. After all, we belong to that country. What Pakistan could not achieve by the use of economic blockade it wanted to achieve by full-fledged aggression. What do we request? We request nothing more than that the Security Council should send some members to this area to see for themselves what is happening there. If Pakistan comes forward and says, "We question the legality of accession", I am prepared to discuss whether or not the accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India was legal. However, now they say, "We want a plebiscite, we want to obtain the free and unfettered opinion of the people of Kashmir. There should be no pressure exerted on the people and they should make the free choice as to the State to which they wish to accede." Not only this the offer that was made by the people of Kashmir to Pakistan long, long ago, but it is the offer made by the Prime Minister of India at a time, I think, he had not the slightest need for making it, as Kashmir was in distress. We realised that Pakistan would not allow us any time, that we had either to suffer the fate of our kith and kin of Muzaffarabad, Baramulla, Srinagar and other towns and villages, or to seek help from some outside authority. Under these circumstances, both the Maharaja and the people of Kashmir requested the Government of India to accept our accession. The Government of India could have easily accepted the accession and could have said, "All right we accept your accession and we shall render this help." There was no necessity for the Prime Minister of India to add the proviso, when accepting the accession, that India does not want to take advantage of the difficult situation in Kashmir. We will accept this accession, without Kashmir’s acceding to the Indian Dominion, we are not in a position to render any military help. But once the country is free from the raiders, marauders and looters, this accession will be subject to ratification by the people. That was the offer made by the Prime Minister of India. That was the same offer which was made by the people of Kashmir to the Government of Pakistan, but it was refused because at that time Pakistan felt that it could, within a week, conquer the entire Jammu and Kashmir State and then place the fait accompli before the world, just as happened some time ago in Europe. The same tactics were used. But having failed in these tactics, Pakistan now comes before the bar of the world, pleading, "We want nothing, we only want our people to be given a free hand in deciding their own fate. And in deciding their own fate, they must have a plebiscite." They then continue and say, "No, a plebiscite cannot be fair and impartial unless and until there is a neutral administration in the State of Jammu and Kashmir." I have failed to understand this terminology with reference to a "neutral administration". After all what does "neutral administration" mean? The representative of Pakistan has stated that Sheikh Abdullah, because he is a friend of Jawahar Lal Nehru, because he has had sympathy for the Indian National Congress, because he has declared his point of view in favour of accession to India, and because he is head of the Emergency Administration, cannot remain impartial. Therefore, Sheikh Abdullah must depart. Let us suppose that Sheikh Abdullah goes, who is to replace Sheikh Abdullah ? It will be someone amongst the 4 million people of the State of Jammu and Kashmir. But can we find anyone among these 4 million people whom we can call impartial? After all, we are not logs of wood, we are not dolls. We must have an opinion one way or the other. The people of Kashmir are either in favour of Pakistan or in favour of India. Therefore, Pakistan’s position comes down to this that the 4 million people of that State should have no hand in running the administration of their own country. Someone else must come in for that purpose. Is that fair ? Is that just ? Do the members of the Security Council wish to oust the people of Kashmir from running their own administration and their own country ? Then, for argument’s sake, let us suppose that the 4 million people of the State of Jammu and Kashmir agree to have nothing to do with the administration of their country; some one else must be brought into the country for this purpose. From where do the members of the Security Council propose that such a neutral individual may be secured? From India? No, from Pakistan? No, from anywhere in the world? No, frankly speaking, even if the Security Council were to request Almighty God to administer the State of Jammu and Kashmir during this interim period, I do not feel that He could act impartially. After all, one must have sympathy either for this side or that side. If elections were to be held in the United Kingdom sometime after tomorrow with the Labour Government in power, would anyone say to Mr Attlee: "The elections are now going on. Because you happen to belong to Labour Party, your sympathies will be in favour of the Labour vote. Therefore, you had better clear out. We must have a neutral man as Prime Minister until our elections are finished? However, we have been told that Sheikh Abdullah must walk out because he has declared his point of view in favour of India. Therefore, he cannot be impartial. We must have some impartial man, we must have some neutral man. As I have submitted to the members of the Security Council, Sheikh Abdullah happens to be there because the people wish it. As long as the people wish it, I shall be there. There is no power on earth which can displace me from the position which I have there. As long as the people are behind me, I will remain there. We have declared once for all, that there shall be freedom of voting and for that purpose we have said, "Let anyone come in, we have no objection. Let the Commission of the Security Council on India come into our State and advise us how we should take a vote, how we should organize it, and how it can be completely impartial. We have no objection." My Government is ready to satisfy, to the last comma, the impartiality of the vote. But to have an impartial vote is one thing; to have a say in the administration of the State is a different thing entirely. After all, with what are we concerned? We are concerned only with the fact that no influence shall be exercised over the voters, either in one way or in another. The people shall be free to vote according to their own interests. We are ready to accede to that. It is then said: "You cannot have freedom of voting as long as the Indian Army remains in the State of Jammu and Kashmir." It is probably very difficult for me to draw a full picture of what is going on in that country. There is absolute chaos in certain parts of the country, fighting is going on and thousands of tribesmen are there ready to take advantage of any weakness on the part of the State of Jammu and Kashmir. Once we ask the Indian Army, which is the only protective force in Kashmir against these marauders, to clear out, we leave the country open to chaos. After all, one who has suffered for the last seventeen years, in attempting to secure the freedom and liberation of his own country, would not like an outside army to come in and to remain in the country. However, what is the present situation? If I ask the Indian Army to clear out, how am I going to protect the people from the looting, arson, murder and abduction with which they have been faced all these long months? What is the alternative? here need be no fear, since the Indian Army is there, that this army will interfere in the exercise of a free vote. After all, a Commission of the Security Council will be there in order to watch. The Indian Army does not have to go into every village. It will be stationed at certain strategic points, so that in the event of danger from any border, the Army will be there to protect that border. The army is there to curb disorders anywhere in the State; that is all. The army will not be in each and every village in order to watch each and every vote. It is then said: "Can we not have a joint control ? Can we not have the armies of Pakistan and India inside the State in order to control the situation ?" This is an unusual idea. What Pakistan could not achieve through ordinary means, Pakistan wishes to achieve by entering through the back door, so that it may have its armies inside the State and then start the fight. That is not possible. After all, we have been discussing the situation in Kashmir. I should say that we have been playing the drama of Hamlet without the Prince of Denmark. The people of Kashmir are vitally interested in this question. Four million people in Kashmir are keenly interested in this entire affair. I have sympathies with the people of Poonch and Mirpur. The representative of Pakistan will probably concede that I have suffered greatly for the people of Poonch as well as for the people of Mirpur. There is no difference on this part of international democratisation of the administration between me, my party and the people of Poonch. We are one, we want our own liberty, we want our own freedom, we do not want autocratic rule. We desire that the 4 million people in Jammu and Kashmir—Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims— shall have the right to change their destiny, to control their country, and to administer it as best as they can. On that point there is absolutely no difference. However, it is not a question of internal liberation. The Security Council should not confine the issue. The question is not that we want internal freedom, the question is not how the Maharaja got his State, or whether or not he is sovereign. These points are not before the Security Council. Whether Kashmir has lawfully acceded to India—complaints on that score have been brought before the Security Council on behalf of Pakistan—is not the point at issue. If that were the point at issue, then we should discuss that subject. We should prove before the Security Council that Kashmir and the people of Kashmir have lawfully and constitutionally acceded to the Dominion of India and Pakistan has no right to question that accession. However, that is not the discussion before the Security Council. Indian and Kashmiri forces are ready to deal with tribesmen, to come to an understanding with the people of Kashmir and to establish a democratic form of government inside the State. We shall do all that. We do not want Pakistan to lend us support to supress an internal revolt or to drive out the tribesmen. We do not seek any support from Pakistan in that connection. Since Pakistan is a neighbouring country, we desire to remain on the friendliest possible terms with this sister Dominion. But we do ask that Pakistan shall have no hand, directly or indirectly, in this turmoil in Kashmir. The Government of Pakistan has said: "We have no hand in this turmoil." The only course left to the Security Council is to send out the commission and to see whether or not Pakistan has any hand in this turmoil. If Pakistan has had any hand in this turmoil, then the Government of Pakistan should be asked to desist from such activity. If Pakistan has had no hand in this turmoil, then that can be proved. This issue has been clouded by very many other issues and interests. I suggested at informal talks that according to my understanding there are two points at issue, first, how to have this neutral, impartial administration; second, whether or not the Indian Army shall remain. It is not at all disputed that we must have a plebiscite and that the accession must be ratified by the people of Kashmir, freely and without any pressure on this or that side. That much is conceded, there is no dispute about that. The dispute arises when it is suggested that in order to have the free vote, the administration must be changed. To that suggestion we say, "No." I do not know what course future events will take. However, I may assure the Security Council that, if I am asked to conduct the administration of this State, it will be my duty to make the administration absolutely impartial. It will be my duty to request my brothers, who are in a different camp at this time, to come to lend me support. After all, they are my own kith and kin. We suffered together, we have no quarrel with them. I shall tell them: "Come on; it is my country; it is your country. I have been asked to administer the State. Are you prepared to lend me support? It is for me to make the administration successful; it is for me to make the administration look impartial." It is not for Pakistan to say "No, we must have an impartial administration." I refuse to accept Pakistan as a party in the affairs of the Jammu and Kashmir State. I refuse this point blank. Pakistan has no right to say that we must do this and we must do that. We have seen enough of Pakistan. The people of Kashmir have seen enough. Muzaffarabad and Baramulla and hundred of villages in Jammu and Kashmir depict the story of Pakistan to the people of Jammu and Kashmir. We want to have no more of this. In concluding, I again request that in order to settle this issue of Kashmir, the Security Council should not confuse the point in dispute. The Security Council should not allow various other extraneous matters to be introduced. Very many extraneous matters have been introduced. The representative of Pakistan gave us the history of the Jammu and Kashmir State. He read to us some letters from Viceroys of India, asking the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir to behave, giving the Maharaja good advice, et cetera. However, we cannot forget that these States are the creation of British imperialism in India who has supported these states and this misrule for these 150 years? It is not going to convince me or the world for the representative of Pakistan to say: "These events have happened and these letters were written." We know how the Princes have acted, how the states were brought into existence, and how the Princes were supported. This was all a game in the British imperialist policy. But this legacy has now fallen upon us. We are not here to discuss whether or not the Maharaja lawfully became the ruler of the State, whether or not there is moral administration in this State, whether or not the Maharaja is sovereign and whether or not Kashmir has legally acceded to India. These issues are not before the Security Council. The only issue before the Security Council is that Pakistan must observe its international obligations and must not support any outside raiders. Pakistan should not encourage inside revolt. Pakistan has denied that it has in order to verify the statements made by the representatives of India and Pakistan, the Security Council must send a commission to the spot to see whether the complaint brought before the Security Council is valid or invalid. If the Security Council finds that the complaint brought before it by India is valid, then Pakistan should be asked to desist or India should be permitted to use its means to carry out the decision of the Security Council. As far as I can speak on behalf of India, India does not want the help of the armies of Pakistan. What it wants from Pakistan is that Pakistan should not supply bases to the raiders on Pakistan territory across the border from Jammu and Kashmir State. All along the border on Pakistan territory, there are huge concentrations of these tribesmen who are Pakistani nationals. We request Pakistan not to allow its territory to be used by these raiders. Pakistan should not provide ammunition, arms, direction and control to these tribesmen. It should stop the passage of these tribesmen through its territory. Pakistan should not supply arms and ammunition to the people who are fighting within the State because all these matters fall under an international obligation. Therefore, Pakistan should desist from that practice. That is all. We do not want any armed help from Pakistan. If Pakistan does what we have requested, the Indian Army, I am quite sure, will be capable of driving out the raiders and tribesmen. If Pakistan does not meddle in our affairs, we will be capable of solving all our own internal disputes with the Maharaja of Kashmir. However, as long as this unofficial war continues, it is very difficult for us to do any thing. Our hands are tied. What is happening? The raiders are concentrated just across the border. They enter our State in large number—four or five thousand strong. They raid four or five villages, burn them, abduct women and loot property. When our army tries to capture them, they go across the border, and can not fire a single shot across the border, because if it does, there is the immediate danger of a greater conflagration. So our hands are tied. We do not want to create this difficult situation without informing the Security Council and we felt honour-bound to inform it of the actual position. The Indian Army could easily have followed the raiders across the border and could have attacked the bases, which were all in Pakistan territory, but it desisted. We thought it would be better to inform the Security Council of the situation. However, I did not have the slightest idea that when the case came before the Security Council, the representative of Pakistan would so boldly deny that Pakistan supplied all this help. Everybody knows that Pakistan is aiding these raiders and tribesmen and the people who are fighting with the State. However, Pakistan chose boldly to deny all these charges. What is left for me to do? After all, I do not have any magic lamp so that I might bring the entire picture of Jammu and Kashmir State, along with the borders of Pakistan, before the eyes of the members of the Security Council so that they might see who is fighting and who is not fighting. Therefore, somebody must go to the spot. Then at that time it would be for us to prove that the charges we have brought before the Security Council are correct to the last word. That is the only help we want and no other help.
Posted by: Mudy Feb 23 2004, 11:49 PM
Pakistan behaviour is still same. thumbsdownsmileyanim.gif
Posted by: Sunder Feb 24 2004, 02:34 AM
QUOTE (Reggie @ Feb 23 2004, 10:47 PM)
No link, but Complete text of the speech made by Sher-e-Kashmir, Late Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah, in UN Security Council (February 1948).
Link Here :
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 24 2004, 05:11 AM
Pakistan's disgraced nuclear scientist AQ Khan could not have leaked nuclear secrets on his own, former prime minister Benazir Bhutto says.
B. Once a Lotastaani always a plonker Only a Lotastaani can state that India’s Defence Budget is USD 14 Trillion Annually and the USA’s corresponding figure is USD 700 Trillion.
And, now, let me give you some idea of the cost of militarism and their effect on the economy. Pakistan’s defence budget is over 150,000,000,000,000 rupees. She has spent over 20,000,000,000,000 rupees on the manufacture and maintenances of nuclear weapons during the past 20 years. India is the third largest importer of arms in the world, and her defence budget of 14,000,000,000,000 dollars a year. And the US budget is well over 700,000,000,000,000,000 dollars per year.
Posted by: Viren Feb 24 2004, 02:58 PM
Posted by: Kaushal Feb 24 2004, 05:22 PM
I am not a big fan of the Abdullah family. They are opportunists - all three generations, although Omar is less brazen than his father and grandfather.
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 24 2004, 09:01 PM Pakistani forces have arrested a number of suspects in a major operation to flush out al-Qaeda and Taleban fighters near the Afghan border. "There are up to 20 people arrested, and there are some foreigners among them," army spokesman Major General Shaukat Sultan told AFP news agency. The operation, mounted in Pakistan's tribal belt, was now over, he said. Officials would not say if al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden or Taleban chief Mullah Omar were among the targets. US forces in Afghanistan have said they are stepping up the hunt for the two men, who are believed to be in the border area. Over the past few weeks, the Pakistani authorities have tried to persuade tribal leaders to hand over foreign fighters, most of whom fled into Pakistan's tribal belt during the US-led military operation in Afghanistan in 2001. Armed assault From dawn on Tuesday, hundreds of Pakistani soldiers backed by helicopter gunships swept through several villages in the deeply conservative South Waziristan tribal agency of North West Frontier Province. Reports say the soldiers blew up houses believed to be used as hideouts by foreign militants. A military statement said "weapons, ammunition and audio cassettes" as well as documents were recovered from the houses. "The arrests... confirm that some foreigners had been living there," Major General Sultan told the Associated Press. "We will not reveal the identity or nationality of any arrested man until the investigations are complete." US pressure Pakistani intelligence officials said Bin Laden was not the immediate target of the current operation in the semi-autonomous South Waziristan region. But they hope to glean clues leading to his ultimate capture. The operation came hours after US President George W Bush pledged to hunt down al-Qaeda militants and just ahead of a visit by US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to Afghanistan later this week. Pakistan has been a key ally of the United States since it launched its war on terror after devastating attacks on New York and Washington in 2001, for which Bin Laden is blamed. About 500 suspects have been detained in Pakistan, and many sent to US military detention at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. Earlier this month, CIA chief George Tenet paid a secret visit to Islamabad to share information on the al-Qaeda leader, reports say. Pakistan has stationed tens of thousands of troops along the porous Afghan border to hunt al-Qaeda and Taleban suspects. Government officials vigorously deny that US troops operate on Pakistani soil. The last time Pakistani forces were involved in a major crackdown in Waziristan, in October 2003, US helicopters patrolled the Afghan side of the border to stop suspects escaping. Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 25 2004, 04:40 AM Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 25 2004, 06:16 AM
Hauma Hamiddha : Interesting Article :
The persecution of the gladiators-Christians - deemed ‘lowly’ was an entertainment for the elite. The gladiators had to fight the wild animals for the delight of the spectators, where the applause was for the victory of the wild beasts, not for the humans. Most gladiators fell, a few survived. Their survival was not relished. A similar game is on in the nuclear coliseum. The Muslim nuclear gladiators - probable ones like Libya and Iran have fallen; Pakistan, the real one, is on its feet yet. Will it be slain or mere castration will do?
Henry Kissinger also threatened Zulfikar Ali Bhutto that an example would be made of him if he embarked upon nuclear programme to augment Pakistan’s security. By not heeding to the warning, he had to go to the gallows.
In the words of Margolis, "President Pervez Musharraf, who has been unfailingly responsive to US demands, may soon be asked to place Pakistan’s nuclear weapons under joint US - Pakistani control, a prelude to the total elimination of its nuclear arsenal, scientists, and weapons manufacturing capability".
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 25 2004, 06:20 AM furious.gif Cheers
Posted by: prem Feb 25 2004, 07:28 AM
RAW HELPED ISI FOIL ATTEMPT ON RIFF RAFF’S LIFE ____________________________________________________________ Yes, we save our own, Raw will protect its main agent in pukeland i.e Mushibhoi.
Posted by: Hauma Hamiddha Feb 25 2004, 11:46 AM
Peregrine, way I am reading it is that the Pukes are sort of coming to believe that it is their dear Mama who is locking away their Nukes. But then as they begining using terms like castration, it is possible that they are actually realizing the loss of the essential elements of their phallocracy. smile.gif I wonder if Mamaji has also extracted a promise from us on no Nuke use on castrated TSP. The more the Puki resentment against the US increase the better it is for India. Contagion called TSP should not be a useful weapon for US anylonger.
Posted by: Kaushal Feb 25 2004, 07:06 PM
We have let ourselves be defined by our enmity with TSP or at least so the Americans would wish. India is on the right track. Americans should read Gen.Paddy's book where India takes on America in 2017( so should I). The point is that the world (at least the US) should realize that India does not define herself (and of course never has) by her relationship with TSP. There are 150 odd nations in the world and the sole country with which India does not have good relations with is TSP. That is a far better record than say the US which has frosty relations with a number of countries in the globe
Posted by: Krishna Feb 25 2004, 11:04 PM
Kaushal, Well said! specool.gif Yeh life bhi kya funda hain..........US preaching how to better relations with someBody else! laugh.gif
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 26 2004, 12:31 AM
Hauma Hamiddha : Well that is my opinion too as I feel that Uncle has already got hold of Lotastaani Nukes and the Lotastaani Government rather than letting its people realize the full import of Uncle’s actions is letting out the news in dribs and drabs. OTOH could China have taken back its Nukes (as people believe Lotastaan never made any Bombs but got them from its Underwear Friend) which it had “Loaned” to Lotastaan? It would be difficult for Uncle to have extracted a promise from India (whereas Riff Raff can say to Uncle “JO AGYA SHREEMAN”, ABV cannot give such assurances as he would be impeached by the Indian Parliament) although ABV on his personal behalf could have given suitable assurances. Resentment against the USA has been there for quite some time i.e. AFAIK the down slide must have started when “Kansi” was surrendered to the USA. I do not see the USA changing its policy towards Lotastaan vis-à-vis India as long as the USA is embroiled in the Afghanistan imbroglio. Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 27 2004, 12:34 AM Indications are the arrested people are all local tribesmen, though one needs to wait for the completion of the interrogation process Contrary to the claim made by director-general ISPR (Inter-Services Public Relations), Maj-Gen Shaukat Sultan, that the second military operation against Al Qaeda suspects and their local supporters managed to net some foreigners suspected of ties with Al Qaeda, all the arrested people are local tribesmen. Immediately after the operation on February 24, which did not see any casualties on either side, the military spokesman told journalists that the troops had captured some foreigners in the Ziara Latta area and recovered from their possession passports, weapons, ammunition and audiocassettes. However, he declined to identify the captured foreigners. “All [the 21 arrested people] are locals,” South Waziristan Agency chief administrator Muhammad Azam Khan told TFT by phone from Wana, summer capital of the troubled South Waziristan Agency, a day after the operation. He said five to six tribesmen among the detained “locals” were wanted men. A tribal elder also contradicted the army spokesman’s claim about the arrest of foreigners during the operation. “Our hands are clean. No foreigner was found from the area,” Malik Saadullah Jan of Yargulkhel sub-tribe told TFT via phone from Wana. “It is difficult to say if any foreigners were arrested,” another administration official said while requesting not to be named. “They [arrested men] are being interrogated. We need to wait and see,” he added. Sources say three women were also arrested but were later handed over to the tribal chiefs on surety. Azam Khan told TFT: “The Joint Interrogation Team has been asked to complete the detained men’s interrogation as soon as possible. Some 15 to 16 arrested men will be set free soon.” The military establishment has also been advised to complete the “debriefing” of arrested men quickly to ensure that the army does not lose the support of the tribesmen who are very sensitive about such matters. “The long detention of innocent men could lead to anger among the families of the arrested men and their relatives against the army,” said a source. A senior official at the Federally Administered Tribal Areas Secretariat in Peshawar told TFT that the “factual position” on the arrested people would appear only after the interrogation process was completed. “We suspect some of the arrested men to be foreigners. But it cannot be established immediately since the foreigners can speak local language and they look and dress up like the local people.” The Tuesday operation, backed by army commandos, paramilitary troops and helicopter gunships in which three houses were also demolished, was a sudden raid and had no link with the ongoing search and cordon operation launched for some weeks by the political administration. “This operation was the work of the army following top intelligence reports. The army can go after high-value targets,” a military source told TFT on the condition of anonymity. On January 8, the army carried out an operation in the Kalosha region of South Waziristan Agency but failed to nab any foreigner linked to Al Qaeda. However, the Baghar operation on October 2, 2003, was successful and the army managed to arrest and kill some terror suspects. The June operation in 2003 was heavy on casualties with the army losing some 12 personnel, including one officer. The South Waziristan Agency chief administrator said that out of 89 wanted men, the Wazir tribe surrendered 56 people and the grand Ahmedzai tribe’s jirga was told on Wednesday that the remaining wanted men must be handed over. The government has also made clear that its policy on foreigners’ presence in the area would remain the same. President Musharraf has already warned foreigners to get out of the area. Cheers
Posted by: rajesh_g Feb 27 2004, 11:55 PM
Am watching Zee Cine Awards - shameless nautanki - ind-pak bhai bhai nonsense going on ...
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 28 2004, 05:33 AM pakee.gif MULTAN: The Army has been called out in Multan to assist the local government and it was also called into sensitive areas of south Punjab like Khanewal, Bahawalpur, Lodhran, Jhang and Sahiwal. The district administration has banned pillion riding in Khanewal, Lodhran and Jhang. —Staff Report Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 28 2004, 06:42 PM
Last Updated: Saturday, 28 February, 2004, 12:45 GMT Pakistani soldiers have killed 11 people in a shooting incident in the tribal region of South Waziristan near the Afghan border. The army says they were firing back at militants who attacked an army camp. But tribesmen said troops opened fire on two vehicles that failed to stop at a road block; local people and Afghans were among the dead. The Pakistani army this week launched a fresh offensive against al-Qaeda and Taleban suspects in the area. 'Mistaken' The BBC's Zaffar Abbas in Islamabad says it is the deadliest incident in the area since the Pakistani military began operations last October to flush Islamic militants out of the tribal areas. According to an army spokesman, armed men driving two or three vehicles tried to attack a military camp near the town of Wana in the early hours of Saturday. Troops returned fire, killing 11 people and injuring six. The army acknowledges that some civilians might have been killed in the cross-fire, but says they might also have been "terrorists". Officials said 16 people have been arrested for questioning. However, local tribal leaders say the shooting was a case of mistaken identity. They said those killed were tribesmen and Afghans on board two vehicles hit by gun fire after they failed to heed a military road block. Sanctuary An intelligence official quoted by Reuters also suggested the shooting was a mistake. "According to our initial investigations, it was mistaken fire," he said. Correspondents say tribal leaders deeply resent the army's presence on their lands and the latest killings seem sure to increase anger in the region. South Waziristan has long been considered a sanctuary for Taleban and al-Qaeda fugitives who fled Afghanistan after the arrival of American forces in 2001. Twenty-five people were detained in a big operation last Tuesday against suspected al-Qaeda members. Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 28 2004, 09:41 PM Saturday, February 28, 2004 - ©2004 TEHRAN, Feb 28 (AFP) -- Osama bin Laden has been captured in a tribal area of Pakistan, the external Pashto-language service of Iranian state radio reported Saturday quoting an "informed source". The report, which could not be independently verified, said the alleged arrest took place "some time ago" but gave no further details. went on to claim that US officials were keeping news of the arrest secret and were likely to announce it later in the year – to help US President George W. Bush's re-election chances in November polls. Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 28 2004, 09:48 PM
Lotastaani reaction to Iranian statement about OBL being under arrest in Lotastaan pakee.gif ISLAMABAD: A suicide bomber died when explosives strapped to his body detonated Saturday, killing him on the spot and injuring three worshippers at a Shiite mosque in the nearby garrison city of Rawalpindi, police said. "A man was killed and three people were slightly injured in an apparent suicide attack," police officer Basharat Ahmad told reporters. "A man with explosive strapped to his body joined the evening prayers at a Shiite mosque near the busy commercial centre and during the prayer the explosives went off," Ahmad said. Witnesses and other worshippers said it was a sectarian attack. In recent months police have arrested dozens of sectarian militants in a bid to prevent sectarian hostilities between majority Sunni and minority Shiites that have claimed hundreds of lives during the past four years. Muslims, mainly Shiites, mourn the death of Imam Hussain, the grandson of prophet Mohammad, during the month of Muharram. Police and paramilitary troops have already been put on alert ahead of Muharram, which started on February 22. Drive-by shootings in the port city of Karachi killed dozens of people, mostly Shiites, last year. Cheers
Posted by: Mudy Feb 28 2004, 11:40 PM
A suicide bomber died when explosives strapped to his body detonated Saturday, killing him on the spot and injuring three worshippers at a Shiite mosque in the nearby garrison city of Rawalpindi, police said.
This look like serious begining of civil war in Lotastaan. Not in Karachi but in Garrison city.
Posted by: Peregrine Feb 29 2004, 12:15 AM
Cross Posted on the Cricket Thread Pakistan's cricket authorities have admitted that an £11.5m sponsorship and television deal for the forthcoming tour by India has saved them from bankruptcy. The Pakistan Cricket Board lost an estimated £16m between 2001-3 as tours involving India, New Zealand, the West Indies and Australia were cancelled or switched to neutral venues. But Pakistan's fortunes appear to have been reversed with a Dubai-based television company paying £7.2m for the rights to the first tour by India since 1988. And a number of sponsors are generating more money for the series, to be held in March and April. Ticket revenues are expected to raise a further £540,000 in revenue for the PCB. "The money generated from this series has rescued us from bankruptcy. We have never earned so much from a series before" a PCB spokesman told the BBC sport website. "Cricket has been dying in this part of the world, and the domestic game in Pakistan has suffered in the last two years from a lack of funds.
PAKISTAN'S 'LOST' TOURS Sept 2001: New Zealand postpone tour Dec 2001: India cancel tour Jan 2002: West Indies tour moved to Sharjah May 2002: New Zealand tour cut short August 2002: Australia postpone tour October 2002: Australia tour switched to Sharjah
"We will now be able to invest in our academy, existing grounds, build new stadiums and start paying domestic cricketers match fees again." Bangladesh, in August 2003, were the first team to tour Pakistan for a full Test series since England visited at the tail end of 2000. In August 2001 India pulled out of the Asia Cup and cancelled a tour of Pakistan in December. In September that year New Zealand postponed their tour until April/May 2002, but the series was cut short by a bomb blast outside their hotel. The West Indies and Australia also refused to visit in 2002, but played their Tests in Sharjah, and a triangular limited-overs tournament had to be switched to Kenya. The PCB's finances were in such a sorry state that they asked the International Cricket Council to compensate them for the lost revenue, but were only offered a loan which they did not take up. Pakistan threatened to co-ordinate an Asian Cricket Council boycott of teams that refused to come to them. But an improved security situation in the country, coupled with a thawing of political tensions with India, means Pakistan appears to have turned the corner. Board of Control for Cricket in India President Jagmohan Dalmiya has confirmed that all the money generated from their tour will go to Pakistan. "Under the current scheme of things the hosting board makes all the money, while the visitors actually incur lots of expenses," he said. And PCB Chairman Shaharyar Khan said the financial rewards from the tour are huge. "Since the series has so much life in it we received a huge response.The sum is more than what we expected," he said. Cheers
Posted by: Hauma Hamiddha Feb 29 2004, 08:03 AM Pakistani forces have killed or captured more al-Qaida members than any other U.S. ally. Uncle will never tire of TSP what ever one may wish.
Posted by: Viren Feb 29 2004, 08:20 AM
HH: Don't overlook the fact that all this is 'praise' is a double edged sword to Mush. Imagine the kind of heartburn that's being generated in the likes of Hamid Gul and all those jihadi-mulla-fauji combine who have to digest the fact that one of their own is doing them in pakee.gif Talk about rubbing salt on the wound - 'shyam' mama might be trying to be modern day shakuni mamma wink.gif
Posted by: Mudy Feb 29 2004, 08:38 AM
Pakistani forces have killed or captured more al-Qaida members than any other U.S. ally.
Where else they can find rat, if not in rat hole frusty.gif
Posted by: Viren Feb 29 2004, 08:50 AM Over a year ago a Paki newspaper had a reported of over 5000 Paki passports being found missing from one of their counsulates in a middle eastern country. I'll wager a small bet that it's a just a matter of time before the the stolen passports are traced to the pukestan. pakee.gif
Posted by: Mudy Feb 29 2004, 09:37 PM
just a matter of time before the the stolen passports are traced to the pukestan
But uncle will shower them with billions to enhance syndicate.
Posted by: Reggie Mar 1 2004, 03:29 AM|top|02-29-2004::13:26|reuters.html Report: Deal for U.S. to Hunt Bin Laden in Pakistan Feb 29, 1:10 PM (ET) NEW YORK (Reuters) - The United States has struck a deal with Pakistan to allow U.S. troops to hunt for al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden this spring in an area of Pakistan where he is believed to be operating, the New Yorker magazine reported on Sunday. Thousands of U.S. troops will be deployed in a tribal area of northwest Pakistan in return for Washington's support of President Pervez Musharraf's pardon of the Pakistani scientist who this month admitted leaking nuclear arms secrets to Iran, Libya and North Korea, investigative reporter Seymour Hersh wrote in the issue that goes on sale on Monday. Full disclosure of Pakistani scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan's activities would have exposed him as "the worst nuclear-arms proliferator in the world," an intelligence official is quoted as saying. "It's a quid pro quo," according to a former senior intelligence official. "We're going to get our troops inside Pakistan in return for not forcing Musharraf to deal with Khan." Musharraf has also offered other help in the hunt for bin Laden, accused of masterminding the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States, according to the article. "Musharraf told us, 'We've got guys inside. The people who provide fresh fruits and vegetables and herd the goats' for bin Laden and his al Qaeda followers," the intelligence official added. The spring offensive could slow the tempo of U.S. operations in Iraq, the magazine said. "It's going to be a full-court press," one Pentagon planner was quoted as saying. The article added that some of the most highly skilled U.S. Special Forces units would be shifted from Iraq to Pakistan. Special Forces personnel have been briefed on their new assignments and in some cases have been given "warning orders" -- the stage before being sent into combat, according to a military adviser.
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 1 2004, 04:53 AM pakee.gif NEW DELHI - Prime Minister Mir Zafarullah Khan Jamali has urged both Pakistan and India to be flexible on issues including Kashmir and sacrifice their ego for the sake of better relations and a bigger goal as both need peace and none of them want war. Asserting on flexibility, Jamali said: “In my assessment, both parties should sacrifice their ego for the sake of better relations. We have to sacrifice it for a bigger goal. And when you come to dialogue, either you convince me or I convince you. So, let us see who is a better operator.” “I hope we shall reach a conclusion. Of course, the core issue of Kashmir will be solved,” he told an Indian fortnightly magazine Frontline in a detailed interview following February 16. Jamali said that in the South Asian region Kashmir is a problem and “the Kashmiris need a helping hand.” “We are trying to contribute so that this issue is settled - it is in the interest of humanity,” he added. Prime Minister Jamali has brushed aside the apprehensions that the bureaucracy of both India Pakistan would sabotage the dialogue process, saying that he did not see any reason why people think that bureaucracy would sabotage.” “As far as we are concerned, we are positive,” Jamali said adding that he did not mistrust his team. Reacting on a question that India and Pakistan should have talked all political level, Jamali said, “It is government-to-government talks. It is not person-to-person talks. It is only a start.” “This is level-I. Level-II will be at the ministerial level. Level-III will be at the chief executive level, whatever the case may be,” he said. Prime Minister Jamali said, “Even India needs peace. Nobody wants war. War is no solution to any problem. It is peace, dialogue and the convincing power, which has to make a breakthrough.” Commenting on the nature of his country’s relations with India, Jamali said that Pakistan was enemy to none and expects no one to be its enemy. But if someone would try to compress Pakistan it would not be allowed. “I have always said that we are enemies to none - that was my speech to Parliament. And we expect no one to be our enemy. There are some issues that need to be discussed and resolved but we have no enmity with anyone. We have no reason for it. But if someone tries to compress us, we won’t allow that,” he said Reacting on a question about the possibility of reduction in Pakistan’s defence budget in case the threat perception from India reduces, Jamali said that “Let the time come.” “There is a big `if’ in this,” he added. Prime Minister Jamali said that now two-nation theory is not valid today. “The two-nation theory has become a one-nation theory,” he said adding “It was over half a century ago. And whichever nation is there, that is there today.” “Many Muslims were left behind in India. They suffered a lot then. They had contributed a lot for the creation of Pakistan. Owing to the conditions and circumstances, they could not make it to this country. Naturally, they had to suffer because they were held responsible for the creation of this country,” Jamali said. On Pakistan’s support to the Kashmiri movement, Jamali said “We have been giving Kashmiris diplomatic and moral support.” “Kashmiris are the best people to decide. They are the best judges. They are suffering. That is why, in the interest of humanity, this issue must be resolved in a decent and honourable way,” he said. On talks between a section of the Kashmiri separatists and the government of India, Jamali said, “Every country has a right. They have been able to get hold of Ansari, Mirwaiz, Bhatt, the Lone brothers... I think that is politics.” “But whosoever they may be, they are Muslims and we hope better conclusions would come up. We would appreciate that. We want peace - whether it comes from the Pakistan side or the Indian side. If it is up to the satisfaction of the Kashmiris, it will be a worthwhile effort. If something is leading to peace, that is enough,” Jamali said. What the hell is wrong with this stupid Lotastaani – Indians should be very careful. We do not want to re-unite with Lotastaan. India should continue to progress as it is. We do not want to be dragged down with those Lotastaanis furious.gif Cheers
Posted by: Krishna Mar 1 2004, 05:15 AM
Akhand Bharat would happen............but not in this way, at this time. At a place and time of our choosing onlee! Till then 8/10% growth is good enuff to build some muscle up for the inevitable D-Day!
Posted by: Mudy Mar 1 2004, 06:39 AM
Peregrine, They are saying at this moment they have lost Kashmir, it is a tactical defeat. India should keep powder dry and eyes and ears open. Never trust losers called Pakistan. Pakistan have another 3 years in hand to derail India's progress after that it will be sucidal for them. Gap will be so big.
Posted by: Mudy Mar 1 2004, 11:47 AM,00050002.htm ohmy.gif Press Trust of India New York, March 1 Pakistan Army still appears to be helping Taliban in Afghanistan as they prepare for a major confrontation in coming spring, a media report said. American intelligence officials possess satellite photos that "purportedly" show Pakistani Army trucks picking up Taliban troops fleeing back across the border after a failed attack. After the US confronted Pakistani officials with the photographs, signs of visible Pakistani aid to the rebels ceased, Time magazine said. It quoted US and Afghan officials as saying that the US has also provided Islamabad with specific locations of two dozen suspected Taliban hideouts in the tribal badlands. Afghan security officials, Time said, complain that their Pakistani counterparts continue to tolerate -- and even encourage -- militancy by the Taliban. At the highest levels, Pakistan's establishment remains "nostalgic" for the Taliban, says a Western diplomat. Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf has cooperated in the hunt for Al-Qaeda's top officials but has shown less enthusiasm for rooting out the Taliban. Until Pakistan's security services stop sheltering Taliban leaders, US officials say, Afghanistan will never be free from the threat of their return.
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 1 2004, 02:11 PM
QUOTE (Mudy @ Mar 1 2004, 06:39 AM)
Peregrine, They are saying at this moment they have lost Kashmir, it is a tactical defeat. India should keep powder dry and eyes and ears open. Never trust losers called Pakistan. Pakistan have another 3 years in hand to derail India's progress after that it will be sucidal for them. Gap will be so big.
Mudy : I hope you are right in stating They are saying at this moment they have lost Kashmir, it is a tactical defeat. Lotastaan has been slowly sinking into the mire. All efforts to depict a rosy picture have come to nought. A stark example is the Poverty Level of Lotastaan. In the last 15 years the Indian poverty level has been reduced from about 45% to about 25%. The criteria for this is based on an income of USD 1 per day. OTOH in Lotastaan the Poverty Level 15 years ago was about 15% again on the basis on an income of USD 1 per day – One Third of India’s Level. Now it is about 40% on the basis of a daily Income of Pak. Rs. 25 per day i.e. less than half a US Dollar. I reckon that if Lotastaan was to base the Poverty Level to an income of USD 1 per day then the Poverty Level would be possibly 55% to 60%. IMO this is the reason for the Lotastaanis seeing “a bit of light”. If they continue on their “Jehadi” Road then it will lead them to Economic Chaos and Ruin. I am very weary of Agreement and/or Pacts and/or Treaties signed by India and Lotastaan. Not being a student of History I cannot comment authoritatively but at various times I have heard my Lotastaani friends discussing the Hudaibiyah Treaty which permits Islamic Societies and/or Groups and/or Nations to repudiate an agreement which they accepted and/or signed at/from a position of weakness. I hope posters on this Forum with more knowledge of the “Hudaibiyah Treaty” will comment as to its contents Lotastaan is at the moment weak and getting weaker. They will sign anything provided Indian Negotiators are strong and staunch in their resolve, and not the likes of the Ex-Indian High Commissioner to the Court of St. James – the waffler Kuldip Nayyer or Thefool Badwai and their Tribe, and not becoming “The Give Aways” and hand everything to Lotastaan on a plate. I am disgusted at the Lotastaanis Leaders, Political, Mullah and Generals, especially Jamali asking India to be flexible on the issue and hand Pakistan the whole of Jammu and Kashmir. In this respect I have not heard of any Indian Leader asking Lotastaan to be flexible and hand POK to India. Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 1 2004, 02:17 PM
QUOTE (Mudy @ Mar 1 2004, 11:47 AM),00050002.htm ohmy.gif
Mudy : You can put a dog’s tail in a pipe for generations or you can even keep “docking” a dog’s tail, but, You can never remove the kink in the dog’s tail Similarly with the relationship between the Lotastaani Army – especially the ISI – and every International Islamic – or otherwise – Terrorist Organization, especially the Taleban and Al Qaeda. These relationships will never end. Cheers
Posted by: Mudy Mar 1 2004, 11:34 PM Our tax money at work devilsmiley.gif
Posted by: Mudy Mar 2 2004, 12:48 AM thumbsdownsmileyanim.gif Pakistan to take over UNSC presidency on May 1 By Muhammad Saleh Zaafir ISLAMABAD: Pakistan will take over Presidency of the United Nation’s Security Council (UNSC) from May 1 this year. It will be second time Pakistan will occupy the UNSC chair in one year. Well placed diplomatic sources told The News here on Friday that Islamabad is chalking out a detailed schedule to make the occasion a historic event. The government has asked its permanent envoy to the UN Muneer Akram to send his proposals in this regard. Muneer Akram, who came here last week to attend the all important two-day Envoys Conference has returned to his office in New York, and is expected to send his recommendations next month, the sources said. Pakistan was elected member of the UNSC for two years on Asian seat as a result of successful diplomatic manoeuvrings and assumed the Presidency for the first time last year during its term. Pakistan has remarkable record as member of the UN and its Security Council. It hosted conference of the Foreign Ministers last year which exclusively discussed the menace of terrorism when Pakistan was president of the Council. The conference was attended by foreign ministers of five permanent members of the UNSC including US secretary of state. Fifteen members of the Council contributed richly to the conference. The sources said that Islamabad is preparing a plan to mark its chairmanship of the UNSC as a historic occasion and is planning to hold another conference of great significance. This time it would be on non-proliferation of nuclear technology, enhancing harmony among the nations and peaceful coexistence with greater tolerance, the sources opined. The conference could take up the idea of moderate enlightenment, floated by President General Pervez Musharraf sometime back. The US President George Bush is expected to be invited to address the sitting. President Pervez Musharraf’s participation could also not be ruled out, the sources added. Pakistan will remain member of the UNSC till the end of current year and president of the UNSC for the whole month of May. Islamabad would also offer its input on the question of United Nations reformation before expiry of its tenure as member of the UNSC. It will impress upon the world organisation to make schedule of reforms on democratic principals, sources added.
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 2 2004, 02:25 AM pakee.gif Will somebody who can understand this “Bhari-Urdu” please translate. Cheers cheers.gif
Posted by: Mudy Mar 2 2004, 02:30 AM
ROTFL.gif ROTFL.gif ROTFL.gif Please warn us in future clap.gif
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 2 2004, 02:46 AM Pakistan said Monday that Israel's approval on Sunday of a $1.1bn sale of sophisticated military technology to India could destabilise the region and undermine the fledgling peace process between the nuclear-armed neighbours. Islamabad warned that the deal, in which India would acquire three Phalcon early-warning aircrafts from Israel and Russia, could fuel the arms race between the two countries. The technology, which could be used both defensively and offensively, would also encourage Pakistan to seek a similar system, it hinted. Sure Lotastaan can go ahead. Paisa Pheko Tamasha Dekho. However with 40% Poverty rapidly approaching 50% what will the Lotastaanis buy with? "The sales of sophisticated weapons to India will accentuate strategic and conventional imbalance in South Asia," said Masood Khan, the Pakistan government spokesman. "Such transactions also undermine the spirit of peace and stability being pushed by Pakistan, India and the international community." Indian officials would not comment on Pakistan's reaction. But they pointed out that India's defence calculations also included neighbouring China, which defeated India in a border war in 1962. India and China have recently embarked on talks to resolve their border dispute. "India's defence requirements are not all targeted at Pakistan," said one official. However, few doubt that Islamabad's underlying concern is the United States' expected approval in the next few months of the sale to India of the Israeli Arrow anti-ballistic missile system, for which New Delhi has been fiercely lobbying. In January, the US and India signed a landmark deal in which Washington agreed to gradually relax its restrictions on the export of "dual-use" technology to India. In exchange, India pledged to tighten its export control safeguards. The deal came shortly after Atal Behari Vajpayee, India's prime minister, met General Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan's president, and agreed to embark on a formal peace process. The Arrow sale was not mentioned in the agreement between New Delhi and Washington. But it was implicit to the understanding, say officials. "It is clear that the peace process between India and Pakistan is going well at the moment," said Sundeep Waslekar, head of the Strategic Foresight Group, a think tank, in Mumbai. "But it is a very delicate process and as we have seen from previous efforts the situation can rapidly flip back into hostilities if it fails." Pakistani officials warned that the introduction by India of an anti-missile system could induce Pakistan to upgrade its nuclear missile capability, which in turn would compel India to do the same. Both plan to test their long-range nuclear-capable missiles in the near future. In contrast to its more relaxed attitude towards India, the US is likely to further tighten its export control on defence sales to Pakistan following revelations that A.Q. Khan, the "father" of Pakistan's nuclear deterrent, had been at the centre of an international nuclear proliferation market. Cheers
Posted by: acharya Mar 2 2004, 07:13 AM
ADVERTISEMENT Tendentious Textbooks Perverted Psyche Islamised, social studies textbooks in Pakistan are replete with manipulated interpretations of historical events By Ashok Kumar Content&pa=showpage&pid=12&page=16 "How the younger generation is indoctrinated with selective history, which often distorts and disconnects historical moments from their context has been brought to light by Yvette Claire Rosser in a book Islamisation of Pakistani Social Studies Textbooks (published by Rupa & Co in association with Observer Research Foundation). The book points out: “All students in Pakistan are required to take courses called Pakistan Studies and must pass standardised tests based on that curriculum. Pakistan Studies is a compulsory subject in all secondary schools and colleges. There are numerous textbooks published under this title for the 9th class to the BA level. In general, the curriculum is a composite of patriotic discourses, justification of the Two-nation theory, hagiographies of Muslim heroes, and endemic in the discourse are polemics about the superiority of Islamic principles over Hinduism.”
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 2 2004, 04:57 PM EIGHT KILLED IN FIRING IN QUETTA, CURFEW IMPOSED pakee.gif QUETTA: At least eight people were killed when unidentified gunmen opened fire on a Youm-e-Ashur procession in Liaquat Bazaar here, while several people were injured, Geo TV reported on Tuesday. The local administration imposed curfew in the city after the incident. Shots were fired into a procession of mourners in the busy Liaquat Bazaar area of the city at around 1.40 pm. Balochistan Corps more contingents were deployed in the city. The law enforcement agencies have further beefed up the security measures in the city. Many of the wounded were in critical condition. Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 2 2004, 05:02 PM
QUOTE (acharya @ Mar 2 2004, 07:13 AM)
ADVERTISEMENT Tendentious Textbooks Perverted Psyche Islamised, social studies textbooks in Pakistan are replete with manipulated interpretations of historical events By Ashok Kumar Content&pa=showpage&pid=12&page=16
acharya : On the Hatred for Hindus & Indians in the Lotastaanis’ School Curricula there were two Articles in the Jang about Education Ministry(?) in Decemebr last year. Hve you seen them? If not I will try to find them and post them here. Cheers
Posted by: Viren Mar 2 2004, 07:58 PM
QUOTE (Peregrine @ Mar 2 2004, 07:32 AM)
On the Hatred for Hindus & Indians in the Lotastaanis’ School Curricula there were two Articles in the Jang about Education Ministry(?) in Decemebr last year. Hve you seen them? If not I will try to find them and post them here.
Is this the Nayyar report (link in the first post of this thread)?
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 2 2004, 08:46 PM
QUOTE (Viren @ Mar 2 2004, 07:58 PM)
Is this the Nayyar report (link in the first post of this thread)?
Viren : The Nayyer Report is a voluminous affair. Here are the two Articles from the Jang – Short and to the point : Thus it is not the Theoretical Academicians but also the normal Commentators in Lotastaan who are appalled at the turn of Events in Lotastaani Education and the effects of same i.e. Jehadis Fundamentalist Weirdos. There are some more Articles by Dr Saleem and other writers but I think the above two are enough to give us a true Picture of the mentality of the ordinary Lotastaani who has been brainwashed into this Jehadi Fundamentalist Hindu Hating mindset. Dr. Saleem is guided by the Nayyer Report Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 2 2004, 09:26 PM
I am appalled and shocked and totally dismayed at the Indian Organizations rushing to do business with the Lotastaanis. The Lotastaanis are totally unscrupulous, unprincipled, unreliable, lying bunch of COUPS of the canine species. pakee.gif They have worked so many scams that the list is endless. The latest in a long list is the present Import of 150,000 tonnes of Wheat from Australia. IMO either the Lotastaanis do not need the wheat anymore or there is no berthing space available as there is heavy port congestion. As such they have “found” Karnal bunt. Normally the Australian Wheat Board sells its Grain directly to the buyers especially if it is to a National Government. In Lotastaan, I suppose, third parties like Tradesman International (I will not be surprised if it is a Lotastaani owned Australian Company) are used so that the Lotastaani Officials can get their “Cut”. I hope the Indian Organizations are extremely careful in their dealings with the Lotastaanis as the Lotastaani Banks’ Letters of Credit are literally worthless. Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 2 2004, 09:39 PM
Correction to my earlier post : At least 37 people have been killed and over 100 wounded in an attack on Shia Muslims in the Pakistani city of Quetta, hospital officials say. An explosion was followed by intensive gunfire as a Shia procession passed through the business district. Doctors say the condition of many of the injured is critical. The city is under an indefinite curfew. The attacks came as Shia Muslims held ceremonies to mark the slaying of the Prophet Mohammed's grandson. Another shooting incident during a Shia procession in Punjab province left two people dead. Another 40 were injured following clashes between Shias and Sunnis in Phalia, a small town more than 600 km (375 miles) north-east of Quetta. No group has said it carried either attack, but sectarian violence had been a regular feature in Pakistan in recent years. The BBC's Zaffar Abbas in Islamabad says it is unlikely the violence in Pakistan is linked to attacks on Shias in Iraq which left scores dead. City 'tense' The Quetta explosion created chaos, and was followed by gunfire from different directions, witnesses say. Eye-witnesses said as the procession was passing through the city's shopping district, a grenade was thrown, followed by firing from automatic guns. Afterwards groups of angry Shias attacked shops, vehicles and government property before security forces fired shots and tear gas to disperse the crowd. Several cars parked in the area were also set on fire. Reports say the atmosphere in Quetta remains tense. The mayor of the city said a curfew had been imposed and troops were patrolling the streets. A senior Shia leader in Pakistan, Allama Hassan Turabi, has demanded that President Musharraf sack government officials including the interior minister for failing to prevent Tuesday's attack. "This is not the first attack against us," he said, "our people are not safe in their homes. They are not safe in their mosques." President Musharraf has condemned the Quetta attack and directed the authorities to take all action necessary to bring those guilty to justice. Processions Security has been tightened across Pakistan during the holy month of Muharram to prevent violence between the minority Shia and majority Sunni communities. On Tuesday, there were big Shia processions in most towns and cities across the country to commemorate the seventh century martyrdom of the Prophet Mohammed's grandson, Imam Hussein. The authorities deployed thousands of security personnel to ward off attacks on the Shia day of mourning. Last July, Quetta was the scene of one of the worst outbreaks of sectarian violence in Pakistan, when attackers armed with machine guns and grenades stormed a Shia mosque, killing 50 people who were praying inside. Most of Pakistan's Sunni and Shia Muslims live peacefully together, but small radical groups on both sides are responsible for frequent attacks. About 97% of Pakistan's population is Muslim, and Sunnis outnumber Shias by a ratio of about eight-to-two. If this killing is going on amongst Muslims of Lotastaan then I pity the Indian Cricket Team. furious.gif Cheers
Posted by: Mudy Mar 2 2004, 09:56 PM
In case riotstaan lose match whole country will burn. Something good will come out of this series.
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 2 2004, 10:02 PM
QUOTE (Mudy @ Mar 2 2004, 09:56 PM)
In case riotstaan lose match whole country will burn. Something good will come out of this series.
Mudy : I hope you will agree with me that 15 Members of the Indian Cricket Team plus maybe 10,000 Indians visiting the Cricket Matches are far more important than the 153 Million Lotastaanis. Lotastaanis can become Riotistaani Lotastaanis, but, only after the safe departure of the Indian Team and their Indian supporters for India. Cheers
Posted by: Mudy Mar 2 2004, 10:23 PM
What happened yesterday in Lootastaan is not good/bad? Counter offence will soon come. I doubt India will be playing in riotsaan at this juncture. Let see when shias will start battle. Karbala casualities are very high which is a holiest place for Shia. Regarding Cricket team, at first they wanted to go to for extra endrosement. Well if 15 fools can bring down Lootastaan, not bad.
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 2 2004, 11:00 PM
QUOTE (Mudy @ Mar 2 2004, 10:23 PM)
Regarding Cricket team, at first they wanted to go to for extra endrosement. Well if 15 fools can bring down Lootastaan, not bad.
Mudy : I am not worried about the 15 fools bringing Lotastaan Down. I am afraid of one of more of these fools getting “Hallalized” The Secular Government of India will accept Lotastaani verbal meaningless apologies just to prove our peaceful credentials to the world. Cheers
Posted by: Mudy Mar 2 2004, 11:18 PM
I am afraid of one of more of these fools getting “Hallalized”
15 fools wanna be Goat, well let it be. Atleast it will save 100s of Indian soliders and innocent civilians. I hope 15 fools will take cheer leaders (Urmilla, Bhatt family, Akshay, Laloo, Paswan etc) from Bollywood to Lootastaan.
Posted by: Krishna Mar 2 2004, 11:36 PM
Folks, We have some new breed Indians too, in this team.
Talking about the security concerns of the Indian team, he said, "Sure, the boys had security issues. We were worried that there could be a bomb waiting for us somewhere. "But we are not scared to tour Pakistan. If soldiers can die fighting on the border, we can at least [play] cricket."
I hope, this guy & Sehwag shoves it up their............u know where!
Posted by: Viren Mar 2 2004, 11:44 PM while Where's our resident pakee.gif
Posted by: Mudy Mar 3 2004, 02:40 AM
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 3 2004, 04:44 AM PARACHINAR: At least 13 people were killed and 50 injured in an stampede followed by a short circuit and collapse of a portion of Imam Bargah here Wednesday. Condition of three of the injured was stated to be critical. Cheers
Posted by: Viren Mar 3 2004, 09:23 AM
came via email:
From: Srinath Sreenivasan of SAJA (South Asian Journalists Association) When I posted the note about Steve Coll's new book on the CIA and Afghanistan (and his event tonight in NYC - and in other cities this week), I got a note from a SAJA Lister asking: "Does his book have anything about the rest of South Asia?" Not having read the book yet, I planned to ask Steve that tonight. But then, I got a note from SAJAer K.P. NAYAR, who has teased out what he calls Coll's "several other startling revelations about the recent twists and turns in America's ties with Pakistan." Below is a copy of Nayar's article and below that, details about Coll's book | sreenath sreenivasan | The Telegraph March 1, 2004 Bonhomie ignited long before war on terror By K.P. NAYAR Washington, Feb. 29: The Bush administration's chumminess with Pervez Musharraf did not start after the September 11, 2001, attacks in New York and Washington and the imperatives it created for a revived alliance between the US and Pakistan as generally believed. Early in 2001, soon after President George W. Bush took office, the White House sent a confidential letter to Musharraf "that contained many encouraging signals about the future of the US-Pakistan alliance", which included debt relief, sanction waivers and security cooperation. That letter was in response to a three-page confidential memo delivered by Musharraf to Bush outlining common ground between Islamabad and Washington and pressing for closer ties. That memo was the result of alarm in Islamabad over advocacy within the Republican party for a "strategic shift towards India" by Robert Blackwill, then a foreign policy adviser to the incoming President, and others in the Bush election team. This and several other startling revelations about the recent twists and turns in America's ties with Pakistan are contained in a book by Steve Coll, managing editor of The Washington Post, published here last week. Coll was earlier the paper's correspondent in New Delhi. Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan and Bin Laden, From the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001, published by Penguin, also offers the first clue to why Ashraf Jehangir Qazi was posted as Pakistan's ambassador to Washington after Delhi asked Islamabad to pull him out as high commissioner in Delhi. Coll says that among the documents recovered from Pakistan's embassy in Kabul after the Americans overthrew the Taliban was a secret cable sent by Qazi from Delhi to Islamabad in advance of a meeting called by Musharraf of all Pakistani ambassadors abroad. Arguing strongly in favour of ditching the Taliban, Qazi wrote in that cable about Pakistan's support for Mullah Omar, the one-eyed Taliban supremo: "We find practical reasons to continue with policies that we know are never going to deliver and the eventual costs of which we also know will be overwhelming... Thus we are condemned to ride a tiger." Pakistan, he argued, had "no choice" but to "resolve the OBL (Osama bin Laden) problem before addressing any other issue". The cable would have been written at a time when Qazi was feeling the heat in Delhi after the Taliban cooperated with hijackers of an Indian Airlines plane taken to Kandahar and released in exchange for terrorists jailed in India for holy war in support of Kashmir's freedom. Qazi, it would have been clear to the Americans from the cable and other such evidence, was among those in the Pakistani foreign office who had questioned the support of the Army General Headquarters in Rawalpindi for the religious zealots in Afghanistan, a factor that would have endeared him to the Washington establishment. The book reveals that contrary to the popular belief that Musharraf was reining in the Taliban, it was the other way round. Mullah Omar wrote a threatening letter to Musharraf on January 16, 2001, urging him to "enforce Islamic law... step by step". He warned Musharraf of instability in Pakistan if this was not done. "This is our advice and message based on Islamic ideology," Omar wrote to the general. "Otherwise you had better know how to deal with it." The letter and Qazi's cable were reported in Survival, the journal of the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies, in 2002 but Coll's book puts such facts into the context of Pakistan's web of ties with the Taliban and the evolution of Washington's alliance with Musharraf during the Bush presidency. The book reveals that after Musharraf wrote his confidential three-page memo to Bush, Condoleezza Rice, now the national security adviser, met Maleeha Lodhi, then Pakistan's ambassador to the US, to discuss parameters of US-Pakistan ties, including resolution of the bin Laden problem, under a Republican presidency. Rumours of the meeting had then swirled around the Indian embassy here: the conventional wisdom at the mission during the presidential campaign was that Al Gore would become President in the 2000 election. During a visit to Washington, national security adviser Brajesh Mishra was alarmed that India had not worked adequately on contacts with Republicans during the presidential campaign. blink.gif He took the initiative to fly to the west coast and meet former Republican secretary of state George Schultz in an obvious effort to negate Lodhi's influence on Rice, which was then reported to be growing. 0 0 0 0 0 Pulitzer Prize winner Steve Coll, managing editor of The Washington Post (and SAJA Convention headliner in 2002) has an important new book out on the secret history of the CIA, Afghanistan, bin Laden, et al (I have been seeing him on various TV and radio shows). Coll, a former WP South Asia bureau chief, wrote a book about the Grand Trunk Road that I consider mandatory reading for anyone who wants to be a journalist in the region: "On the Grand Trunk Road: A Journey into South Asia." Below you will find the press release about the new book GHOST WARS The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001 by Steve Coll "During the 1980's, Soviet conscripts besieged by CIA-supplied Afghan rebels called them dukhi, or ghosts. The Soviets could never quite grasp and hold their enemy. It remained that way in Afghanistan long after they had gone. From its first days before the Soviet invasion until its last hours in the late summer of 2001, this was a struggle among ghosts." --from GHOST WARS Looming large in the minds of the American people since the devastation of September 11, 2001 - and perplexing their political analysts, media, and elected leaders - are two unsettling questions: To what extent did America's best intelligence analysts grasp the rising threat of Islamist radicalism? And, Who tried to stop bin Laden and why did they fail? Later this month, and for the first time, Steve Coll, managing editor of The Washington Post, provides answers in a news-breaking account of the CIA's involvement in the covert wars in Afghanistan that fueled Islamic militancy and gave rise to bin Laden's al Qaeda. The Penguin Press will publish GHOST WARS: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001 on February 23, in a national one-day on-sale. For nearly the past quarter century, while most Americans were unaware, Afghanistan has been the playing field for intense covert operations by U.S. and foreign intelligence agencies-invisible wars that sowed the seeds of the September 11 attacks and that provide its context. From the Soviet invasion in 1979 through the summer of 2001, the CIA, KGB, Pakistan's ISI, and Saudi Arabia's General Intelligence Department all operated directly and secretly in Afghanistan. They primed Afghan factions with cash and weapons, secretly trained guerrilla forces, funded propaganda, and manipulated politics. In the midst of these struggles bin Laden conceived and then built his global organization. Pulitzer Prize-winning Coll provides the only comprehensive account to date of the secret history of the CIA's role in Afghanistan, including its covert program against Soviet troops from 1979 to 1989, and examines the rise of the Taliban, the emergence of bin Laden, and the secret efforts by CIA officers and their agents to capture or kill bin Laden in Afghanistan after 1998. Based on extensive firsthand accounts, GHOST WARS is the inside story that goes well beyond anything previously published on U.S. involvement in Afghanistan, chronicling the roles of midlevel CIA officers, their Afghan allies, and such top spy masters as Bill Casey, Saudi Arabia's Prince Turki al Faisal, and George Tenet; heated debates within the American government; and the often poisonous, mistrustful relations between the CIA and foreign intelligence agencies. ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Winner of a 1990 Pulitzer Prize for explanatory journalism, Steve Coll has been managing editor of The Washington Post since 1998 and covered Afghanistan as the Post's South Asia bureau chief between 1989 and 1992. Coll is the author of four books, including On the Grand Trunk Road and The Taking of Getty Oil. He lives with his wife and three children in Maryland.
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 3 2004, 02:08 PM clap.gif ISLAMAWORST : Anti-Pakistan forces, including agencies from the US, the UK, India, and Israel penetrated the country’s nuclear program, and as of now, Pakistan 's defence and security apparatus was under threat, claimed former army chief General (retired) "The agents of CIA, RAW, MOSSAD and MI5 have managed to penetrate into our nuclear program, as anti-Pakistan forces were trying to roll back country's nuclear capability," Online News quoted Baig as saying. He said the claims of these four nations that they had been closely observing and watching the clandestine activities of nuclear scientist Dr A Q Khan, had greatly damaged the country's integrity. These forces, he further went on to say, wanted Pakistan to rollback its nuclear program. This, he warned, would be destructive for the country. Claiming that anti-state elements were present in each department of Pakistan under the guise of bureaucrats, technocrats, scholars and others, the former army chief said that these elements posed a serious threat to the country's security and integrity. "Neither any government can rollback it, nor anyone has the right to inspect our laboratories," he elaborated. He recalled that no federal government in the past had ever been involved in the freezing of the country's nuclear program. "No government has shown any flexibility about nuclear program and respective governments improved it for national defence. This was the reason that Pakistan became a nuclear power," he maintained. He also urged the US and the UK to break-up the underground network of nuclear proliferation. Baig claimed that Pakistan 's nuclear program was for peaceful purposes. "KRL (Khan Research Laboratories) and its related activities are purely for peaceful purposes and now it is working under a full Command and Control Authority established in 1999," he said. Cheers cheers.gif
Posted by: Dr. S. Kalyan Mar 3 2004, 05:34 PM
"The most dangerous country for the United States now is Pakistan...": Gallucci THE DEAL by SEYMOUR M. HERSH Why is Washington going easy on Pakistan’s nuclear black marketers? Issue of 2004-03-08 Posted 2004-03-01 On February 4th, Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, who is revered in Pakistan as the father of the country’s nuclear bomb, appeared on a state-run television network in Islamabad and confessed that he had been solely responsible for operating an international black market in nuclear-weapons materials. His confession was accepted by a stony-faced Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan’s President, who is a former Army general, and who dressed for the occasion in commando fatigues. The next day, on television again, Musharraf, who claimed to be shocked by Khan’s misdeeds, nonetheless pardoned him, citing his service to Pakistan (he called Khan “my hero”). Musharraf told the Times that he had received a specific accounting of Khan’s activities in Iran, North Korea, and Malaysia from the United States only last October. “If they knew earlier, they should have told us,” he said. “Maybe a lot of things would not have happened.” It was a make-believe performance in a make-believe capital. In interviews last month in Islamabad, a planned city built four decades ago, politicians, diplomats, and nuclear experts dismissed the Khan confession and the Musharraf pardon with expressions of scorn and disbelief. For two decades, journalists and American and European intelligence agencies have linked Khan and the Pakistani intelligence service, the I.S.I. (Inter-Service Intelligence), to nuclear-technology transfers, and it was hard to credit the idea that the government Khan served had been oblivious. “It is state propaganda,” Samina Ahmed, the director of the Islamabad office of the International Crisis Group, a nongovernmental organization that studies conflict resolution, told me. “The deal is that Khan doesn’t tell what he knows. Everybody is lying. The tragedy of this whole affair is that it doesn’t serve anybody’s needs.” Mushahid Hussain Sayed, who is a member of the Pakistani senate, said with a laugh, “America needed an offering to the gods—blood on the floor. Musharraf told A.Q., ‘Bend over for a spanking.’” A Bush Administration intelligence officer with years of experience in nonproliferation issues told me last month, “One thing we do know is that this was not a rogue operation. Suppose Edward Teller had suddenly decided to spread nuclear technology and equipment around the world. Do you really think he could do that without the government knowing? How do you get missiles from North Korea to Pakistan? Do you think A.Q. shipped all the centrifuges by Federal Express? The military has to be involved, at high levels.” The intelligence officer went on, “We had every opportunity to put a stop to the A. Q. Khan network fifteen years ago. Some of those involved today in the smuggling are the children of those we knew about in the eighties. It’s the second generation now.” In public, the Bush Administration accepted the pardon at face value. Within hours of Musharraf’s television appearance, Richard Armitage, the Deputy Secretary of State, praised him as “the right man at the right time.” Armitage added that Pakistan had been “very forthright in the last several years with us about proliferation.” A White House spokesman said that the Administration valued Musharraf’s assurances that “Pakistan was not involved in any of the proliferation activity.” A State Department spokesman said that how to deal with Khan was “a matter for Pakistan to decide.” Musharraf, who seized power in a coup d’état in 1999, has been a major ally of the Bush Administration in the war on terrorism. According to past and present military and intelligence officials, however, Washington’s support for the pardon of Khan was predicated on what Musharraf has agreed to do next: look the other way as the U.S. hunts for Osama bin Laden in a tribal area of northwest Pakistan dominated by the forbidding Hindu Kush mountain range, where he is believed to be operating. American commanders have been eager for permission to conduct major sweeps in the Hindu Kush for some time, and Musharraf has repeatedly refused them. Now, with Musharraf’s agreement, the Administration has authorized a major spring offensive that will involve the movement of thousands of American troops. Musharraf has proffered other help as well. A former senior intelligence official said to me, “Musharraf told us, ‘We’ve got guys inside. The people who provide fresh fruits and vegetables and herd the goats’” for bin Laden and his Al Qaeda followers. “It’s a quid pro quo: we’re going to get our troops inside Pakistan in return for not forcing Musharraf to deal with Khan.” The spring offensive could diminish the tempo of American operations in Iraq. “It’s going to be a full-court press,” one Pentagon planner said. Some of the most highly skilled Special Forces units, such as Task Force 121, will be shifted from Iraq to Pakistan. Special Forces personnel around the world have been briefed on their new assignments, one military adviser told me, and in some cases have been given “warning orders”—the stage before being sent into combat. A large-scale American military presence in Pakistan could also create an uproar in the country and weaken Musharraf’s already tenuous hold on power. The operation represents a tremendous gamble for him personally (he narrowly survived two assassination attempts in December) and, by extension, for the Bush Administration—if he fell, his successor might be far less friendly to the United States. One of Musharraf’s most vocal critics inside Pakistan is retired Army Lieutenant General Hamid Gul, a fundamentalist Muslim who directed the I.S.I. from 1987 to 1989, at the height of the Afghan war with the Soviets. If American troops start operating from Pakistan, there will be “a rupture in the relationship,” Gul told me. “Americans think others are slaves to them.” Referring to the furor over A. Q. Khan, he added, “We may be in a jam, but we are a very honorable nation. We will not allow the American troops to come here. This will be the breaking point.” If Musharraf has made an agreement about letting American troops operate in Pakistan, Gul said, “he’s lying to you.” The greatest risk may be not to Musharraf, or to the stability of South Asia, but to the ability of the international nuclear monitoring institutions to do their work. Many experts fear that, with Khan’s help, the world has moved closer to a nuclear tipping point. Husain Haqqani, who was a special assistant to three prime ministers before Musharraf came to power and is a visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, noted, with some pride, that his nation had managed to make the bomb despite American sanctions. But now, he told me, Khan and his colleagues have gone wholesale: “Once they had the bomb, they had a shopping list of what to buy and where. A. Q. Khan can bring a plain piece of paper and show me how to get it done—the countries, people, and telephone numbers. ‘This is the guy in Russia who can get you small quantities of enriched uranium. You in Malaysia will manufacture the stuff. Here’s who will miniaturize the warhead. And then go to North Korea and get the damn missile.’” He added, “This is not a few scientists pocketing money and getting rich. It’s a state policy.” Haqqani depicted Musharraf as truly “on the American side,” in terms of resisting Islamic extremism, but, he said, “he doesn’t know how to be on the American side. The same guys in the I.S.I. who have done this in the last twenty years he expects to be his partners. These are people who’ve done nothing but covert operations: One, screw India. Two, deceive America. Three, expand Pakistan’s influence in the Islamic community. And, four, continue to spread nuclear technology.” He paused. “Musharraf is trying to put out the fire with the help of the people who started the fire,” he said. “Much of this has been known for decades to the American intelligence community,” Haqqani added. “Sometimes you know things and don’t want to do anything about it. Americans need to know that your government is not only downplaying this but covering it up. You go to bed with our I.S.I. They know how to suck up to you. You let us get away with everything. Why can’t you be more honest? There’s no harm in telling us the truth—‘Look, you’re an ally but a very disturbing ally.’ You have to nip some of these things in the bud.” The former senior American intelligence official was equally blunt. He told me, “Khan was willing to sell blueprints, centrifuges, and the latest in weaponry. He was the worst nuclear-arms proliferator in the world and he’s pardoned—with not a squeak from the White House.” The most recent revelations about the nuclear black market were triggered by the National Council of Resistance of Iran, a now defunct opposition group that has served as the political wing of the People’s Mujahideen Khalq, a group that has been on the State Department’s list of terrorist organizations since 1997. The National Council lobbied in Washington for decades, and offered information—not always accurate—about Iran. There had been suspicions about Iran’s nuclear intentions since the eighties, but the country’s religious rulers claimed that its nuclear facilities were intended for peaceful purposes only. In August of 2002, the National Council came up with something new: it announced at a news conference in Washington that it had evidence showing that Iran had secretly constructed two extensive nuclear-weapons facilities in the desert south of Tehran. The two plants were described with impressive specificity. One, near Natanz, had been depicted by Iranian officials as part of a desert-eradication program. The site, surrounded by barbed wire, was said to include two work areas buried twenty-five feet underground and ringed by concrete walls more than eight feet thick. The second plant, which was said to be producing heavy water for use in making weapons-grade plutonium, was situated in Arak and ostensibly operated as an energy company. Inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency, the organization that monitors nuclear proliferation, eventually followed up on the National Council’s information. And it checked out. A building that I.A.E.A. inspectors were not able to gain full access to on a visit in March, 2003, was found on a subsequent trip to contain a centrifuge facility behind a wall made of boxes. Inspectors later determined that some of the centrifuges had been supplied by Pakistan. They also found traces of highly enriched uranium on centrifuge components manufactured in Iran and Pakistan. The I.A.E.A. has yet to determine whether the uranium originated in Pakistan: the enriched materials could have come from the black market, or from a nuclear proliferator yet to be discovered, or from the Iranians’ own production facilities. Last October, the Iranian government, after nine months of denials and obfuscation—and increasingly productive inspections—formally acknowledged to the I.A.E.A. that it had secretly been producing small quantities of enriched uranium and plutonium, and had been operating a pilot heavy-water reactor program, all potentially in violation of its obligations under the nuclear-nonproliferation treaty. Some of the secret programs, Iran admitted, dated back eighteen years. At first, the country’s religious leadership claimed that its scientists had worked on their own, and not with the help of outside suppliers. The ayatollahs later admitted that this was not the case, but refused to say where the help had come from. Iran’s leaders continued to insist that their goal was to produce nuclear energy, not nuclear weapons, and, in a public report last November, the I.A.E.A. stopped short of accusing them of building a bomb. Cautiously, it stated, “It is clear that Iran has failed in a number of instances over an extended period of time to meet its obligations . . . with respect to the reporting of nuclear material and its processing and use. . . . To date, there is no evidence that the previously undeclared nuclear material and activities referred to above were related to a nuclear weapons programme.” Privately, however, senior proliferation experts were far less reserved. “I know what they did,” one official in Vienna told me, speaking of the Iranians. “They’ve been lying all the time and they’ve been cheating all the time.” Asked if he thought that Iran now has the bomb, the official said no. Asked if he thought that Iran had enough enriched uranium to make a bomb, he said, “I’m not sure.” Musharraf has insisted that any dealings between A. Q. Khan and Iran were independent of, and unknown to, the Pakistani government. But there is evidence to contradict him. On a trip to the Middle East last month, I was told that a number of years ago the Israeli signals-intelligence agency, known as Unit 8200, broke a sophisticated Iranian code and began monitoring communications that included talk between Iran and Pakistan about Iran’s burgeoning nuclear-weapons program. The Israeli intelligence community has many covert contacts inside Iran, stemming from the strong ties it had there before the overthrow of the Shah, in 1979; some of these ties still exist. Israeli intelligence also maintained close contact with many Iranian opposition groups, such as the National Council. A connection was made—directly or indirectly—and the Israeli intelligence about Iran’s nuclear program reached the National Council. A senior I.A.E.A. official subsequently told me that he knew that the Council’s information had originated with Israeli intelligence, but he refused to say where he had learned that fact. (An Israeli diplomat in Washington, asked to comment, said, “Why would we work with a Mickey Mouse outlet like the Council?”) The Israeli intercepts have been shared, in some form, with the United States intelligence community, according to the former senior intelligence official, and they show that high-level officials in Islamabad and Tehran had frequent conversations about the I.A.E.A. investigation and its implications. “The interpretation is the issue here,” the former official said. “If you set the buzzwords aside, the substance is that the Iranians were saying, ‘We’ve got to play with the I.A.E.A. We don’t want to blow our cover, but we have to show some movement. There’s no way we’re going against world public opinion—no way. We’ve got to show that we’re coöperating and get the Europeans on our side.’” (At the time, Iran was engaged in negotiations with the European Union on trade and other issues.) It’s clear from the intercepts, however, the former intelligence official said, that Iran did not want to give up its nuclear potential. The Pakistani response, he added, was “Don’t give away the whole ballgame and we’ll look out for you.” There was a further message from Pakistan, the former official said: “Look out for your own interests.” In the official’s opinion, Pakistan and Iran have survived the crisis: “They both did what they said they’d do, and neither one has been hurt. No one has been damaged. The public story is still that Iran never really got there—which is bullshit.” And analysts throughout the American intelligence community, he said, are asking, “How could it be that Pakistan’s done all these things—developed a second generation of miniaturized and boosted weapons—and yet the investigation has been shorted to ground?” A high-level intelligence officer who has access to the secret Iran-Pakistan exchanges told me that he understood that “the Pakistanis were very worried that the Iranians would give their name to the I.A.E.A.” The officer, interviewed in Tel Aviv, told me that Israel remains convinced that “the Iranians do not intend to give up the bomb. What Iran did was report to the I.A.E.A. the information that was already out in the open and which they cannot protect. There is much that is not exposed.” Israeli intelligence, he added, continues to see digging and other nuclear-related underground activity in Iran. A nonproliferation official based in Vienna later explained that Iran has bored two holes near a uranium-mining operation that are “deep enough to do a test”—as deep as two hundred metres. The design of the bomb that could be tested, he added, if Iran chose to do so, came from Libya, via Pakistan and A. Q. Khan. Last December, President Bush and Tony Blair, the British Prime Minister, jointly announced that Muammar Qaddafi, the Libyan leader, had decided to give up his nuclear-weapons program and would permit I.A.E.A. inspectors to enter his country. The surprise announcement, the culmination of nine months of secret talks, was followed immediately by a six-day inspection by the I.A.E.A., the first of many inspections, and the public unveiling, early this year, of the role of yet another country, Malaysia, in the nuclear black market. Libya had been able to purchase hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of nuclear parts, including advanced centrifuges designed in Pakistan, from a firm in Malaysia, with a free-trade zone in Dubai serving as the main shipping point. It was a new development in an old arms race: Malaysia, a high-tech nation with no indigenous nuclear ambitions, was retailing sophisticated nuclear gear, based on designs made available by Khan. The centrifuge materials that the inspectors found in Libya had not been assembled—in most cases, in fact, the goods were still in their shipping cases. “I am not impressed by what I’ve seen,” a senior nonproliferation official told me. “It was not a well-developed program—not a serious research-and-development approach to make use of what they bought. It was useless. But I was absolutely struck by what the Libyans were able to buy. What’s on the market is absolutely horrendous. It’s a Mafia-type business, with corruption and secrecy.” I.A.E.A. inspectors, to their dismay, even found in Libya precise blueprints for the design and construction of a half-ton nuclear weapon. “It’s a sweet little bomb, put together by engineers who know how to assemble a weapon,” an official in Vienna told me. “No question it’ll work. Just dig a hole and test it. It’s too big and too heavy for a Scud, but it’ll go into a family car. It’s a terrorist’s dream.” In a speech on February 5th at Georgetown University, George Tenet, the director of the Central Intelligence Agency, hailed the developments in Libya as an American intelligence coup. Tenet said, “We learned of all this through the powerful combination of technical intelligence, careful and painstaking analytic work, operational daring, and, yes, the classic kind of human intelligence that people have led you to believe we no longer have.” The C.I.A. unquestionably has many highly motivated and highly skilled agents. But interviews with former C.I.A. officials and with two men who worked closely with Libyan intelligence present a different story. Qaddafi had been seeking a reconciliation with the West for years, with limited success. Then, a former C.I.A. operations officer told me, Musa Kusa, the longtime head of Libyan intelligence, urged Qaddafi to meet with Western intelligence agencies and open up his weapons arsenal to international inspection. The C.I.A. man quoted Kusa as explaining that, as the war with Iraq drew near, he had warned Qaddafi, “You are nuts if you think you can defeat the United States. Get out of it now. Surrender now and hope they accept your surrender.” One Arab intelligence operative told me that Libyan intelligence, with Qaddafi’s approval, then quickly offered to give American and British intelligence details about a centrifuge deal that was already under way. The parts were due to be shipped aboard a German freighter, the B.B.C. China. In October, the freighter was seized, and the incident was proclaimed a major intelligence success. But, the operative said, it was “the Libyans who blew up the Pakistanis,” and who made the role of Khan’s black market known. The Americans, he said, asked “questions about those orders and Libya said it had them.” It was, in essence, a sting, and was perceived that way by Musharraf. He was enraged by what he called, in a nationally televised speech last month—delivered in Urdu, and not officially translated by the Pakistani government—the betrayal of Pakistan by his “Muslim brothers” in both Libya and Iran. There was little loyalty between seller and buyer. “The Pakistanis took a lot of Libya’s money and gave second-grade plans,” the Arab intelligence operative said. “It was halfhearted.” The intelligence operative went on, “Qaddafi is very pragmatic and studied the timing. It was the right time. The United States wanted to have a success story, and he banked on that.” Because of the ongoing investigation into Khan and his nuclear-proliferation activities, the I.A.E.A.’s visibility and credibility have grown.The key issue, Mohamed ElBaradei, the director-general of the I.A.E.A., told me, in an interview at the organization’s headquarters in Vienna, is non-state actors. “I have a nightmare that the spread of enriched uranium and nuclear material could result in the operation of a small enrichment facility in a place like northern Afghanistan,” he said. “Who knows? It’s not hard for a non-state to hide, especially if there is a state in collusion with it. Some of these non-state groups are very sophisticated.” Many diplomats in Vienna expressed frustration at the I.A.E.A.’s inability, thanks to Musharraf’s pardon, to gain access to Khan. “It’s not going to happen,” one diplomat said. “We are getting some coöperation from Pakistan, but it’s the names we need to know. ‘Who got the stuff?’ We’re interested to know whether other nations that we’re supposed to supervise have the stuff.” The diplomat told me he believed that the United States was unwilling to publicly state the obvious: that there was no way the Pakistani government didn’t know about the transfers. He said, “Of course it looks awful, but Musharraf will be indebted to you.” The I.A.E.A.’s authority to conduct inspections is limited. The nations that have signed the nonproliferation treaty are required to permit systematic I.A.E.A. inspections of their declared nuclear facilities for research and energy production. But there is no mechanism for the inspection of suspected nuclear-weapons sites, and many at the I.A.E.A. believe that the treaty must be modified. “There is a nuclear network of black-market centrifuges and weapons design that the world has yet to discover,” a diplomat in Vienna told me. In the past, he said, the I.A.E.A. had worked under the assumption that nations would cheat on the nonproliferation treaty “to produce and sell their own nuclear material.” He said, “What we have instead is a black-market network capable of producing usable nuclear materials and nuclear devices that is not limited to any one nation. We have nuclear dealers operating outside our front door, and we have no control over them—no matter how good we are in terms of verification.” There would be no need, in other words, for A. Q. Khan or anyone else in Pakistan to have a direct role in supplying nuclear technology. The most sensitive nuclear equipment would be available to any country—or any person or group, presumably—that had enough cash. “This is a question of survival,” the diplomat said, with a caustic smile. He added, “Iraq is laughable in comparison with this issue. The Bush Administration was hunting the shadows instead of the prey.” Another nonproliferation official depicted the challenge facing the I.A.E.A. inspection regime as “a seismic shift—the globalization of the nuclear world.” The official said, “We have to move from inspecting declared sites to ‘Where does this shit come from?’ If we stay focussed on the declared, we miss the nuclear supply matrix.” At this point, the international official asked me, in all seriousness, “Why hasn’t A. Q. Khan been taken out by Israel or the United States?” After Pakistan’s role in providing nuclear aid to Iran and Libya was revealed, Musharraf insisted once again, this time at the World Economic Forum, in Davos, Switzerland, in January, that he would not permit American troops to search for Al Qaeda members inside Pakistan. “That is not a possibility at all,” he said. “It is a very sensitive issue. There is no room for any foreign elements coming and assisting us. We don’t need any assistance.” Nonetheless, a senior Pentagon adviser told me in mid-February, the spring offensive is on. “We’re entering a huge period of transition in Iraq,” the adviser said, referring to the coming changeover of forces, with many of the experienced regular Army combat units being replaced by National Guard and Army Reserve units. “We will not be conducting a lot of ops, and so you redirect and exploit somewhere else.” The operation, American officials said, is scheduled to involve the redeployment to South Asia of thousands of American soldiers, including members of Task Force 121. The logistical buildup began in mid-February, as more than a dozen American C-17 cargo planes began daily flights, hauling helicopters, vehicles, and other equipment to military bases in Pakistan. Small teams of American Special Forces units have been stationed at the Shahbaz airbase, in northwestern Pakistan, since the beginning of the Afghanistan war, in the fall of 2001. The senior Pentagon adviser, like other military and intelligence officials I talked to, was cautious about the chances of getting what the White House wants—Osama bin Laden. “It’s anybody’s guess,” he said, adding that Ops Sec—operational security—for the planned offensive was poor. The former senior intelligence official similarly noted that there was concern inside the Joint Special Operations Command, at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, over the reliability of intercepted Al Qaeda telephone calls. “What about deception?” he said. “These guys are not dumb, and once the logistical aircraft begin to appear”—the American C-17s landing every night at an airbase in Pakistan—“you know something is going on.” “We’ve got to get Osama bin Laden, and we know where he is,” the former senior intelligence official said. Osama bin Laden is “communicating through sigint”—talking on satellite telephones and the like—“and his wings have been clipped. He’s in his own Alamo in northern Pakistan. It’s a natural progress—whittling down alternative locations and then targeting him. This is not, in theory, a ‘Let’s go and hope’ kind of thing. They’ve seen what they think is him.” But the former official added that there were reasons to be cautious about such reports, especially given that bin Laden hasn’t been seen for so long. Bin Laden would stand out because of his height; he is six feet five. But the target area is adjacent to Swat Valley, which is populated by a tribe of exceptionally tall people. Two former C.I.A. operatives with firsthand knowledge of the PakistanAfghanistan border areas said that the American assault, if it did take place, would confront enormous logistical problems. “It’s impenetrable,” said Robert Baer, who visited the Hindu Kush area in the early nineties, before he was assigned to lead the C.I.A.’s anti-Saddam operations in northern Iraq. “There are no roads, and you can’t get armor up there. This is where Alexander the Great lost an entire division. The Russians didn’t even bother to go up there. Everybody’s got a gun. That area is worse than Iraq.” Milton Bearden, who ran the C.I.A.’s operations in Afghanistan during the war with the Soviet Union, recounted, “I’ve been all through there. The Pashtun population in that belt has lived there longer than almost any other ethnic group has lived anywhere on earth.” He said, “Our intelligence has got to be better than it’s been. Anytime we go into something driven entirely by electoral politics, it doesn’t work out.” One American intelligence consultant noted that American forces in Afghanistan have crossed into Pakistan in “hot pursuit” of Al Qaeda suspects in previous operations, with no complaints from the Pakistani leadership. If the American forces strike quickly and decisively against bin Laden from within Pakistan, he added, “Musharraf could say he gave no advance authorization. We can move in with so much force and firepower—with so much shock and awe—that we will be too fast for him.” The consultant said, “The question is, how deep into Pakistan can we pursue him?” He added, “Musharraf is in a very tough position.” At home, Musharraf is in more danger than ever over his handling of the nuclear affair. “He’s opened up Pandora’s box, and he will never be able to manage it,” Chaudry Nisar Ali Khan, a former government minister who now heads an opposition party, said. “Pakistani public opinion feels that A.Q. has been made a scapegoat, and international opinion thinks he’s a threat. This is a no-win situation for Musharraf. The average man feels that there will be a nuclear rollback, and Pakistan’s immediate deterrent will be taken away. It comes down to an absolute disaster for Musharraf.” Robert Gallucci, a former United Nations weapons inspector who is now dean of the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service, calls A. Q. Khan “the Johnny Appleseed” of the nuclear-arms race. Gallucci, who is a consultant to the C.I.A. on proliferation issues, told me, “Bad as it is with Iran, North Korea, and Libya having nuclear-weapons material, the worst part is that they could transfer it to a non-state group. That’s the biggest concern, and the scariest thing about all this—that Pakistan could work with the worst terrorist groups on earth to build nuclear weapons. There’s nothing more important than stopping terrorist groups from getting nuclear weapons. The most dangerous country for the United States now is Pakistan, and second is Iran.” Gallucci went on, “We haven’t been this vulnerable since the British burned Washington in 1814.”
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 3 2004, 06:37 PM
Full Post on the Islamic Nuke Thread. Cheers
Posted by: rhytha Mar 3 2004, 07:18 PM
Bad as it is with Iran, North Korea, and Libya having nuclear-weapons material, the worst part is that they could transfer it to a non-state group. That’s the biggest concern, and the scariest thing about all this—that Pakistan could work with the worst terrorist groups on earth to build nuclear weapons. There’s nothing more important than stopping terrorist groups from getting nuclear weapons. The most dangerous country for the United States now is Pakistan, and second is Iran.” Gallucci went on, “We haven’t been this vulnerable since the British burned Washington in 1814.”
'Whatsoever, you bring in a dog and keep it in middle of your house, it will always run to the street dumb" - an old tamil proverb guitar.gif Super Duper unkil deserves this and more infact thumbup.gif
Posted by: rhytha Mar 3 2004, 07:20 PM
The Protean Enemy Jessica Stern Despite the setbacks al Qaeda has suffered over the last two years, it is far from finished, as its recent bomb attacks testify. How has the group managed to survive an unprecedented American onslaught? By shifting shape and forging new, sometimes improbable, alliances. These tactics have made al Qaeda more dangerous than ever, and Western governments must show similar flexibility in fighting the group.
Posted by: Mudy Mar 4 2004, 12:34 AM by B.Raman (This is to be read in continuation of my earlier articles titled " Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, bin Laden & RamziYousef " ( ), "Al Qaeda & Taliban Target Hazaras" ( ) and " Iraq: From Bad To Worse" ( ) ------------------------ In my despatch of February 16, 2004, from Israel, I had stated as follows: "The Falluja raid has come at a time when there are reports of the infiltration of about 60 Yemeni, Yemeni-Balochi and Pakistani terrorists, belonging to the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET), the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen (al-Almi meaning international) and the sunni extremist Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan (SSP) into Iraq from Saudi Arabia. They had gone to Saudi Arabia under the guise of Haj pilgrims. After the Haj was over, they crossed over into Iraq instead of returning to their country. Similar instances had taken place last year too. With their entry, the total number of foreign jihadi terrorists in Iraq is estimated at about 360 to 380. 2. To understand the anti-Shia massacres at Karbala and Baghdad in Iraq ( about 180 fatal casualties) and at Quetta in Pakistan's Balochistan (41 killed ) during the Muhurrum procession on March 2, 2004, one has to go back to the creation of Pakistan in 1947. 3. When Pakistan was formed in 1947, the Shias were amongst the major land-owners of Pakistan's Punjab, its granary, and many of the Sunnis, who migrated to Pakistan from India's Punjab, were largely poor landless farm workers, who had to earn their livelihood in their country of adoption by working in the farms of the Shias. The perceived exploitation of the Sunnis by the Shia landlords started the process of the polarisation of the two sects of Islam in Pakistan. 4. This sectarian polarisation largely due to economic reasons was given a religious twist by Zia-ul-Haq, Pakistan's military dictator of the 1980s, after the overthrow of the Shah of Iran and the triumph of the Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979. To counter the growing political assertiveness of the Shias and their political party, the Tehrik-e-Jaffria (TEJ) Pakistan, which generally supported Mrs. Benazir Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party (PPP), he encouraged and assisted Sunni extremist organisations such as the Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan (SSP). 5. With his blessings, the SSP challenged the right of a woman to come to political power and projected the Shias and Mrs. Nusrat Bhutto, the mother of Benazir, as the surrogates of Iran. The SSP also started calling for the declaration of the Shias as non-Muslims and for the proclamation of Pakistan as a Sunni State. 6. Even before Zia seized power in 1977, Pakistan used to see sectarian tension and clashes between the Sunnis and the Shias, but this violence took a virulent form in the 1980s. There were many targeted attacks on Shias in the Sindh and Punjab provinces of Pakistan and in the Northern Areas of Jammu & Kashmir (Gilgit and Baltistan, where the Shias are in a majority), which has been under Pakistani occupation since 1947-48. 7. The last years of the Zia regime saw the Shias of Gilgit come out with a demand for a separate Shia State consisting of Gilgit and the Shia majority areas of Punjab and the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP). They wanted the Shia state to be called the Karakoram Province and remain part of a confederation of Pakistan. 8. The Zia regime crushed the Shia movement ruthlessly. In August 1988, the Pakistan Army inducted a large Sunni tribal force from the NWFP and the Federally-Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), led by Osama bin Laden, into Gilgit and it massacred hundreds of Shias and crushed their revolt. The hatred of the Shias for Osama bin Laden and his Al Qaeda dates from this period. 9. Shortly after this massacre, Zia died in a mysterious plane crash. Though the report of the enquiry commission has not been allowed to be released by the Army, it is generally believed by many in Pakistan that the crash of the aircraft was caused by a Shia airman on board the flight. In October,1991, Lt.Gen. (retd) Fazle Haq, a close associate of Zia, was assassinated in Peshawar, the capital of the NWFP, by Shia gunmen. 10. The virulent anti-Shia ideology of the SSP was also exploited by the intelligence agencies of the USA and Iraq in their attempts to destabilise Iran and have the Shia clergy ruling Teheran overthrown. As a result of the support from the Saddam Hussain regime, the SSP, which was an anti-Pakistani Shia and not an anti-Iran movement, started targeting the Iranians living in and visiting Pakistan too in the 1990s. There were many attacks on Iranian civilians, diplomats and military officers coming to Pakistan for training. The SSP was also used by the intelligence agencies of the USA and Iraq to instigate the Sunni Balochis of Iran to revolt against Teheran. 11. Many notorious Pakistani and Arab terrorists such as Ramzi Yousef, now in jail in the US for his involvement in the New York World Trade Centre explosion of February,1993 Maulana Masood Azhar of the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JEM), Fazlur Rahman Khalil of the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen (HUM) and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a Jordanian, started their career as terrorists as members of the SSP and participated in many of its anti-Shia massacres in Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan. When al-Zarqawi, along with some other Jordanians, many of them of Chechen ancestry, came to Pakistan in the 1980s to join the Arab mercenary force trained and armed by the CIA and the ISI and used against the Soviet troops in Afghanistan, his passport gave his name as Fadel al-Khalayleh, which is believed to be his real name. 12. On June 20, 1994 Ramzi Yousef and al-Zarqawi, at the instigation of the Iraqi intelligence, caused an explosion at Mashad in the Iranian territory adjoining Pakistan which killed a large number of Shias. Zarqawi, along with the late Riaz Basra, the leader of the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LEJ), the militant wing of the SSP, helped the Taliban in the capture of Kabul in September, 1996. 13. The LEJ subsequently helped the Taliban and Al Qaeda in the massacre of the Hazaras (Shias ) of Afghanistan. Osama bin Laden never liked Saddam, whom he looked upon as an apostate because of his secular and socialist policies, and the proximity of the LEJ and al-Zarqawi to Saddam's intelligence agency created differences between them and bin Laden. 14. Despite this, the LEJ joined bin Laden's International Islamic Front (IIF) for Jihad Against the Crusaders and the Jewish People after it was formed in 1998 and has remained loyal to bin Laden. Till 2002, the anti-Shia activities of the LEJ were confined to Punjab and Sindh. Balochistan remained largely free of anti-Shia incidents. The situation changed after the arrest of Khalid Sheikh Mohammad (KSM) by the Pakistani authorities at Rawalpindi in March, 2003 and his handing over to the USA's Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). It was reported that KSM had fled from Karachi to Quetta in September 2002, after the arrest of Ramzi Binalshibh and from there shifted to Rawalpindi fearing betrayal by the Hazaras (Shias) of Balochistan, who were suspected of helping the US agencies in their hunt for bin Laden because of their anger over the massacre of the Hazaras of Afghanistan before 9/11. 15. It is this suspicion, which was behind two anti-Shia incidents in Quetta last year. In the first, Hazara policemen under training and in the second in the first week of July, 53 Shia worshippers were killed. This suspicion against the Shias has increased in recent weeks in the wake of reports, contradicted by the Pakistani authorities, that President Pervez Musharraf has agreed to permit the US troops to comb for bin Laden in the FATA and the Pashtun majority areas of Balochistan. The massacre of the Shias in Quetta on March 2 was in reprisal partly for their suspected collaboration with the Americans in their hunt for bin Laden and partly for the murder of Maulana Azam Tariq, the leader of the SSP, last year, allegedly by Shia extremists. 16. In a message disseminated by Al Jazeera TV before the invasion of Iraq by the coalition troops led by the US last year, bin Laden had called for a united struggle against the Americans by the Sunnis and Shias of Iraq forgetting their sectarian differences. While continuing to describe Saddam as apostate, he appealed to the Shias and Sunnis not to let their differences come in the way of a joint resistance against the Americans. 17. Even before the invasion, terrorist elements of the IIF started moving to Iraq via Saudi Arabia and Iran for starting a jihad against the Americans. The first group to go was from the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen (HUM). They went to Saudi Arabia as Haj pilgrims and from there crossed over to Iraq. Subsequently, Arab-speaking volunteers of the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) and the LEJ also started going to Iraq in small numbers. Many of the Arabs of Chechen ancestry, originally belonging to Jordan and Saudi Arabia, who were in the South Waziristan area of the FATA, also joined them. 18. Neither the HUM nor the LET had in the past come to notice for indulging in anti-Shia massacres in Pakistan though some leaders of the HUM had originally been members of the SSP. Of those who have gone to Iraq from Pakistan, only the members of the LEJ had indulged in anti-Shia massacres in Pakistan and Afghanistan in the past and could be expected to indulge in similar massacres in Iraq without any hesitation. The Iraqi resistance fighters are unlikely to indulge in the kind of massacres carried out at Karbala and Baghdad on March 2. The needle of suspicion, therefore, strongly points to the LEJ. 19. Their action in targeting the Shias of Iraq arises partly from their deeply-ingrained anti-Shia reflexes and partly is a reprisal for the perceived collaboration of the Shia leaders of Iraq with the American troops. If al-Zarqawi wanted to promote a civil war in Iraq by instigating Shia-Sunni clashes, as alleged by US officials, the LEJ, with which he has had a history of association in the past and which would not hesitate to massacre Shias anywhere in the world, would be the ideal tool in his eyes.
Posted by: Viren Mar 4 2004, 01:28 AM
Where exactly are the champions of the candle kissers brigade - Clueless Nayyar, Pure Fool etc? Dosen't their heart bleed for those Shias in Pakistan?
Posted by: Krishna Mar 4 2004, 08:56 AM
Only in lotastan:
Posted by: Viren Mar 4 2004, 09:27 AM
How original - name a cologne after a guy who lives in caves, washes himself once a week, moves around with herds of goats rolleyes.gif Maybe with all the hot air these pakee.gif blow, a dash or cologne now and then might be a good thing.
Posted by: Sunder Mar 4 2004, 09:35 AM,2763,1161774,00.html Pakistan yesterday offered to share military assistance, including "nuclear power" with Nigeria, in defiance of President George Bush's new counter-proliferation initiative. pakee.gif The offer was announced by the Nigerian defence ministry in a statement saying that General Muhammad Aziz Khan, chairman of Pakistan's joint chiefs of staff, had made the offer to the Nigerian defence minister, Rabiu Kwankwaso, during a visit to the west African state's capital, Abuja. "Speaking at the opening of the discussions, the Pakistani chairman of joint chiefs of staff ... said that his country is working out the dynamics of how they can assist Nigeria's armed forces to strengthen its military capability and to acquire nuclear power," the Nigerian press release said. Neither the Pakistani nor the Nigerian governments clarified what Gen Khan had in mind. The announcement is likely to provoke consternation in Washington, coming just a month after the mastermind behind Pakistan's nuclear weapons programme, Abdul Qadeer Khan, admitted publicly that he had run a black market in nuclear weapons materials. Pakistan's president, Pervez Musharraf, expressed shock at the confession, but pardoned Mr Khan, much to the anger of nuclear inspectors at the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna. A detailed report in the New Yorker this week suggested Washington had turned a blind eye to the Pakistani government's connivance in sales of nuclear materials and technology to countries like Iran and Libya, in exchange for permission to send American commandos to hunt down Osama bin Laden in Pakistan's Hindu Kush. A week after Mr Khan's confession, President Bush launched a counter-proliferation initiative based on international cooperation to curb transfers of nuclear technology and materials. Gen Khan's offer to Nigeria appeared to be in blatant defiance of that initiative. The general made clear that the snub was intentional, declaring: "Pakistan had to take its destiny into its own hands to become a nuclear state because of the regular threats posed by hostile neighbours with special reference to the Kashmir conflict," according to the press release. US officials are also baffled at Nigeria's intentions, nearly five years after the country restored civilian rule, and at a time when it is under no threat from its neighbours. Two months ago, the Nigerian vice president's office announced that it had struck an agreement with North Korea to gain access to Pyongyang's missile technology. The offer was subsequently denied by North Korean officials and played down by a spokeswoman to Nigeria's president, Olusegun Obasanjo. The Nigerian government said at the time that "nothing was written in stone" and that any North Korean missile help would be used for "peacekeeping" and to protect its territory. It said it was not seeking nuclear technology or any other weapons of mass destruction. The South Korean unification minister, Jeong Se-hyun, said it was not clear whether Nigeria had accepted the offer, but said he didn't think the issue would cause many problems. "I see it as a tactic by North Korea to arouse anxiousness from the United States ahead of the second round of six-nation talks," Mr Jeong said. Nevertheless, the reports caused alarm in Washington. "If the Nigerians go through with this purchase, they will have earned the unenviable distinction as the first sub-Saharan African state to introduce ballistic-missile technology to the region. They will become the initiator of a supremely wasteful and potentially deadly arms race," said Richard Norton, a national security expert at the US naval war college. "Nigeria's motives would be questioned and its moves viewed with suspicion. And the Nigerian-US relationship would be damaged, perhaps badly. Substantial amounts of US military and law enforcement aid given to Nigeria might be placed in jeopardy."
Posted by: Dr. S. Kalyan Mar 4 2004, 03:00 PM
Pak offers Islamic nuke to Nigeria Uncle Sam, You had Somalia then 9/11. Now you have Nigeria, what next? Nuke version of 9/11? Don't the policy brass of USA realise that such a scenario is just unthinkable? If so, what are they doing to denuke Paki islamic bomb? Kalyanaraman
Posted by: Viren Mar 4 2004, 11:10 PM - methinks the bar on Mushy just got raised a bit tongue.gif
Posted by: Viren Mar 4 2004, 11:14 PM
Pakistani Rangers carry a white flag as they arrive to receive 'prasaad' or religious offerings from India's Border Security Force personnel for Pakistanis on the international border dividing India and Pakistan at Sangral, 35 km south west of Jammu, March 4, 2004. A ceasefire between India and Pakistan surprisingly yielded a spiritual ambiance at a deserted place after seventeen years, where hundreds of devotees thronged the Mazar of the Sain Swali Pir Baba situated on Zero Line here. REUTERS/Amit Gupta
Not first time that we've seen a Paki soldier walking towards India carrying a white flag - but a beard making a dash to eat 'prasad' - holy canoli ! What's the world come to ? biggrin.gif
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 4 2004, 11:37 PM
Viren : Arey Bhai this is much better : thumbup.gif clap.gif Cheers cheers.gif
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 5 2004, 12:49 AM
From : Far Eastern Economic Review Print Edition – 4 March 2004 – No URL The 5th Column TRADING MILITANCY FOR PEACE By Michael Krepon No one has lost money betting against a diplomatic break-through between India and Pakistan – but the odds are becoming more sporting. Diplomats from both countries have quickly agreed to the framework for a composite dialogue, which will begin in earnest following the Indian Elections. Conventional wisdom suggests another futile effort, because President Pervez Musharraf lacks the sincerity or the following to engineer a strategic shift towards peace. In this view, Pakistan’s army cannot wean itself from the need for an adversary and for Kashmir to remain on the boil. The time may be ripe to question these assumptions. We have become used to doubting public statements of Pakistan’s leaders – most recently on the Abdul Qadeer Khan affair – that it’s easy to discount important signals of a policy shift. Over the last year, Musharraf has dropped ritualistic positions on Kashmir. He has called for mutual flexibility in finding a solution, relaxed Pakistan’s insistence on holding a plebiscite and pledged directly to Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee not to permit “any territory under Pakistan’s control to be used to support terrorism.” Musharraf’s respositioning on Kashmir fits within his larger vision to transforming Pakistan into a “moderate, developed, enlightened and welfare Islamic state.” Musharraf carried this message to Davos for the World Economic Forum in January. Pakistan prepared a slick brochure for this occasion, seeking foreign investment and trumpeting positive economic prospects, declaring: “ It looks as though commerce may succeed where diplomats have so far failed…There is no doubt that the trade benefits of peace would be massive.” [Musharraf’s and other military leaders have often said that Pakistan’s stability rests on two pillars – the armed forces and economics. Some of Pakistan’s economic indicators are positive, but these advances are deceiving. Recent gains are largely the result of debt relief from international financial institutions and from the United States, which are connected to Pakistan’s support for the war against terrorism. Positive short-term indicators mask troubling domestic trends and a plethora of missed opportunities. In the past 15 years, the incidence of poverty in Pakistan has risen from *20% to 33%. Pakistan’s burgeoning population, now approximately **140 million, id poorly educated and cared. For every dollar that Pakistan spends on Defence, it spends just 40 cents on education and 20 cents on public health. As long as Pakistan is perceived to be linked to the Taliban and to jihadi (holy war) groups carring out a “freedom struggle” in Kashmir, foreign investors will shy away. American foreign direct investment in Pakistan over a five year period from 1998-2003 averaged $ 202 million – or just 5% of that in Bermuda, and 20% of that in Panama. Since the insurgency in Kashmir began, Pakistan’s rating of attractiveness for foreign direct investment dropped from 92 to 129 out of 140 countries surveyed by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. Pakistan’s geostrategic location makes it a natural transmission belt for trade and energy between Central Asia and the Subcontinent, but its failed national-security policies towards Afghanistan and India have forfeited both markets. In 2001-02 Pakistan’s direct trade with five Central Asian states was a paltry $ 27 Million. The annual volume of direct trade between one-fifth of humanity that lives in India and Pakistan stands at $ 250 million – approximately equal to that between the U. S. and Barbados. Pakistan could earn more than twice this amount by serving as a conduit for just one pipeline from Iran or Central Asia into India. All of these hard facts point to the wisdom of a strategic shift in Pakistan’s approach to India, her than to continuing support for jehadi groups that threaten Pakistan’s internal stabilityle punishing India’s security forces and Kashmiris. Have Musharraf and the top army brass figured this out? It’s hard to say, because Musharraf does not execute a straight-line exit strategy from failed policies. Instead, he tacks like a sailing boat in open water, shifting his sails to the winds of external pressures. We will know far more about whether we are witnessing a strategic shift or a mere tactical manoeuvre soon enough. In the meantime, it would be pure folly for India and the U. S. to prepare for the upcoming talks on the basis of conventional wisdom. * = Actually it is from 17% to 38.3%. This too is misleading as originally it was on the basis of a level of USD 1 per day. Now it has been calculated on the basis of Pak. Rs. 25 per day i.e. less than Half a U S Dollar. ** = The estimated population of Lotastaan is now 153 Million. Additional reading : Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 5 2004, 05:03 AM
Contrast this with the fate of non-Muslim minorities (or what remains of them) in all Muslim countries. Having reduced Christians and Hindus to a state of pathetic subservience, and not content with declaring the Ahmadis to be a non-Muslim minority and actively persecuting them, the fundamentalists in Pakistan want to confer the same fate on the Shias. Even in the one country that Islamists present as a model of development, namely Malaysia, non-Muslims who constitute over 40 per cent of the population are officially discriminated against under a policy that favours the “Bhumiputra” (literally, ‘Sons of the Soil’), the Malay Muslims. In Indonesia, the Chinese are officially required to adopt Indonesian names and are prohibited from education in their own language. In the Muslim Middle East preaching any religion other than Islam is a severe crime, while in Saudi Arabia even practicing any other religion is illegal. The Hindu population of Bangladesh has dropped from over 30 per cent in 1947 to about 15 per cent now. The Islamic Sudanese government has over two decades carried out a campaign to decimate the Christian and animist population of the south of the country
Posted by: Mudy Mar 6 2004, 04:12 AM
2004: A turning point for Pakistan A.H. AMIN The year 2004 is a turning point in Indo-Pakistan military and geopolitical history. It has witnessed the commencement of the end of whatever military resurgence was produced in the Pakistan Army since 1947. Historically, the military decline of the Indo-Pakistan Muslims started in mid-1650s once Shivaji, the Hindu Maratha, launched a guerrilla war against Mughal Muslim rulers, initiating a process which finally led to financial and thus military ruin of the Mughal Empire. The birth of Pakistan in 1947 enabled the Indian Muslims to organise the first Muslim army of Indo-Pakistan Muslims since Bakht Khan had led an army of sepoys at Delhi in 1857-58. This army had two kind of officers: British loyalists like Ayub Khan, and more resolute, highly decorated officers like Akbar Khan who won the DSO for gallantry in Burma in World War II. Akbar Khan was the pioneer who championed the idea of armed insurrection in Kashmir in 1947-48. The first Kashmir War was fought by tribal Pathan volunteers, Kashmiri Muslims, and units of the Pakistan Army. Akbar’s ideas were well digested by the Pakistani military establishment and practised albeit crudely for the first time in Operation Gibraltar in 1965 in Indian Occupied Kashmir. They were also practiced in Indian North East Frontier Agency in the 1960s where Pakistan aided anti Indian separatist movements. Akbar’s theories were first successfully practiced in the initial Afghan guerrilla insurrection. This was initiated in Kunar Province on orders of the then Prime Minister, Mr ZA Bhutto, in 1975-76, in whose cabinet Akbar was initially a minister. This operation was later expanded into the Afghan Jihad, ironically financed, equipped, and trained by the CIA, and it became the first major Baptism of Fire by international Islamist guerrilla forces. Meanwhile, Mr ZA Bhutto initiated Pakistan’s Nuclear Programme. The 1971 War had proved the conventional disparity which was bound to widen. The US clearly saw Mr Bhutto as a threat and financed the anti-Bhutto movement of 1977, encouraging General Zia to remove Bhutto. Ironically for the US, Zia the military usurper proved a tough nut to crack and continued Bhutto’s nuclear programme. The Afghan War made the US tolerate the programme. Under the guise of Afghan War, plans were revived to aid secessionist movements in India and to encourage the Kashmiri Muslims to fight against India since it was correctly perceived as a major military threat to Pakistan. Significant part of US aid directed to the Afghan insurgents was diverted for supporting guerrilla forces. The Indians were all set to attack Pakistan in 1984 (Operation Meghdoot). Jihad and armed insurrection were seen as a guarantee that Indians were bled white without declaring conventional war, aided by a nuclear capability that Pakistan acquired in late 1980s. Also, somewhere in the Pakistani psyche was a desire to avenge the 1971 military humiliation. Following the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan the USA revived its initial geopolitical aim of denuclearising Pakistan, now that Pakistan was not needed as a US ally. Meanwhile, the guerrilla forces became free after Soviet withdrawal, allowing the resultant regrouping in Kashmir, Chechnya, and the Balkans. All along for the Muslims fighting the Afghan War it was clear that USA was only a temporary ally. Following Zia’s demise in an aircrash possibly engineered by USA, his successor, General Aslam Beg, perfected the blue print developed in Afghanistan for use in Kashmir. General Beg had been associated with military planning including the nuclear programme and guerrilla operations as Pakistan Army’s Chief of General Staff from 1980 to 1985, and as corps commander Peshawar in 1985-87, followed by a stint as Vice Chief. Beg’s policy of strategic defiance was a deliberate response to USA’s anti Pakistan policies initiated after 1988. Regardless of whatever happened later, there was strong logic in Beg’s policy. Pakistan was under an undeclared siege led by the US. The Americans saw India as the future policeman of Asia, and Pakistan as the trouble creator. Major strategic decisions had been finalised by the end of Beg’s tenure and it was Beg who was the guardian of Pakistan’s strategic and operational plans for the longest period i.e. from 1980 to 1991.What Beg finalised by 1991 was merely followed with minor changes till 2001. Beg’s ambition was national rather than personal and that was why Pakistan’s second major elections based on direct elected franchise since 1947 were held under Beg’s guardianship. Meanwhile, Jihad gained a snowball momentum and thousands of unnamed warriors who died in Kashmir and many other areas strengthened Pakistan’s defense cause. Al Qaeda, or whatever else one may call it, was the reaction and final culmination of a process of Muslim military regeneration which started after 1947-48. During this period, Muslims saw conventional Muslim armies being humbled in battle. Afghanistan was the turning point, and nuclear weapons seen as the only guarantee against extinction. There is no doubt that strategic defiance, a mix of armed insurrection and guerrilla war protected by a nuclear cum missile umbrella, was institutionalised in the Pakistan Army as a policy by General Akbar Khan DSO. It was practiced first unsuccessfully in 1965, and then more successfully in Afghanistan and Kashmir in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s. It had been fine tuned by Generals Zia and Beg and then merely continued by Asif Nawaz, Kakar, Karamat and Musharraf till 1999. The nuclear side had been initiated by Bhutto’s great vision, and aided by AQ Khan’s technical acumen. The armed insurrection in Kashmir from 1989 and the Kargil Affair of 1999 were important landmarks in this saga. The Kashmir War was fought on sound military lines, but the Kargil War of 1999 destroyed Pakistan’s cause internationally. What the guerrillas had gained in Kashmir from 1989 to 1999 was destroyed in Kargil thanks to a myopic understanding of international relations and strategy. The post 9/11 scenario, which includes USA’s invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq and various anti-Muslim operations conducted globally under the so-called guise of war on terror, however, constitute another turning point in the history of Islamic military resurgence. Today the USA is convinced that Pakistan must be denuclearised, and that the only way it can be done is by forcing compliance to do so from the Pakistani military establishment. In an article titled “Betrayal at Camp David” published in “Nation” in June 2003, this scribe had asserted that USA’s main aims for Pakistan are its denuclearisation, a US-sponsored sellout of Kashmir and denial of freedom of manoeuvre to anti-US Islamist forces. The USA in all probability plans to achieve all three aims in 2004 through Pakistan’s fourth military junta. Whether Pakistan as a result is Balkanised or Somalised is of no consequence to USA, a Christian Crusader state which is already occupying two Islamic countries by force and one i.e. Pakistan by what US analysts term as soft power covertly applied by cultivation of key government members, some ex-employees of CITI Bank, some ex Bank of America officials, some with tenures as Pakistan government employees on postings in USA and some by choice of ambition with eyes blinded because of lust for power and wealth. The blueprint for doing so is a mild anaesthetic administration of economic aid. This is enough to keep the sick man going, but not sufficient to make him fully healthy. Thus, the 3 Billion promised US aid package linked to secret clauses possibly agreed to at Camp David. Finally, the Americans think that 2004 is the right time to reduce Pakistan to size. The method to do so is based on cultivation of key leaders, and a covert carrot and stick policy. Thus the so-called 2004 thaw in Indo-Pakistan relations. What was terminated by the English East India Company in 1803 and 1849 in Muslim favour by a twist of fate is to be resumed. 2004 is the turning point in Hindu revival. Thanks to the war on terror it is probable that the USA has finally succeeded in overawing the Pakistani defense establishment. Today there is no Bhutto who would risk the gallows and no Akbar Khan who would call a spade a spade. If all goes on as it is it would be safe to assert that the Hindu has won the war that was initiated by Shivaji in mid-1650s. The question is not whether one is a staunch or liberal Muslim. I have lived and traveled in USA, Canada, Ireland ,Russia and UK, and repeatedly discovered that the non Muslims perceive the name ‘Muslim’ with grave mistrust and bias. There is much truth in the concept of clash of civilisations. The bigoted Hindus did not accept the liberal Jinnah in 1928 or 1947. The bigoted west will not accept whatever concessions the liberal Musharraf, has made or would offer them, based on any rationale or good motive. The demise would be subtle - indirect but clear-cut if Pakistan surrenders its nuclear potential. 2004 is the year of decision. The draft of the agreement that the Pakistan military junta will have their way in Pakistan aided by windbag rubber stamp prime ministers, while India will be the regional boss. We are seeing a secret alliance of Indian democracy and Pakistani higher interest groups. This is the age of silent betrayals.
Posted by: Viren Mar 6 2004, 10:40 PM So now they admit it:
In the first statement from Pakistani establishment, former ISI chief, General (retd) Javed Ashraf Qazi, has blamed the banned militant group Jaish-e-Muhammad for the terrorist attack on Indian Parliament in 2001 and the recent suicide attacks on President Pervez Musharraf, as well as for deaths of "thousands" of Kashmiris
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 6 2004, 11:47 PM
Viren : Respected Sir, of course they now admit what we have al/ known for nearly Twenty Seven Months. However, the Gravity of the Article's contents merit a full post - especially for our Lotastaani Lurkers : pakee.gif ISLAMAWORST : In the first statement from Pakistani establishment, former ISI chief, General (retd) Javed Ashraf Qazi, has blamed the banned militant group Jaish-e-Muhammad for the terrorist attack on Indian Parliament in 2001 and the recent suicide attacks on President Pervez Musharraf, as well as for deaths of "thousands" of Kashmiris. "We must not be afraid of admitting that Jaish was involved in the deaths of thousands of innocent Kashmiris, (Journalist) Daniel Pearl's murder and attempts on President Musharraf's life," Qazi said participating in a debate in the Senate on Musharraf's address to the joint sitting of Parliament. India has blamed both Jaish and another Pakistan based militant outfit, Lashkar-e-Taiba, for the on Parliament. The two organisations were subsequently banned by Musharraf. Qazi, who served as a senior minister in Musharraf's military government, said both Jaish and the Lashkar-e-Taiba have harmed the "Kashmir struggle" the most. The ruling PML (Q) member blamed sectarian outfit Lashkar-e-Jhangvi for the attacks on minority Shias in Pakistan. At last the Government of India’s findings have been vindicated – Let this be a lesson to the Lotastaani Lurkers who visit our Fourm. This acceptance again proves that the Lotastaani Establishment is not only fully aware, but, is fully involved in supporting these Terrorists Financially, Logistically and every other form of support so that the can keep on perpetrating their murderous attacks in India. Let it be said once and for all : NEVER TRUST A LOTASTAANI furious.gif Cheers
Posted by: Mudy Mar 6 2004, 11:57 PM
Why ex ISI cheif is saying? What is Pakistan new agenda? Are they trying dupe India again? Are they suggesting one jihadi group is out of control and recaranation is needed?
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 7 2004, 12:43 AM
QUOTE (Mudy @ Mar 6 2004, 11:57 PM)
Why ex ISI cheif is saying? What is Pakistan new agenda? Are they trying dupe India again? Are they suggesting one jihadi group is out of control and recaranation is needed?
Mudy : To answer your question I put my Chanakyan Cap on. Methinks that Lotastaan will gradually accept all its malefic, malevolent and malicious Acts, including but not limited to Terrorism in Jammu & Kashmir as well as in North Eastern India, Mumbai, Ahmedabad in fact all over India and cut off its support to proxies – be they Terrorists or Religious Fundamental Troublemakers IN EXCHANGE FOR the Indian Cricket Team Touring Lotastaan as well as the Bus links in Jammu & Kashmir, Punjab and Rajasthan. Of course it would also included Rail, Ferry and Air Links. I am also of the opinion that Lotastaan has given written guarantees, or made agreements with India, counter – guaranteed by the USA, as Lotastaan’s Lord and Master, to desist from the aforesaid malefic, malevolent and malicious Acts as well as dismantle the Terrorist Camps in Lotastaan including POK. What sayest thou? Cheers
Posted by: Krishna Mar 7 2004, 02:05 AM
I think this ex-ISI chief's statement falls under the 'deniability' category. These guys are trying to show a +ve side of lotastan, distancing themselves from the fundoos. But we know, as we have known for all these years, it's all the same side of the coin. Paki Army is the unbearded side of the fundooness that pakistan stands for. Now it's upto us, to make sure our own folks don't buy this BS and start preaching brotherhood n' crap like that.
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 7 2004, 06:09 AM Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 7 2004, 06:25 AM
Confirmation from the Daily Times : Cheers
Posted by: Mudy Mar 8 2004, 01:31 AM,5744,8900251%5E2702,00.html [Bribe us with billions we will eat grass] biggrin.gif
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 8 2004, 02:10 AM
QUOTE (Mudy @ Mar 8 2004, 01:31 AM),5744,8900251%5E2702,00.html [Bribe us with billions we will eat grass] biggrin.gif
Mudy : The Lotastaani “Karnal Bunt” smells phishy not due to the presence of the so called “Karnal Bunt” but in the way the whole drama has been enacted. A ship’s cargo is “Inspected / Tested” after it berths alongside the Dock or Wharf where the cargo is to be discharged. However, I have read in reports from the Lotastaani Media that the Samples for Inspection-Testing were taken whilst the Ships were at Outer Anchorage – about 20 to30 Miles away from the Dock or Wharf where the cargo is intended to be discharged – which is most unusual and reeks if something “phuny” taking place. The situation seems grave as the Australian Wheat Board has already received the amount of USD 34 Million being the cost of 150,000 MT Wheat. Watch this space. Cheers
Posted by: Mudy Mar 8 2004, 03:23 AM
Actually all Puki trade is controlled by Mafia. Mafia is looking for hafta, which it seems difficult to get now a days. Water shortage and along with wheat shortage will create disney world in puki land. biggrin.gif
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 8 2004, 05:31 AM
QUOTE (Mudy @ Mar 8 2004, 03:23 AM)
Actually all Puki trade is controlled by Mafia. Mafia is looking for hafta, which it seems difficult to get now a days. Water shortage and along with wheat shortage will create disney world in puki land. biggrin.gif
Mudy : You could be right about the Lotastaani Mafia - case of "Dawood bites the hand that fed him" clap.gif Meantime while Four Ships with about 150,000 MT Australian Wheat are waiting for the “Karnal Bunt” problem to be resolved Interior of Sindh faces the crisis of non-availability of Wheat : Cheers cheers.gif
Posted by: AJay Mar 9 2004, 02:50 AM
Get your VCRs ready for recording. Received in email today. ---------------------------- Nightline Daily E-Mail March 8, 2004 TONIGHT'S FOCUS: He is a hero in his own country. But it turns out he was selling nuclear weapons technology to America's enemies. So why isn't the U.S. more upset? You've probably never heard of him, but A.Q. Khan is a hero in Pakistan. I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that he is responsible for Pakistan's nuclear weapons program. But he is more than that. He headed a network that sold the technology and the information needed to develop nuclear weapons to Libya, Iran, and possibly North Korea. The network was finally discovered, and its scope is still being determined. In a lot of ways, it sounds like a spy movie, except that it's very, very real. Much of the network was uncovered in the end. And what happened? The President of Pakistan, a close ally of the U.S. in the war against terrorism, pardoned Kahn. It's important to remember the context here. The concern over the spread of weapons of mass destruction, especially nuclear weapons, is one of the driving forces of American foreign policy. The administration, as we all know by now, justified the invasion of Iraq in part by arguing that Saddam was trying to develop WMD's and had to be stopped. So why has the American reaction to the discovery of Khan's actions been so muted? We can certainly speculate, as there are lots of reports of a so-called "spring offensive" aimed at finally finding Osama bin Laden with the help of the Pakistani army, that Pakistan is more important as an ally. Bin Laden is thought to be somewhere in the border area between Afghanistan and Pakistan, an area over which the Pakistani government has little control. But the Pakistani army is apparently moving into that area in larger numbers than ever before. Is there a trade-off? It's a fascinating story, reported tonight by Chris Bury along with producer Jay Lamonica. I hope you'll join us. Leroy Sievers and the Nightline Staff ABCNEWS Washington D.C. bureau ----------- If you have questions or comments regarding this message or a recent "Nightline" broadcast, please do not hit reply; simply click on this link to send your message directly to the "Nightline" staff: Or log on to the new "Nightline" Message Board: Chat with "Nightline" guests and find articles, transcripts and video excerpts on our Web site at: Ask your friends to sign up! Send them this link: Did you know that can also send you a daily email from ABCNEWS Political Unit? Get the daily political scoop from our insider sources. Click here to sign up!
Posted by: Viren Mar 9 2004, 04:17 AM
Pakistan ’s leading bike maker Dewan (pakindoo??) Motorcycles Ltd is contemplating setting up a joint venture in India to make and market its range of 125cc and 150cc cruiser bikes
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 9 2004, 04:42 AM Exactly one week before the first one-dayer of the cricket series between India and Pakistan, Karachi ‘suffered’ the killing of MPA Abdullah Murad Baloch and his driver on Saturday.The assassination, which coincided with a day of protest by the Jeay Sindh Qaumi Mahaz against controversial water projects, resulted in a serious law-and-order situation - including burning of property - in the Malir area. Not only did the National Highway, where the killing took place, remain closed for a few hours, railway traffic too was suspended for a couple of hours because of the violence that spilled onto the railway tracks along the highway. This demonstration continued on Sunday morning as angry supporters blocked streets and pelted police with stones. Also on Sunday, the PPP announced that the party would demonstrate across the province on March 10 to protest the murder of MPA. With the MPAs’ murder, the controversy that was generated by the killing of two young girls in the Gadap area last month -, which already pitted the MQM and PPP against each other -, has taken a new turn. Although she did not name the MQM Benazir Bhutto, whose party has called a Sindh Assembly session over the MPA’s death, has said Mr Baloch had recently mentioned to party colleagues that a certain section in the Sindh government was targeting him and that he feared for his life. On the other hand, MQM leader Altaf Hussain has said the killing of the two girls and the MPA and his driver were the result of a conspiracy in which the PPP was involved. Mr Baloch, a building contractor by profession, also had in his constituency the area of Memon Goth in Gadap where the bodies of two local girls, Hajira and Sassui, were found on the premises of a police station last month, which is why he was active in raising this issue. The MQM was faced with a predicament over the killing of the two girls, in which the role of the police had come under severe criticism, because the party’s Aftab Sheikh runs the police department. On the other hand, the party’s efforts to make inroads into the Balochi/Sindhi-speaking population in Karachi’s outskirts areas in particular and the rest of the province suffered a setback because the girls’ families were Balochi/Sindhi-speaking. The MQM already has Sindhi-speaking members in the Senate, the National Assembly and the Sindh Assembly. The killings apparently strained relations between Governor Ishratul Ibad, the former convener of the MQM, and Chief Minister Ali Muhammad Mehr. There are reports that the governor, in a bid to defuse the situation, took action against the policemen involved, including the SHO, who is known to be “the CM’s man.” Karachi had been sidelined for a Test match by the Indian cricket board because of its history of violence and bomb blasts, and there is danger of Saturday’s match being scrapped if the situation worsens sharply. But the more alarming aspect is the possibility of increasing ethnic tension. The MQM has already claimed that certain elements are trying to give Mr Baloch’s assassination an ethnic colour. Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 9 2004, 05:15 AM
KARACHI : Four people, including two activists of Muttahida Qaumi Movement, were killed while eight, including three women, received serious injuries in violence that erupted in several areas of the metropolis on Monday.
Despite the Lotastaanis killing each other our fools agree to endanger the lives of our Cricket Team in Karachi and Peshawar Cheers
Posted by: Mudy Mar 9 2004, 10:09 PM oh we are are nervous now... biggrin.gif
Posted by: Mudy Mar 10 2004, 12:59 AM
Pervez may make himself Field Marshal biggrin.gif 20himself%20Field%20Marshal New Delhi, March 8: The whisper circulating amongst Pakistan's power elite for several weeks now has finally found its way into the media and received instant legitimacy. Will Pakistan President Gen Pervez Musharraf upgrade his status to that of Field Marshal, and while retiring as Army Chief retain power and control? Many in Pakistan are of the view that this is a major possibility simply because they cannot see the general discarding his uniform and giving up control over the Army at any cost. The South Asia Tribune, a Web paper brought out from Washington on politics in Pakistan and South Asia, is now of the view that this is not just probable, but possible. has claimed that the President's key aide Tariq Aziz is working on the details, which will allow the general to keep his commitment to the extremist groups at the end of the year even while he continues to exercise full control over the Army. Senior members of Pakistan's "power elite" had told Deccan Chronicle in January that the possibility of Gen Musharraf relinquishing real control was dim. They had also pointed out that by giving up his uniform to a new Army chief, the President would in fact be declaring retirement from power and that no one in Pakistan saw him actually doing that. Gen Musharraf is unlikely to back off from the commitment given by him to the Muttahid Majlis-e-Amal about retiring as Chief of Army Staff as he will not be able to ride over the flak. He is expected to appoint a general who enjoys his confidence, but as a retired Pakistani general pointed out, the officer in the chair eventually becomes the man in charge and that no one was more aware of this than Gen Musharraf himself. Pakistan's influential intellectuals made no secret of the fact that the man in the hot seat would become the man in command, and not a single person spoken to in Islamabad was of the view that the general would be willing to relinquish power by giving up his post at the end of the year. The South Asia Tribune has suggested that Gen Musharraf will appoint a new Army chief by November this year. It has stated that efforts are on to examine the possibility of converting the ceremonial supreme commander position to that of an executive position, so that President Musharraf will continue to chair the meetings of the corps commanders and the joint chiefs. To ensure this he will promote himself to a rank above that of Chief of Army Staff and other four-star officers, and emerge out of the exercise with an extra star as a Field Marshal, the newspaper reported. Comparisons have been drawn between President Musharraf and his military predecessors in power, with several articles appearing in the Pakistani media over the last several years as well. At one stage, influential Pakistanis saw many comparisons between him and Gen Zia-ul Haq, who had decided not to shed his uniform. It was pointed out that both Generals had installed Prime Ministers, the late President installing Mohammed Khan Junejo and Gen Musharraf anointing Mir Zafarullah Khan Jamali in the post. Comparisons have also been drawn between Gen Zia's famous words at the time — "I will now spend my time reading books and playing golf" — with Gen Musharraf's statement: "I will relax and play tennis and golf." This comparison has since been overtaken by similarities seen by the same power elite between Gen. Musharraf and Pakistan's first military ruler Field-Marshal Ayub Khan. He had discarded his uniform as the ruling General has committed himself to. He had created a political party, he had appointed a new Army chief and promoted himself to Field-Marshal, retaining control as President. It is this "formula" that Gen Musharraf appears to be examining. Interestingly, the South Asia Tribune has suggested that the chairman of Pakistan International Airlines Choudhry Ahmed Aziz is involved in the current discussions being held in Islamabad. In New Delhi, foreign policy experts agree with the assessment of Pakistanis that Musharraf will not give up power, and probably has the support of Washington on this.
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 10 2004, 01:38 AM pakee.gif ISLAMAWORST : Federal Minister for Education Ms Zobaida Jalal has said that a committee has been constituted to work out recommendations for deletion of material from curricula which is aimed at fomenting hatred against India adding that the committee will submit its recommendations within a month. “Several social organizations have raised objection that hatred is fanned against India through the curricula of educational institutions in Pakistan. Government has set up a committee to look into the matter and send its recommendations within a month”, she said this while talking to the journalists here Monday after a function held under Children Resource International. Condemning the honour killing, she said that the killing the women in the name of honour is condemnable act. President General Pervez Musharraf has assured to take stern action against this heinous practice, she added. About Indo-Pak composite dialogues, she hoped that the talks will lead to peace and stability in the region. The prevailing hatred between the two countries will diminish, she added. She informed that government would soon legislate to prevent violence against women under which the oppressed women in villages and rural areas will be provided life protection. She went on to say that the education ministry in collaboration with special education ministry will work for implementation of a joint political system to remove the sense of deprivation prevailing among the special children. She stated that priority will be given for appointment of women teachers in primary standard schools. = = = = = What about the hatred that is being perpetrated for Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Zoroastrians, Jews and of course for the Qadianis-Ahmediyas and last but not the least the hatred for the Shias? Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 10 2004, 03:02 AM
Unfortunately, Pakistan does not rank very high on the scale of trust liar.gif even in cases where sovereign guarantees are’s not just about a shipment of wheat. Our request, therefore, is that it won’t do any harm, if Australia is prepared to foot the bill, to get the shipment examined by a third party to determine its fitness. It would remove any impression of malafide on the Pakistani side and settle the issue to the satisfaction of both sides.
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 10 2004, 04:52 AM Cheers
Posted by: Viren Mar 10 2004, 05:00 AM
Very interesting Peregrine. Report of deletion of material from curricula (aimed at fomenting hatred against India) coming out along with jalebi doll's attack on the Nayyar report. pakee.gif (Guess you win the unofficial bag-the-hag contest this week specool.gif )
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 10 2004, 05:09 AM
QUOTE (Viren @ Mar 10 2004, 05:00 AM)
Very interesting Peregrine. Report of deletion of material from curricula (aimed at fomenting hatred against India) coming out along with jalebi doll's attack on the Nayyar report. pakee.gif (Guess you win the unofficial bag-the-hag contest this week specool.gif )
Viren : You fallen out of love already - Good buddy? She also comments about the 150,000 Tons of Australian Wheat which is "Swinging at Anchor" off Karachi. This Article explains better : KARACHI: The manner in which the Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock (Minfal) has so far dealt with the fate of the imported consignment of Australian wheat has put Pakistan in an embarrassing position in the international community. The Minfal had placed an import order for 150,000 tonnes of soft wheat through a tender to an Australian firm Tradesman International. The Tradesman Company was the winner of the tender with the least bid money of $224.75 per tonne C&F Karachi. As such, the first ship carrying 41,800 tonnes of wheat consignment reached Karachi in the third week of February. Other three ships followed this vessel. However, after getting the sample from the first three ships, the Minfal authorities declared the consignment unfit for human consumption on the ground that it contained a foreign particle called kernal bunt. Conversely, this claim stunned the Australian government and it challenged it. On the directives of the federal cabinet, the Minfal retested the consignment in the same laboratory that had already declared it unfit earlier and the result was found to be the same. However, the laboratory has not issued the official report of the second test so far. Experts say that the samples were tested in a neutral well-reputed laboratory but the Minfal is just lingering on the matter, which is denting Pakistan’s reputation at the international forums, they added. According to reports from Australia, the Australian Prime Minister has contacted President General Pervez Musharraf to resolve the matter and has vowed to fight the allegations against its wheat consignments. ”We cannot afford to have the reputation of our wheat product damaged in this way, so we’ll be doing every thing in our power, Australian trade minister Mark Vaile said to the press in Canberra on Tuesday. Methinks the Lotastaanis are upto their "Rinky Dinks" as they have not received their Eid Baksheesh from Tradesman International (Lotastaani Owned - Foreign Based) Cheers
Posted by: Sudhir Mar 12 2004, 02:59 AM,%20Rahul%20are%20State%20guests%20in%20Pakistan Wah! What chanakian brilliance? biggrin.gif Send all our "VIPs" to TSP and they'll be busy guarding them rather than creating mischeif on our borders.
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 12 2004, 04:40 AM Mar 11th 2004 | ISLAMAWORST One of America's most important partners in the war against terror, Pakistan is also one of its biggest worries AS AN American ally, Pakistan is an embarrassment. Its ruler, General Pervez Musharraf, seized power in a bloodless coup in 1999. His efforts since then to legitimise himself have been marred by a farcical referendum, electoral manipulation, and concessions to Pakistan's Islamist extremists. The country has been the launch-pad for terrorist attacks in India. Worse still, it has proved to be the headquarters of a global mail-order business in nuclear-bomb technology, with Libya, Iran and North Korea as its known customers. If not a member of George Bush's “axis of evil”, Pakistan seems to have been doing its best to meet the eligibility criteria. So when Colin Powell, America's secretary of state, visits Pakistan on March 17th, he will have some harsh words for his hosts. But only in private. Since September 11th 2001, Pakistan has been an irreplaceable American partner. Its airspace and logistical support were essential for the war against the Taliban in Afghanistan in late 2001. Its co-operation remains vital to the continuing hunt for Mullah Omar, the Taliban's leader, and for Osama bin Laden. In an operation now under way in the remote and lawless areas along the Pakistan-Afghan border, Pakistani soldiers are trying to drive al-Qaeda remnants into the arms of their American allies. World Audit and the International Crisis Group report on democracy and human rights in Pakistan. America's State Department has information on relations with Pakistan (including its recent human-rights report). America and Pakistan have strongly denied reports of an explicit deal to allow American troops to operate from Pakistan in return for a lenient approach to Pakistan's proliferation sins. But November's presidential election makes catching Mr bin Laden an ever more important symbolic moment in the “war against terrorism”—an American general has said it will happen this year. Whether or not Americans are crossing the border, their spyplanes are certainly patrolling it. And as the winter snows melt, the co-ordinated attack has intensified. In what is called a breakthrough, the 70,000 Pakistani soldiers will be helped by hundreds of Zalikhel tribesmen from Waziristan, who agreed on March 7th to join the hunt for fugitives and those harbouring them. Policy towards Pakistan lays America open to the charge of hypocrisy. On February 25th, America's State Department issued its annual human-rights report. A damning section on Pakistan noted that the government was dominated by the army and the intelligence services, and its human-rights record remained poor. The next day, Mr Powell appeared before Congress to justify the department's budget for the coming year, including $5.7 billion in assistance for countries “that have joined us in the war against terrorism”. Top of the list, with $700m, was Pakistan. Here comes the hero Behind America's willingness to tolerate Pakistan's undemocratic ways lies the hope that, under General Musharraf, it can deliver not just al-Qaeda fugitives, but stability in the world's only nuclear-armed Islamic Republic. A reminder that Pakistan will not easily relinquish that status came this week when it tested a new missile capable of carrying nuclear warheads to most Indian cities. The fear is that the country might lurch into Islamist extremism, and its nuclear technology fall into even more dangerous hands. This gives rise to a paradox: that the army, the bastion against the fundamentalist threat, has an interest in keeping that threat alive. The general is supposed to be the man who can resolve these contradictions, as indispensable to Pakistan's future as Pakistan is to America's fight against terrorism. In this version of the story, he plays the hero: paving the way for full restoration of democracy, stemming the slide into Islamic fundamentalism, plugging the leaks in the country's nuclear-technology apparatus, and reaching an historic peace with the old enemy, India. Attempts on his life have helped foster this image. Would-be assassins last December included two suicide bombers—an Afghan and a Kashmiri. Much seems to hinge on his continued survival. “It's election year,” says Samina Ahmed, Islamabad representative of the International Crisis Group (ICG), an independent research outfit, “and the Americans have put all their eggs in Musharraf's basket.” India has distrusted the general since 1999 when, as army chief, he oversaw a military adventure in the Kargil area of Kashmir at a time when peace hopes had been kindled. But it too seems to have come round to the idea that Pakistan's president may be a better partner in peace talks than any likely replacement. Atal Behari Vajpayee, India's prime minister, has expressed concern for his safety. Four dangerous perceptions While acknowledging that he is taking big political and personal risks, many Pakistanis take a less charitable view of General Musharraf. They see him as just the latest in a line of Pakistani soldiers to grow weary of the uncertainties of the democratic process, and to override it. Like one such predecessor, General Zia ul Haq, who ruled from 1977 to 1988, General Musharraf has bolstered his position at home by building up the country's small but passionate extremist Islamist fringe. Yet, to justify his dictatorship to the Americans, he points to the threat posed by these very same Islamists. This secular, democratic general, photographed cuddling pooches, and said to be partial to a peg of whisky, seems at times more popular with the mullahs than the politicians. On January 17th, he made an inspirational speech to a joint session of the two houses of parliament. Noting that Pakistan's Islamic Republic was perceived overseas as “intolerant and pro-extremism”, he called for a “jihad against extremism”. His speech was almost drowned out by the barracking of elected parliamentarians. A month later, undaunted, he took the same message to an even more forbidding audience—a gathering of 2,000 ulemas, or Islamic teachers. From them he received a standing ovation. “Our generals have been wrong on everything,” says Pervez Hoodhbhoy, a peace activist and professor of physics at Islamabad's Quaid-i-Azam university. His charge-sheet is convincing. The army's backing of the Taliban ruined Afghanistan, and has left those parts of Pakistan dominated, like the Taliban, by ethnic Pushtuns, deeply disillusioned by the decision to help America's war. The generals' acquiescence or active connivance in the proliferation of nuclear technology (or even, just conceivably, their ignorance of it) may have endangered the whole world. Their provision of money, training and cannon-fodder for the 14-year insurrection against Indian rule in Kashmir brought misery to that land, put Pakistan on the wrong side in the war against terror, and utterly failed in its objectives. Curiously, General Musharraf seems to share Mr Hoodhbhoy's analysis. Amid the cat-calls in parliament he was citing the very same three issues, along with Islamic extremism, as “four dangerous perceptions” to which Pakistan is subject. Correcting them, he suggested, might “save the country”, and he suggested remedies. Many Pakistanis, however, doubt his seriousness in pursuing these remedies. They see an astute political tactician, who has yet to take the strategic decision to abandon failed policies. On Afghanistan, the president promised parliament a “massive operation against those foreign elements in our border areas”. Pakistan is credited with doing much to root out al-Qaeda fugitives, both from its wild fringes and from the cities where some have hidden among the multitudes. But it has done less to help wipe out the vestiges of the Taliban. That is perhaps not surprising. The Afghan fundamentalists were, after all, nurtured by Pakistan's spooks, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), and retain much sympathy among their Pushtun ethnic kin across the porous border. But there are also suspicions that Pakistan is playing a double game in Afghanistan, helping the Taliban to survive to insure against the emergence of an unfriendly regime in Kabul. In 2001, when General Musharraf dumped the Taliban in favour of America, there was speculation that the switch would provoke such anger among Pakistan's Islamists that he might be swept from power. There were indeed some large and unruly protests, but none that came near to mounting such a challenge. Similarly this year, the general weathered another storm: the public humiliation of a great national hero, Abdul Qadeer Khan. The exposure of Mr Khan, a metallurgist, as the hub of a network of nuclear-technology proliferation has left many seeing him as a fall-guy for crimes that could not have been committed without the knowledge of the army top brass. But his televised confession did at least give General Musharraf a prop on which to rest his denials. Some Pakistanis joke that Mr Khan, who brought Pakistan the bomb and so ensured its survival alongside a hostile neighbour, India, has, by taking the rap, saved the country for a second time. He also saved himself. In deference to the scientist's enormous prestige, the president let him off scot-free (“conditionally”). Remarkably, the American and British governments, in public at least, were happy to treat this as an internal Pakistani affair. Just as remarkable to some observers was the muted reaction in Pakistan to the debunking of a national icon. Strikes called in his support soon fizzled. But Khurshid Ahmed, chairman of the Institute of Policy Studies, an Islamabad think-tank, argues it would be “highly superficial” to say that General Musharraf has escaped a popular backlash. According to Mr Ahmed, who is also a senator for Jamaat-i-Islami, part of the Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal (MMA), an alliance of six Islamist parties, “A.Q. Khan is loved by the common man. Musharraf is hated.” That may be true. But it does seem that public opinion allows the generals more leeway than they prefer to admit. “They put their hands behind their backs”, says Mr Hoodhbhoy, “and pretend they are tied.” He thinks this may even be true of the policy stance that Pakistanis see as the most fundamental of all: support for the struggle for self-determination of Muslims in Indian-controlled Kashmir. Solving Kashmir Since 1990, one form that support has taken has been the clandestine sponsorship of armed insurgency. General Musharraf has repeatedly promised to stop “cross-border infiltration”, most recently in a breakthrough meeting with Mr Vajpayee in January. This time, he may just mean it. He is under pressure from America and from Pakistan's other important ally, China. When he visited Beijing in November, he was left in no doubt that his hosts, who have been vital providers of arms, and of missile and nuclear technology, were fed up with Pakistan's cosseting of jihadis. Besides destabilising Afghanistan and liberating Kashmir, some holy warriors also want to bring down Chinese rule in what was briefly East Turkestan and is now the Chinese region of Xinjiang. Indian officials are reserving judgment. Infiltration of armed militants from Pakistani- to Indian-administered Kashmir has abated. But in the winter months anyway, Himalayan snow slows it to a trickle. There is little sign yet that Pakistan is dismantling the dozens of militant training camps. The way to dispel suspicions about Pakistan's activities in Kashmir, General Musharraf told parliament, is “to find its just solution”. That is the hope held out by the start last month of a series of meetings on Kashmir and other bilateral issues between senior Pakistani and Indian officials. But a solution will not be possible on Pakistan's terms: a plebiscite in the former kingdom of Jammu & Kashmir, half of which is now under Indian administration, on the region's future. It is often argued that Pakistan's room for negotiation is limited by popular opinion, formed by decades of indoctrination, starting in the schoolroom, about the injustice and cruelty of Indian rule in Kashmir. But some Pakistanis dispute this. Outside parts of Punjab province, home to many of the Pakistani soldiers and militants who have died in Kashmir, many people are weary of the whole conflict, realise it cannot be won and hanker after a lasting reconciliation with India. Those moderate mullahs Peace with India is even popular with all but an extremist fringe of Pakistan's Islamist parties. The MMA's Mr Ahmed remains suspicious of Indian intentions, saying that “Pakistan cannot, must not, will not do a deal that the people of Jammu & Kashmir cannot accept.” But he insists that the MMA wants peace and is a force for moderation, having no sympathy at all for “the Taliban model”. The MMA is partly an invention of the army and the ISI. In the October 2002 elections, the generals were keen not to see too strong a performance from the two main secular opposition parties : the Muslim League, led by Nawaz Sharif, whom General Musharraf overthrew in his coup; and the Pakistan People's Party (PPP) of Benazir Bhutto, another former prime minister. So they impeded their campaigns, which already suffered from their leaders' absences in exile, and helped forge a coalition of the usually fractious Islamist fringe. This unlikely alliance, capitalising on the fury of Pakistan's Pushtun minority at the war in Afghanistan, enjoyed unprecedented success. It won only 11% of the vote. But that was enough to give it 60 out of 342 parliamentary seats, as well as control of one of the four provincial governments, in North-West Frontier, and a share in a coalition (with General Musharraf's loyalists) in another, in Baluchistan. For a year, the democratic façade the elections were supposed to produce was obscured by parliament's refusal to ratify General Musharraf's self-serving changes to the constitution. These gave him, as president, unprecedented power, and will, through a new National Security Council, entrench the army's role in politics. Last December, he struck a deal with the MMA. In return for his promise to stand down as army chief by the end of 2004, it accepted his presidency until 2007, and his proposed constitutional changes. Not for the first time, a general found a bargain with the Islamists more palatable than making concessions to the secular opposition. Optimists hope that this was a one-shot deal. Amending the constitution required a two-thirds majority in parliament. Governing does not. But that is to overestimate General Musharraf's faith in his own supporters, and to ignore the frailty of their parliamentary majority. The Pakistan Muslim League (Q) faction that backs him is less a political party than a random gathering of toadies and chancers. Both Mr Sharif and Miss Bhutto face arrest if they return to Pakistan. But they pose more of a real threat to the president than do the Islamists. Miss Bhutto in particular has been vocal in exploiting General Musharraf's nuclear embarrassment. So he continues to need the MMA. At the very least that will make it difficult for the government to reverse Islamic legislation, such as a much-abused blasphemy law, or the Hudood ordinances, one effect of which is that 88% of women in Pakistani prisons were convicted of fornication, probably because they had been raped. An ICG report published in January, called “Unfulfilled Promises”, highlights the government's continued failure to regulate the thousands of religious schools, or madrassas, the most radical of which have spawned the Taliban and Pakistani jihadis. The army's failure to take on Islamic extremism means, in Ms Ahmed's cruel summary, that “America is backing the military that is backing the mullahs that are backing the jihadis. That, in essence, is the Pakistani conundrum. At home, it means that General Musharraf deals with Islamist parties in preference to the Muslim League and the PPP, whose policies are far closer to those he professes. The sanguine view is that, because he represents the army, whose senior command he has shuffled in his image, and the army remains the ultimate arbiter of power, he still represents the best chance of achieving the fundamental reforms Pakistan needs. A commando still The present government's economic record, at least, deserves respect. And no civilian leader, none of whom has ever completed a term in office, would be able to make the necessary about-turns on Afghanistan and Kashmir. The gloomy view is that the general's power will fade when he takes off his uniform, bringing a new round of political uncertainty. Or perhaps there will be another constitutional change, or, according to the latest rumour, promotion to “Field-Marshal”. Ever since seizing power, General Musharraf has spoken passionately and persuasively of the need to shed the backward-looking, repressive and anti-western influence of extremist Islam. Abroad, his standing rests on his credentials as Pakistan's saviour from that strategic threat. Yet to stay in power, and to burnish those credentials, he needs to offer tactical concessions to the extremists. Modernisers and fundamentalists alike may be disappointed in him. The MMA's Mr Ahmed could be speaking for both sets of critics: “We gave him the opportunity to become a statesman; he remains a commando.” Cheers
Posted by: Viren Mar 13 2004, 02:27 AM
STRATFOR.COM INTELLIGENCE BRIEF, MARCH 11, 2004 Musharraf Cursed if He Does, Ousted if He Doesn't?
Summary Despite the media hype and fresh military operations on both sides of Pakistan's northwestern border, Osama bin Laden and the top leadership of al Qaeda are nowhere to be found. Certain elements within the Pakistani state and society are known to sympathize with the group, and it is likely that certain rogue elements within the Pakistani military and intelligence establishment are helping al Qaeda members evade capture. Analysis Following leaks out of Washington in February, the global media are rife with reports of renewed and vigorous efforts to nab senior al Qaeda leaders. Despite U.S. and Pakistani military activity along the northeastern border of Afghanistan, there has been no sign of Osama bin Laden or any of his top associates. The generic explanations of why this has been the case cite difficult terrain and sympathetic natives -- particularly in the autonomous Federally Administered Tribal Area (FATA) -- but we must consider the possibility that influential elements are helping the jihadists elude their would-be captors. With Kabul clearly in the hands of anti-Taliban and anti-al Qaeda forces, the only remaining suspects are within Islamabad's Inter- Services Intelligence (ISI) apparatus. After all, it was the ISI that nurtured Afghan and Kashmiri jihadists and, by extension, al Qaeda. Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf would find himself in hot water if individuals or groups within the ISI are found to be assisting al Qaeda. Stratfor sources close to Islamabad say there is no doubt the ISI leadership is firmly under Musharraf's control due to a series of personnel changes since Sept. 11, 2001. Still, certain old-school individuals -- from colonels on down -- remain in a position to thwart anti-al Qaeda efforts. Sources tell Stratfor that news travels fast when the military is set to initiate a fresh assault, and jihadist sympathizers relay the details to bin Laden through a series of contacts. These ISI elements are no longer in positions of authority, but they retain sufficient influence to save bin Laden's hide. Sympathizers don't know where bin Laden is, sources say, but are in touch with a network of middlemen who do know. The United States is determined to destroy al Qaeda, and U.S. officials will not hesitate to take action if they believe a segment of Musharraf's military is torpedoing their efforts. Washington will give Musharraf a chance to purge rogue military elements and provide information about the jihadists' whereabouts. If he complies, he will run the risk of dissent from within the military, which is his only remaining constituency. If Musharraf fails, the United States likely will take matters into its own hands huh.gif . This inevitably would lead to the president's downfall: U.S. troops operating openly in Pakistan likely would incite the masses and some in the military to revolt. The Pakistani political system is showing signs of stress. The Daily Times reported March 3 that Nighat Agha, a senator from the ruling Pakistan Muslim League-Q, asked the Pakistani Parliament why local newspapers were reporting the involvement of foreign troops in operations within Pakistan's borders. She said the reports were fomenting public resentment. The interior minister, who also is a senior PML-Q leader, said Musharraf denies the presence of foreign troops and that the Pakistani army is dealing with the situation. A report also surfaced about an unusually lengthy Feb. 29 meeting between Musharraf and Prime Minister Zafarullah Khan Jamali. Jamali reportedly complained about trying to run day-to-day government business amid "interference" from some of Musharraf's closest aides. This shows that Musharraf's attempts to maintain control are not sitting well even with his own allies. The moderate Islamist Mutahiddah Majlis-i-Amal has threatened to initiate a nationwide March 23 campaign against the FATA military operations and Musharraf's nuclear and Kashmir policies. The MMA also threatened to pull out of a coalition government it formed with the PML-Q in Baluchistan province. Without MMA support, deputies in the provincial legislature would be unable to sustain the PML-Q government. Mounting U.S. pressure is creating significant problems for Musharraf. His principal opponents, who refuse to compromise, are taking this as a cue to move against the president. The exiled leadership of the two main non-Islamist parties -- the Pakistan People's Party (PPP) and the Pakistan Muslim League-N (PML-N) -- are preparing to return home. PPP chair Benazir Bhutto has hinted that she might return to Pakistan later this year, and PML-N leader Shahbaz Sharif also reportedly is considering returning to Pakistan before summer. Although the outcome is unclear, Musharraf does not appear to be in a position to prevent the opposition from ganging up on him. No one within Pakistan's military-intelligence complex apparently has actionable intelligence about bin Laden's whereabouts, and Washington does not fully trust Islamabad to be straight on this matter. Musharraf basically has two choices. He can produce bin Laden, or he will have to convince Washington that he does not know where the al Qaeda leader is and that he has purged his intelligence agencies of people playing both sides. Either way will be an uphill climb, further complicated by government and popular unrest.
Posted by: Viren Mar 13 2004, 02:33 AM
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL ONLINE, MARCH 11, 2004 For U.S., Support Of Musharraf Is Delicate Balance,,SB107896601225352118-search,00.html?collection=autowire%2F30day&vql_string=For+U%2ES%2E%2C+Support+Of+Musharraf+Is+Delicate+Balance%3Cin%3E%28article%2Dbody%29, But Illicit Nuclear Sale, Islamic Parties Worry U.S. 'We Will Continue Our Jihad' By JAY SOLOMON and ZAHID HUSSAIN Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL ISLAMABAD, Pakistan -- The Bush administration has placed a huge bet on Pakistan's president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, relying on him to help hunt down Osama bin Laden and root out other Islamic terrorists. The strategy has paid off in the short term, with hundreds of terrorists arrested. But those gains have involved a delicate diplomatic trade-off. The U.S. has been forced to accept an incomplete airing of the illegal sale of Pakistani nuclear technology to rogue states, possibly leaving the door open to more proliferation. Gen. Musharraf's critics in Pakistan say he has become a more authoritarian leader at a time when the U.S. is trying to promote democracy abroad. And to retain his grip on power, he has formed alliances with fundamentalist Islamic parties, complicating his stated desire to crack down on militant Islamic schools that harbor al Qaeda and Taliban fighters. Top American officials' view of Gen. Musharraf boils down to this: Though he isn't perfect, he has been a firm and reliable ally. rolleyes.gif He is seen as having a steady hand blink.gif on Pakistan's nuclear arsenal and seriously pursuing peace with nuclear rival India -- an issue that has vexed the West for decades. He risked significant political capital by yanking the rug out from beneath Pakistani support for Taliban forces after 9/11, when the U.S. routed them in neighboring Afghanistan in retaliation for harboring Mr. bin Laden. He also helped capture more than 500 al Qaeda operatives after the Taliban's fall, including three top bin Laden lieutenants. Currently, Pakistani and U.S. troops are engaged in a major new effort in the tribal areas that divide Pakistan and Afghanistan to find Mr. bin Laden. But the U.S. doesn't have a clear answer to a question that's growing more urgent: How will Pakistan be ruled once Gen. Musharraf leaves office? Mounting Pressure The president narrowly escaped two assassination attempts in December, which Pakistani officials say were orchestrated by al Qaeda-linked groups. And under mounting domestic pressure, Gen. Musharraf recently agreed to give up his role as army commander in December. Though he rewrote the Pakistani constitution to give himself the power to hire and fire the heads of the country's armed forces, relinquishing direct control could significantly diminish his authority. Washington pursued a similar policy of backing Pakistan's generals throughout the Cold War, when Islamabad was one of Washington's chief allies in the effort to check the Soviet Union's regional aspirations. While such support helped drive the Soviets from Afghanistan, it fed instability within Pakistan and inspired many of the Islamist groups that ultimately formed al Qaeda. "It's amazing how short-sighted the Americans are when it comes to Pakistan," says Talat Masood, a retired Pakistani general ohmy.gif and a Musharraf critic. "They're making the same mistake again of not giving a high priority to democracy." The biggest long-term risk of the Bush administration's policy toward Gen. Musharraf involves nuclear proliferation. Gen. Musharraf drew fire at home and abroad for pardoning Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of Pakistan's nuclear bomb, after he admitted illegally selling nuclear technologies to Libya, Iran and North Korea. Mr. Khan said he acted without the knowledge of Gen. Musharraf (please note that author has mentioned a few paras above that Mushy has firm steady hand on Nuke program rolleyes.gif ) and other military officials, an assertion doubted by many here. Pakistan's government and the armed forces deny any institutional involvement in Dr. Khan's arms network. Pakistani officials say the pardon was the best way to break up Mr. Khan's network while maintaining stability, given the scientist's status as a national hero. Islamabad continues to hold seven Khan aides without formal charges, but calls by civic groups and lawmakers for an independent investigation into the military's alleged role in the affair have been sternly rebuffed by the government. Absent a thorough investigation and strong civilian oversight of Pakistan's nuclear program, opposition leaders and proliferation experts fear future breaches. Yet the Bush administration has praised Gen. Musharraf's handling of the affair. "I think he has handled Dr. Khan ... extremely well," unsure.gif said John Bolton, U.S. undersecretary of state for arms control and international security, in Tokyo last month. Gen. Musharraf, a former paratrooper, was hardly viewed as an iron man when he oversaw the bloodless coup that toppled Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in October 1999. Thousands of Pakistanis took to the streets to welcome his military government, having grown disillusioned by corruption and mismanagement. Even Pakistan's press and middle class largely saw him as a transitional authority through which Pakistan could become a more stable and secular democracy. "For the whiskey-drinking class, the chattering classes, he was the messiah they'd been waiting for," biggrin.gif says Ayaz Amir, a columnist with the Dawn newspaper, Pakistan's largest English-language daily. Then-President Bill Clinton saw the coup as antidemocratic, slapping sanctions on the general's government and refusing to be photographed shaking his hand during a two-hour layover in Islamabad in March 2000. Crucial Cog But after 9/11, his willingness to cut off Pakistani support for the Taliban in Afghanistan and to allow U.S. military strikes from his nation's soil made him a crucial cog in President Bush's war on terror. In return, the U.S. showered Pakistan with billions of dollars in financial aid, debt relief and larger quotas for export. Today, U.S. support has underpinned one of Gen. Musharraf's key achievements: an economic recovery. Pakistani officials project economic expansion of as much as 6% for the year ending in March, and exports and foreign-exchange reserves are at record levels. "The country's moving in the right direction. We just need to continue with the reforms," said Pakistan's commerce minister, Humayun Akhtar Khan, in an interview. Critics say Gen. Musharraf's economic reforms have coincided with backpedaling on his pledge to promote democracy. In April 2002, the general pushed through a nationwide referendum that gave him a five-year presidential term. The vote was largely boycotted by the country's largest opposition parties, which argued that it was unconstitutional because it wasn't sanctioned by the National Assembly's Parliament and Senate. An October 2002 National Assembly election, meanwhile, was never certified by independent monitors from the European Union, which found irregularities. "Musharraf massively distorted the political process," says Sherry Rehman, a Karachi-based lawmaker with the Pakistan People's Party, which is headed by former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, who remains in exile abroad. Independent analysts say regulations passed by Gen. Musharraf's government restricted the party's ability to campaign. After the election, New York-based Human Rights Watch said in a report based on research and interviews in Pakistan that the government provided "overt support" for the ruling party and used police to intimidate the opposition. The government barred Mrs. Bhutto from campaigning, which the PPP charged was illegal and hampered its ability to attract core supporters. Despite this, the PPP won the largest portion of the popular vote and the second-largest number of parliamentary seats at 81. Yet, even this victory was later blunted by Gen. Musharraf's government, which orchestrated the defection of 22 PPP lawmakers. Last December, the government also pushed constitutional amendments through the National Assembly that significantly strengthen the presidency, giving Gen. Musharraf power to suspend the National Assembly, remove the prime minister and choose his own chiefs of the armed services. The parliament also endorsed Gen. Musharraf's presidency through 2007 in return for his agreeing to retire as army commander at the end of this year. Traditionally, Pakistan's president was largely a ceremonial job, with the prime minister running the government. Gen. Musharraf, however, changed the constitution to give the president the power to run the government and to sack the prime minister. Gen. Musharraf's political maneuverings have strengthened Pakistan's Islamist parties. The loss of support for secular parties such as the PPP has translated into votes for a coalition of fundamentalist Islamic parties that swept to power in two Pakistani states in 2002. The Mutahida Majlis-e-Amal -- or the United Forum for Action, as the coalition is called -- has also become the ruling party's key legislative partner in strengthening Gen. Musharraf's power. That partnership has posed problems for Gen. Musharraf and for the U.S. Among his key policy initiatives since the 9/11 attacks is a plan to reform the country's vast network of Islamic boarding schools, known as madrassas. Supported by Islamic fundamentalists, madrassas have been key recruiting centers for al Qaeda and Taliban fighters, teaching militancy as well as Quranic studies. Taliban Support In the Baluchistan province in the south, madrassas continue to serve as a key support system for the Taliban, despite Gen. Musharraf's promises to curb their activities, a recent visit there shows. In the border town of Chaman, thousands of Taliban soldiers freely move back and forth between Pakistan and Afghanistan as they launch strikes against U.S. forces inside Afghanistan. "I am waiting for a call to jihad against an un-Islamic regime," says Abdul Hadi, a Taliban fighter who fled his home in southern Afghanistan and now is housed in a madrassa. Pashtunabad, a congested slum in the nearby city of Quetta, also has a large concentration of former Taliban, and several commanders are believed to be hiding here. Maulana Noor Mohammed, a member of the National Assembly representing the MMA, runs the principal madrassa in town. "The Taliban will ultimately triumph," says Mr. Noor from the school, where a majority of his students are Afghans. U.S. officials acknowledge that Gen. Musharraf has been slow to rein in the madrassas, but they also say they don't think he's capable of controlling some tribal areas where the Taliban has congregated. "The situation on the Western border is much more difficult," says a senior U.S. official. "Large portions are no man's land and have been for 150 years." To address the problem, the U.S. and Pakistan are promoting road and infrastructure projects across Pakistan's tribal areas to integrate the region with the rest of Pakistan. The Bush administration poured some $31 million into the projects last year and is expected to release another $37 million this year. Gen. Musharraf gets high marks from U.S. officials for his government's efforts to cut off militants operating inside the disputed territory of Kashmir. India and Pakistan have twice gone to war over Kashmir and nearly did so again in 2002 after militants attacked India's Parliament building. New Delhi alleged the assailants were supported by Islamabad. As part of a new peace initiative, Gen. Musharraf pledged to cut off all support for militants operating inside Kashmir. Some fighters based inside Pakistani-controlled Kashmir say he's making good on his promise. "We have no choice but to go back to our homes," says Mohammed Asfaq, a Srinigar-based insurgent in the Kashmiri border town of Muzaffrabad. He says that the order from Islamabad is clear: Infiltration into India must stop. But in a dingy room filled with Kashmiri fighters, bitterness toward Gen. Musharraf is also evident. "We will not allow Musharraf to sell out the blood of our martyrs," says Saifullah, a bearded man in his late twenties. "We will continue our jihad." U.S. officials say they are increasingly concerned for Gen. Musharraf's life as he cracks down on Kashmiri militants and widens the bin Laden hunt. Among those arrested in the attempted assassination on the general in December was a Kashmiri member of an al Qaeda-linked terrorist group. And U.S. officials say they don't want to press him too hard on the nuclear question, for fear of further undermining his political base. "There is only so hard or so fast that we can push him," says one U.S. official. A Pakistan without Gen. Musharraf running it, he says, would be even more frightening. blink.gif ---- Carla Anne Robbins in Washington contributed to this article
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 13 2004, 02:52 AM The other victims Shias are targets in Pakistan, too THE attacks on Islam's Shias, which left around 170 dead in Iraq, also took their toll in the Pakistani town of Quetta, near the border with Afghanistan, on March 2nd. More than 40 people were killed and over 150 seriously injured after unknown terrorists attacked a Shia procession with guns and grenades during a religious ceremony to mark the Shia holy day of Ashoura. The enraged marchers went on a rampage, setting shops on fire. Troops were called out and a curfew imposed. The same day, over a dozen Shias were killed in the remote northern town of Parachinar as well, in an accidental stampede provoked by fears of a Sunni attack. Although sectarian strife is not new to Pakistan, its more violent and organised form has its origins in the jihad against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s. The Afghan resistance was then lent a hand by extremist Sunni groups in Pakistan. Among these was the Sipah-i-Sahaba, based in southern Punjab. In the 1990s, the Sunni-Shia divide in both Afghanistan and Pakistan became markedly bloody. In central Afghanistan, the Shia Hazaras bore the brunt of the Sunni Taliban's repression and religious cleansing after they came to power. In Pakistan, the Sipah-i-Sahaba became the umbrella organisation for several underground groups, among which the Lashkar-i-Jhangvi was the most virulently anti-Shia. Attacks on prominent Pakistani Shia clerics, civil servants and medical doctors multiplied, mainly in Karachi, although some Iranian diplomats were also targeted in southern Punjab cities. Recently, however, the focus has shifted to Quetta, where 57 people were killed last July when gunmen opened fire in a Shia mosque during prayers. Authorities in Pakistan have never been able clearly to explain which Sunni organisation is behind the attacks in Quetta, and why it is so difficult to stamp it out. One line of thinking has it that the Lashkar-i-Jhangvi is responsible, in association with the remaining Taliban hiding in Pakistan near the border with Afghanistan, from where they are waging war against the government in Kabul. This theory is supported by the fact that the attacks are aimed at the Hazara community of Pakistan, which is settled in and around Quetta. The destabilisation of Pakistan itself, as an ally of America in the war against the Taliban, may also be an aim. An explanation for the persistence of anti-Shia attacks may paradoxically be that the various Sunni sectarian groups are also suppliers of manpower for the jihad against India in Kashmir, which, according to Delhi, has been unofficially sponsored by the Pakistani government. Conspiracy theorists argue that stamping them out before a political solution with India on Kashmir is found would weaken Pakistan's hand in the negotiations. Cheers
Posted by: rhytha Mar 15 2004, 12:05 AM
Hilarious Paki palmreader website laugh.gif
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 15 2004, 04:33 AM
Cross Posted on Energy Thread : pakee.gif SUKKUR: Main Sui gas pipelines for supplying gas to Sindh, Punjab and NWFP, were not safe despite deployment of strong contingent of police and other law enforcing agencies. The outlaws blow the pipeline almost every week, due to which smooth supply of gas to all the three provinces has become very difficult. Recently a 26" diameter Sui gas pipeline was blown away near village Mazari, in Sindh-Punjab border area, due to which some two kilometre-long pipeline was changed, which caused expenditure of Rs 50 millions, while the loss occurred due to the leakage of gas was also in millions. In June last year with the approval of federal government, Engineer Corps personnel were deployed at the Sindh-Punjab border area, while services of Sindh Rangers were provided for Sindh-Balochistan border area. More than 200 attacks were carried out on the personnel of law-enforcement agencies, deployed for the security of gas pipeline, due to which some 50 personnel were injured. Besides, 15 vehicles were destroyed after hitting the landmines, laid in the area by the outlaws. The Punjab police have so far arrested some 50 suspects, on the alleged charges of attacking the personnel. Our India-Lotastaan Bhai Bhai Congress Leaders and DDM wanting the Iran and Turkmenistan Natural Gas Pipe Line via Lotastaan should take note. Cheers
Posted by: Mudy Mar 15 2004, 06:05 AM Rahul Dutta/ New Delhi Even as India is willing to go an extra mile to make its latest peace initiative a success, Pakistan is busy constructing concrete bunkers all along the Line of Control (LoC) and stockpiling them with heavy weaponry and ammunition. Moreover, the Pakistani regime has done little to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (PoK) and the terror camps are still existing there, the Northern Command said in its latest fortnightly situation assessment report to the Government. These alarming findings are likely to figure prominently during the talks between US Secretary of State Colin Powell and the Indian political leadership on Tuesday, sources said here on Sunday. Explaining the reason behind Pakistan adding military muscle to its bunkers and posts all along the sensitive LoC, sources said these bunkers provided covering fire to the infiltrators. The retaliatory fire by the Indian forces had damaged these posts and Pakistan was now taking advantage of the ceasefire, which came about in November last year, to turn these posts into concrete bunkers to withstand Indian fire. This meant that Pakistan was not sincere about its much publicised pledge to stop aiding infiltrators, sources said quoting the Northern Command report. The Northern Command is responsible for guarding the LoC besides carrying out counter-insurgency and terrorist operations in Jammu and Kashmir. Faced with this new development, India would be presenting these facts to Mr Powell and apprising him of the Indian apprehensions, it was learnt. India was also likely to give him the list of terrorist camps still existing in PoK despite claims by Pakistan that no terrorist organisations would be allowed to use its soil to launch operations against India, sources said. Admitting the fact that infiltration had come down to some extent in the last few months, the defence establishment, however, wanted to give an assessment in May, sources said. The onset of summer would see snow melting in the high mountain passes thereby enabling the terrorists to sneak into India. The forthcoming crucial period would then reflect Pakistan's overall intentions to turn off the tap completely on the terrorists, officials said. The US Secretary of State, meanwhile, arrives here on Monday night to hold talks on a whole range of bilateral issues with Minister for External Affairs Yashwant Sinha. Both sides will hold parleys on Tuesday on issues like strengthening their strategic partnership and the peace process with Pakistan besides nuclear non-proliferation and the ongoing war against terrorism. The visiting dignitary will also meet Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, Congress president Sonia Gandhi, Finance Minister Jaswant Singh and National Security Advisor Brajesh Mishra before leaving for Islamabad on Tuesday evening to call on President General Pervez Musharraf, it was learnt here on Sunday. The Secretary of State was also scheduled to visit Afghanistan before returning to Washington. Announcing the agenda of his visit to India, Mr Powell said in a video message to the 'India Today' conclave on Friday night that India and the US were together building a strategic partnership based on their shared commitment to freedom, prosperity and security. He said, US President George W Bush and Mr Vajpayee have committed their governments to a variety of steps to deepen and expand this strategic partnership and he looked forward to advancing this during his trip to the region next week. The two sides would also review the situation in war-ravaged Afghanistan and Iraq and the ongoing reconstruction efforts there, officials said. This is the first visit by a top US official to New Delhi after India and Pakistan decided at the historic SAARC summit in Islamabad in January to start a dialogue as a step towards achieving lasting peace. In his address to the India Today conclave, Mr Powell welcomed the farsighted steps being taken by India and Pakistan to peacefully resolve their disputes. He said Prime Minister Vajpayee and President Musharraf have given fresh hope to the citizens of both countries by shaping a composite dialogue and expanding bilateral trade and people-to-people ties.
Posted by: Reggie Mar 15 2004, 11:16 PM
Since Powell is visiting Pakiland, the indespensible all-lie does the obligatory act. Karachi Consulate Bomb Scare
The van was stolen Sunday in a carjacking that left the owner hospitalized with a bullet in his leg, a police investigator told CNN.
Isn't that odd? A carjacking and the owner was shot in the leg????? liar.gif
Posted by: Mudy Mar 16 2004, 09:37 AM More missile tests will be conducted’
Karachi Consulate Bomb Scare
ploy to show some action to Powell.
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 16 2004, 02:32 PM
For such an exercise to be accomplished, a high price tag scheme has to be thought up and then put through. A very excellent example is this buying of 3 clapped out French submarines, which we did not need and do not need. The alleged beneficiaries of this operation were the then Prime Minister, Benazir Bhutto and her ever avaricious spouse with the connivance of the then naval chief whose ill-gotten gains then ended up in the shape of a ranch in Texas, USA.
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 16 2004, 11:55 PM
Three interesting Articles on Saudis and Powell joining in to GUBO Riff Raff.
13 March 2004: Fearing an US/ Pakistan-sponsored putsch, Saudi Arabia is downscaling its military-to-military relations with Pakistan, and insisted on a visiting General Parvez Musharraf to democratise the country and permit the exiled Nawaz Sharief to contest the polls tentatively slated for October-November this year.
16 March 2004: In a further deterioration of relations, Saudi Arabia has demanded that Pakistan defreeze the Bahrain account of the nuclear proliferator, A.Q.Khan, and sought return of $650 million taken for a peaceful nuclear reactor that was never built.
15 March 2004: In US secretary of state Colin Powell’s meeting with General Parvez Musharraf tomorrow, America will demand that all terrorism-related information about the FATA areas be given to it by 31 March, failing which, US troops should be allowed to conduct operations there.
Will post the full Articles if any problems in accessing them. Cheers
Posted by: Mudy Mar 17 2004, 12:46 AM
Peregrine, 's intelligence is very poor. On average there stories are cooked in kitchen without any proof.
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 17 2004, 12:58 AM
Mudy : You mean they are RAW? Apologies. Point taken and won't post them again. Thanks Cheers
Posted by: acharya Mar 17 2004, 12:59 AM
> States opted to join with Pakistan with the condition of internal autonomy > under Pakistan Resolution that was a pact for Pakistan and Islam stands very > strictly for pacts once it come into to effect. Here the Pact (Pakistan > Resolution) is being violated that is clear an unislamic act. > > Your Sincere Pakistani brother since 56 years perhaps Neighboring Sindhi > Since 5000 years > Dear Brother Adam Khan, Assalam o alaikum You make two points, I agree with the first, not the second. Provincial autonomy is an essential feature of our polity as well as politics because it establishes a balance between the 'rights' of those who own land and the 'need' of those who are persecuted or are unable to make a living and have to leave. I am trying to underline the principle on which the provincial autonomy is founded lest - out of anger, haste or ignorance - we undermine our 'rights over our land' or our 'freedom to move from the land'. I am afraid the principle is not properly understood and we tend to fall a prey to the interests of feudals or ethnic chauvinists. As for your being a Sindhi (or me a Punjabi) for 5000 years, the argument is counter-productive. I was born in 1935 in a town which is now in Indian Punjab. Does that make me an Indian? My forefathers surely converted to Islam less than 5000 years ago, does that make me a Hindu? I am now a British citizen - a country to which I migrated 25 years ago. I am sworn to loyalty to Britiain - none else. My children can speak Urdu and Punjabi but my grand children can speak only English. Should I be upset that they are unfamiliar with their culture and are not very proud of their 'roots'? I am not. I will tell you, why? My grand-cildren are neither English nor Pakistani. The majority of the British people look at them as "British Muslims". I as a grand parent, and their parents, do not want them to learn Urdu or Punjabi but they do want them to know about Islam so that they are proud and productive members of the British Muslim community which is their present identity. What is meaningful to my grand children is not the identity of their parents or grand parents (let alone of 5000 years ago) but their present identity. What is meaningful to a Sindhi Muslim is his Pakistani identity that gives him the most rights and the most freedoms. The 5000 years arguments would have been useful if you were being persecuted because of being a Muslim. This argument is used by Sindhi Hindus because it led to their expulsion and they want to come back - this time as rulers. All I am saying is: please recognise your self interest: do not be taken in by the Hindu argument being pedalled by the "Sindhi Nationalists". With warm regards + Usman Khalid +
Posted by: Mudy Mar 17 2004, 01:34 AM
Peregrine, They just spread rumors to sell subscription. I doubt they have any connections, they are more like failed journalist spent good time reading lot of James Hardly Chase and now trying to make money. But oops they falied here also. biggrin.gif
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 17 2004, 04:44 AM Cheers ROTFL.gif ROTFL.gif ROTFL.gif
Posted by: Viren Mar 17 2004, 08:25 AM
ROTFL.gif ROTFL.gif Peregrine, The book on Cong. Charlie Wilson has list of brave (s)exploits of the Pakis on those Tennessee mules shipped to Lottastan during the 80s Afghan war. ROTFL.gif
Posted by: Viren Mar 17 2004, 09:12 AM
Interview/Balawaristan leader Nawaz Khan Naji March 16, 2004 Part I: 'We are neither Pakistanis nor Kashmiris'
But the people of this region, who prefer to call it Balawaristan, insist that they have been illegally occupied and are now seeking independence. Do people from this area have any representation in Pakistan? No. Because we are not in the constitution of Pakistan, we cannot cast a vote or stand for a parliamentary post in Pakistan. We cannot appeal to the Supreme Court of Pakistan. We are foreigners, actually. It is completely an occupation. Article 8 of the agreement signed between Islamabad and the government of Azad Kashmir in March 1949 says Pakistan will think about Gilgit and Ladakh only after a decision on Kashmir. This agreement is between Pakistan and the AJK government, between Gurmani [Mushtaque Ahmed Gurmani, minister without portfolio, government of Pakistan], Sardar Mohammed Ibrahim Khan [president of 'Azad Kashmir'], and Choudhary Ghulam Abbas [head of the All-Jammu and Kashmir Muslim Conference]. Who are these people? The people of the Northern Areas don't know them. We did not cast a vote for Ghulam Abbas or Ibrahim. There was no Muslim Conference, and there is still no Muslim Conference in Gilgit. So how can the head of the Muslim Conference sign an agreement with Pakistan about that area? Our president was Raja Sharif Khan, and the AJK president was Sardar Ibrahim. So how can Ibrahim sign an agreement on Balawaristan? Our president was expelled and appointed a civil services officer! Our army chief was Colonel Khan, who was demoted to lieutenant! ......... Pakistan cannot give us independence, for sure. But after our crying, our protests, the government is starting to do something for our area. They are gradually upgrading the democratic system. Like the Northern Areas Council has become the Northern Areas Legislative Council, which has local representation, though the chairman is the chief executive and Kashmir affairs minister, who is from Pakistan. The posts of speaker and deputy speaker have been introduced. And there is an elected deputy chief executive, but a deputy is a deputy. But gradually, very slowly, we are going for autonomy. This has been achieved only through our efforts. Otherwise, Khyber, Mohmand, Waziristan, all are agencies, where it is not necessary to create councils of legislators. Earlier, the deputy commissioner was the chief of the supreme court of the area. But following our cry, our struggle, they appointed a chief or judicial commissioner, and now there is a chief court, equal to high court, and they are preparing an appellate court. All these are local appointments? The chief justice is from Islamabad, the other judges are local. In every department, the chief is from Pakistan, the other, secondary positions are locals. ........ We have no president, prime minister, parliament, courts, and the Pathans are buying property and our cities are becoming Pathan- majority cities, where our locals are becoming minorities. We have no right to cast votes in Pakistan, nor in Azad Kashmir. Like a no- man's land. We are the last colony in the world. For 57 years we have been hoping for an end to the Kashmir dispute. But our patience is running out fast. Our struggle will be fast, and we will do something with the occupiers.
Posted by: Mudy Mar 17 2004, 11:36 AM
Musharraf Has No Clue Where the Country is Headed By Wajid Shamsul Hasan PRESIDENT General Pervez Musharraf has put the country in an abysmal mess. As a result of his policies that lack foresight, his decisions that are devoid of any wisdom and his inconceivable blunders have pushed Pakistan in a hornet's nest. Neither the commando has an exit route out of the dilemma nor has he the courage and intelligence to take wise counsel from others who could save Pakistan from becoming a failed state and ending up like Yugoslavia. Unfortunately in a situation when Pakistan is jostling for survival between the devil and the deep blue sea, Musharraf is surrounded by cronies and there is hardly a sane voice that could tell him that enough is enough. Time has come when he needs to be told and that he should make room for others who could bring about a national reconciliation and mobilize the people to defend vital national strategic interests. No doubt his best asset today are a group of his master's voices that keep harping all is well in the state of Denmark and that he is the best ruler that Pakistan so far has had. His media managers also want the nation to believe that AQ Khan crisis is over and it is gradually dying down in the domestic and western media. What is reassuring for him are the various news stories in the American press that he has managed to defuse Washington's anger by allowing US troops - thousands in number - total freedom to operate as a sovereign force into Pakistani territory to flush out Al-Qaeda, arrest hiding Osama Bin Laden and his associates before the Presidential elections so that George W. Bush has a safe romp home. This view, however, is not shared by hawkish US Deputy Defence Secretary Paul Wolfowitz who has openly charged Pakistan of "failing to cooperate with the United States in its battle to crush Taliban despite Washington's restrain over Islamabad's nuclear proliferation scandal". Such an outburst by the man who is a key figure in Bush Administration amounts to a tight slap on the face of President Musharraf who has not only unzipped himself but the country as well, to be fouled by the Americans in the name of what they call their war on terrorism. Islamabad, however, denies this and its ministers keep on orchestrating that no foreign troops will be permitted to operate in Pakistan since it would violate its independence and sovereignty. These Falstaffian ministerial pronouncements have no relevance to facts. Musharraf government cannot deny that Pakistan's airports and other exit points are manned by FBI agents, that the country has been heavily infested by CIA operatives and that American agencies helped by their marines have been conducting raids to arrest those wanted by them. "Now all is well and settled" on Dr AQ Khan front is for public consumption. In their hearts Musharraf and his colleagues know it well that nothing has ended, there is something more in offing and the lull in the wind from Washington is a precursor to the whirlwind. They have genuine apprehensions that the persistent blowing of hot and cold by different functionaries and the media pressure have a method behind it all. Though US Secretary of State Colin Powell has expressed his satisfaction over Musharraf's conduct of AQ Khan affair and also on his pardon to him, what has made their nights sleepless is the recent scathing attack by both Bush's National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice and Deputy Defence Secretary Wolfowitz. Rice has dubbed as "criminal enterprise" the Musharraf nuclear proliferation network. The lady, who is also a hawk like Wolfowitz and is reputed to be closer to Bush than Powell, made it clear-in keeping with some of the previous assertions of the US State Department-- that it would go to the bottom of it -- that those who indulge in trafficking of deadly weapons "will be brought to justice". In this context-- while Musharraf and his military establishment think that by making AQ Khan a scapegoat they have washed their hands of the responsibility of the transfer of nuclear technology, this is not the perception in Washington. The relevant people in the United States continue to hold the view that Musharraf and other generals have had their fingers much too deep in Pakistan's "dirty" nuclear pie and that if not conducive now, they will have to share the burden of guilt with AQ Khan at some later stage. "They will not be allowed to have the cake and eat it too." According to Rice the entire export of nuclear technology was a "criminal enterprise" motivated by "greed or fanaticism or perhaps both." (Speech at Ronald Reagan presidential library and museum in Sun Valley, California). "We must strengthen the world's ability to keep dangerous weapons out of the hands of the world's most dangerous regimes," she emphasized. Although Musharraf has pardoned Dr Khan, Rice insisted that those who traffic in deadly weapons will be brought to justice "working with intelligence officials from the United Kingdom and other nations," she said, adding: "We unraveled the Khan network and we are putting an end to its criminal enterprise. Its key leaders - including Dr Khan - are no longer in business, and we are working to dismantle the entire network". Despite having put Dr Khan out of their way, Musharraf and his colleagues are not sure of the ground they are treading upon. Besides internal threats of elimination for betraying Pakistan's nuclear program, they fear that once the current operations are over in South Waziristan and Osama is found, Washington would no more need them. Like the end of Soviet occupation in Afghanistan made General Zia and his colleagues redundant and they had to be put to rest en bloc, Musharraf and his team mates would also be discarded to the dustbin of history soon after. General Musharraf thinks he is shrewd enough to know that notwithstanding Washington's goody-goody behavior, the undercurrents there are loaded with evidence that it was Pakistan's military establishment led by General Aslam Beg, Lt General Hameed Gul and Lt General Asad Durrani who had laid down the policy of 'proliferation for cash' to overcome paucity of funds due to stoppage of American money after the Afghan war. To continue meddling in Afghanistan, to ensure what the Generals call Pakistan's strategic depth to protect and sustain other interests, they required a lot of money. So did he need unaccounted funds to carry on what General Musharraf has now acknowledged as cross-border terrorism-harming the indigenous Kashmiri intifada. His Kargil fiasco - while sending 3,000 Pakistani brave military jawans into their graves unsung - cost the country around $500 million. Sustaining of our troops pointing their guns at their counterparts from below the Siachin Glacier required between $500m to $600m annually since 1984 when General Zia let India occupy it without firing a shot. For all these operations - Afghanistan, Kashmir etc - money to the tune of $1000 million per annum was needed. Obviously this kind of cash was not growing on trees and Musharraf had yet to declare that he could perform miracles. Pakistan's dwindling foreign exchange reserves only shot up after 9-11 for reasons other than patriotism. Having survived two serious assassination attempts- though some people take them to be stage-managed - Musharraf believes he would be nine times lucky while those after him want their luck to favor them once. With both internal and external odds against him, he is trying his best to avert an international and domestic backlash. Forewarned of the Ides of March - Musharraf desperately wants to erase the impression that he and other generals were involved in nuclear proliferation (although there is enough circumstantial evidence to prove their culpability) and that AQ Khan was a genuine villain and not a scapegoat as believed by the masses. His agencies are reported to have whipped into action their wired columnists - some of them being retired army officers who escaped court martial for deserting from duty in former East Pakistan. This dubious characters are posing as born-again patriots and have the audacity to describe the legendary Dr Khan as "an albatross round Pakistan's neck that has brought us to ground zero of world public opinion". They forget that Zulfikar Ali Bhutto opened floodgates of nuclear power for Pakistan while Dr AQ Khan - along with other capable nuclear scientists raised by Bhutto - had developed the "atomic pill" to provide the much needed Viagra to the Pakistani Generals. These defence analysts - a constant fixture in the government owned TV and private channels - have not only been assigned to join the orchestra to further blacken Dr Khan, but their new task is to defend Musharraf by matching his lies with Benazir Bhutto's recently revealed truths regarding the generals involvement in the nuclear trade. They want Bhutto to show more propriety in her charge sheet against Musharraf and they desperately plead that it should be ensured that "more skeletons do not appear on an already hot tin roof". Probably provided a pack of lies to counter Benazir Bhutto they want to drag Benazir in the game of nuclear proliferation to lessen the international heat on Musharraf. It has been claimed that Sri Lankan Abu Tahir's involvement with AQ Khan started in 1994-95 when Bhutto was prime minister. They, however, forget that General Musharraf came on record in February last to declare that only Presidents and Army chiefs had their say in nuclear affairs. Obviously this meant that all civilian prime ministers since Zia's fatal fall had nothing to do with the control of the nuclear program. And to put the record straight, Abu Tahir had purchased special steel from Britain for AQ Khan and the case was investigated in London during 2001. Now read this howler from one of the anti-BB propagandists: "Libya contacted AQ Khan in 1997 (again during the Benazir regime), to obtain help and expertise in the field of uranium-enrichment centrifuge as well as supply centrifuge units for Libya's nuclear program." This writer went overboard and forgot that Benazir Bhutto was not in power in 1997. President Farooq Leghari had dismissed her in November 1996. Despite Musharraf's categorical denial pen pushers hired by his media managers are trying to divert attention and in a new propaganda drive have started accusing that it were the post-Zia civilian governments that failed to exercise stricter security controls. It was then, it is alleged, "when AQ Khan first started to run amok." It has, however, been grudgingly acknowledged that ZA Bhutto had introduced strict official controls that were even followed by Gen Zia ul Haq. There is also criticism of Bhutto now talking about the Benazir Nuclear Doctrine, that banned exports of nuclear know-how and material from Pakistan. The necessity for such a doctrine was based on a briefing by her father Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in his death-cell. Besides warning her of external threats to Pakistani nuclear scientists, ZAB had told her to ensure that there was no transfer of technology to any Muslim country or any one else-- either for money or friendship. ZAB had believed that while those who opposed our nuclear program might swallow the fact of Pakistan making and possessing a bomb, once it had become a fait accompli, they would never tolerate it to be a source of an Islamic bomb and transfer of nuclear technology to the Muslim countries for that purpose. Such intricate things are much too difficult to be understood by thickheaded self-styled defence analysts. It seems that Bhutto touched somebody's raw nerve when she alleged in recent TV and newspaper interviews that "Gen Pervez Musharraf is responsible for the nuclear exports to Libya". Instead of proving her wrong crocodile tears are being shed. "With the President already treading a fail-safe line for Pakistan, it was extremely disappointing to see our former PM pursuing crass political objectives well knowing she was causing immense damage to the country. As an admirer of Ms Benazir's political talents and charisma" as he claims, he "expected her to uphold the national interest "even to the peril of her life". Like most Pakistanis, Bhutto believes that by being a party to the transfer of nuclear technology Musharraf has not only betrayed a vital national trust but also committed an act of high treason. Indeed, when a general could send ZAB to the gallows for seeking the nuclear glow for the country on ground of conspiring to kill a pygmy political opponent who is still walking alive, why can't the nation try a general for high treason for giving a fatal blow to Pakistan's nuclear program and hold him accountable for this national crime. It is, indeed, a tragedy that our Praetorian class considers itself to be more important than Pakistan itself, bigger than the state. It needs to be reminded what the Quaid had said: "Who lives if Pakistan dies". Surely, if there is no Pakistan where would our generals go, nay, where we all would go. One agrees with the countrywide view that Pakistan's nuclear tragedy is likely to lead to much more dire consequences than that of fall of Dhaka. And it has happened because there was no accountability of those who had laid down their arms in an abject surrender to the Indian general in 1971. It is an irony that it took 27 years for a general to recognize ZA Bhutto as the father of Pakistan's nuclear program. I hope Benazir Bhutto will not have to wait that long to be recognized as the Prime Minister who got Pakistan the capability to carry its nuclear warheads to their targets in Pakistan's self-defence. The writer is a former Pakistan High Commissioner to UK and a close aide of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto
Posted by: Mudy Mar 17 2004, 09:31 PM
Posted by: Reggie Mar 17 2004, 09:41 PM
Nice letter - Shiv at BR would love this! Pakistan, love it or leave it; I left!
Only memories of Pakistan 27 years since I left (have never returned), especially Karachi are, open gutters, people urinating in public places forming huge highly noxious pools of waste matter, tired and beaten donkeys, carcasses of dead animals punctuating dilapidated garbage strewn streets, raw sewage bubbling out of open man-holes, horribly raucous polluting rickshaws, insane beggars, mad deafeningly loud vendors, corrupt police, buildings collapsing, insane drivers licenced to kill, naturally grotesque road accidents, pedestrians aimlessly jay-walking. There was a big advert on the road to the Karachi airport then (I wonder if its still there) which read, Pakistan – love it or leave it; I left.
********** BTW, Colin Powell just landed at Islamaworst. As he stepped out, he planted two soft kisses on Nancy Powell's cheeks. Isn't public kissing illegal in Pakistan. Can Powell be arrested and jailed for such vulgur display of public affection?
Posted by: Mudy Mar 18 2004, 04:14 AM
> why dont you give the punjab and sindh provinces back to india and > pakhtunkhwa back to afghanistan
Punjab, Sindh, Sarhad and Baluchistan are not given to Pakistan; they are Pakistan. I do not know to which country the writer of above line (who did not give his name) belongs. But Pakistan is the product of a joint struggle of all the Muslims of British India. It belongs to its people. The people of Kashmir and Afghanistan suffer because they are still viewed as the 'property' of their erstwhile rulers and denied self-determination. All the socio-poltical problems of Pakistan emerge from the same mentality - acceptance of serfdom of feudals (landed or industrialis). As long as Afghanistan was ruled by a king, he did talk about restoring the Durrani empire. That imperial argument - or its ethnic successor - are archaic and unacceptable in the modern times. Nations define themselves; they are not defined by foreign ambitions or minorities that are allies of imperial interests. I am saying is that the Durrani Empire included present day Pakistan and Afghanistan. The compulsion of History as well the right of self-determination have come to be the same. Let us make use of it to consolidate unity in the region. It does not matter if it is done in the name of Durrani Empire or Islamic Soldarity; the end result is the same. + Usman Khalid +
Posted by: Mudy Mar 18 2004, 12:02 PM
INDIA-PAKISTAN DIALOGUE OPTIMISM BELIED: A Viewpoint. by Dr. Subhash Kapila Introductory Observations: The beginning of the year 2004, like commencement of all New Years, stirred great hope that India and Pakistan would be initiating a peace process. This arose from the Islamabad Accord arrived at during the Islamabad SAARC Summit in January 2004. Carrying out a deep appraisal of the Islamabad Accord, this author in his paper: “India-Pakistan Peace Process and the Islamabad peace Accord: An Appraisal” (SAAG Paper No. 893 dated 13-01-2004) had made the following salient observations: * The sudden climb down by India and Pakistan from stated positions was externally scripted and choreographed. * United States pressure on India and Pakistan to initiate a peace process was determined by United States strategic stakes in Pakistan and not by peace dividends in South Asia. * United States pressure in this direction would cease the day its current strategic stakes in Pakistan get diluted or ceased. * General Pervez Musharraf is not in a position, militarily or politically, to deliver on the Islamabad Accord. * The Islamabad Accord neither now or in future offers any strategic or military advantages to India. * The Islamabad Accord was a “Declaration of Intent not a Structure for Peace in South Asia. Concluding the above paper, the following assessments were offered: * Peace and peace dividends in South Asia cannot emerge as a result of external impositions and pressures. * Nor can peace in any region of the world be brought about by linkages to strategic stakes of external powers. * Peace in South Asia and a durable peace at that, can become a reality in South Asia by only a self initiated and self urged bilateral accord. After two months of the media hype conferred on this Accord and the intervening developments, the appraisal above seems to stand corroborated. No “ Peace Process”, its only a “Resumption of Dialogue”: “Peace Process” is a wrong term to define the initiation of talks between India and Pakistan. Using the term “Peace Process” conjures memories of what was achieved between Israel and Egypt and invests a lot of optimism. In the case of India and Pakistan the confrontation is not on territorial issues. Kashmir, so often repeated by USA as a nuclear flash point or an issue holding back India’s membership of the UN security council is not a territorial issue. Pakistan made it into an ideological and religious issue. And when this happens, such issues cannot be resolved by “Peace processes” or even dialogues. They get resolved by the compulsions of contemporary strategic, political and military pressures attendant at a given point of time. At best, the on-going efforts for talks between India and Pakistan can best be termed as a “dialogue” on contentions issues. Further in a dialogue of this nature there is no role for ‘mediators’; ‘facilitators’ or ‘patrons’. United States Think Tanks and Scholars Not Optimistic on Outcome of India-Pakistan Dialogue: In marked contrast to the United States Administration, the American think-tanks and American Scholars specializing on South Asia are not optimistic on the outcome of the present India-Pakistan dialogue. A sampling of their Views are covered below. * Stimson Center, Washington, Brief entitled “Trading military for Peace”: In this report the following points are made: Conventional wisdom holds that this will be another futile effort, because President Musharraf Lacks the sincerity or the following to engineer a strategic shift to peace. Pakistan Army cannot wean itself from the need for an adversary and for Kashmir to remain on the boil. Express doubts, that General Musharraf and top Army brass would trade military for peace with India and stem Islamabad’s continuing support for Jihadi groups. * Proof Stephen Cohen, Brookings Institution, Washington: His remarks are: “ I am cautiously pessimistic.” “ I am pretty confident that this will break down sometimes this fall” Cohen said that he was not sure whether current Indian and Pakistani generations are ready to change mutually incompatible views. Cohen had earlier written that Mr Vajpayee (Indian PM) is working towards eventual transformation of Pakistan, but he cannot do it alone. His improbable partner General Musharraf lacks strategic vision. * Robert Mathaway, Woodrow Wilson International School for Scholars: He has expressed that going by history, this dialogue should not raise unnecessary optimistic expectations. Further, that, under the best of circumstances, the India-Pak dialogue is going to be a long tough slog marked by setbacks, statements and acrimony. These American scholars have made realistic assessments. It is time that India’s media analysts stop their unnecessary hype on this issue and lead Indian public opinion astray. India and Pakistan Have Contrasting Approaches on Pace of Dialogue: To add to the contentiousness of the issues figuring on the India-Pakistan dialogue agenda, a larger contentious issue which is now over-arching this dialogue is the contrasting approaches of India and Pakistan. In brief, these can be analysed as under: * Pakistan wants an ‘Instant Coffee’ like recipe on Kashmir, which he can sell to his Generals both to shore up his personal survival and exploit the masses. This is evidence by his latest performance of repeating Kashmir as the core issue and its solution would determine the rest of the agenda. * India believes that a that a wide array of Confidence Building Measures (CBMs) be put into effect, paving the way for greater confidence and mutual trust as a stepping stone for tackling the bigger issues. So, therefore, it seems that the fundamental difference in approach between India and Pakistan are re-emerging. Pakistan’s Generals Fear Indian CBMs: India’s CBMs, some of them unilateral, in the form of greater facilitation of exchange of visitors and delegations from Pakistan, cultural exchanges and free flow of visitors from Pakistan is frightening for Pakistani Generals. Pakistani Generals feel that with such a free flow of Pakistanis visiting India, the impact generated would be as follows: * Pakistanis will see first hand the tremendous progress made by India, comparatively. * Pakistanis would begin doubting the futility of Pak Government's approaches on Kashmir and the anti-Indian propaganda on Kashmir by their Govt. * Pakistanis would begin questioning the long years of Pakistan Army rule, the corruption and futile military adventurism. Kashmir allows the Pakistan Army Generals to reinforce their hold on political power in Pakistan. And if Pakistan Army generals have to trade their ‘raison d’etre’ for hold on Pakistan for South Asian Peace, then India should surrender completely on Kashmir at once. Hence, General Musharraf’s continuing refrain on Kashmir as the ‘core issue’ and that speed on its solution (read Pakistan Army demands) cannot lag behind pace on others issues. India’s policy planners therefore should be well aware that the emphasis on Indian CBMs must be at a higher priority and pace than or Kashmir. The Pakistan Army is most welcome to try another military solution in Kashmir. Concluding Observations: India’s unsuspecting political and strategic analysis make mush use of Western concepts like ‘conflict resolution’ and ‘conflict management’ in relation to South Asia. Wholesale applications of such Western concepts to the South Asia scene are not in order as the South Asian security environment and role of external intrusive powers make the situations more complex .Those interested in this subject ,for more detailed analysis may refer to this author's Paper: “South Asia Conflict Revolution: Impediments: An Analysis” (SAAG Paper No.553 dated 25-11-2002) India Pakistan dialogue process has better chances of success and optimism if the following developments would emerge : * United States and china de-link themselves as external inputs in South Asia conflict generation * United States and China prevail on Pakistan to give up it’s over-sized strategic ambitions of parity with India in South Asia . * United States gives up it’s permissiveness towards Pakistani’s strategic delinquencies in terms of having been the haven of Al Qaeda, Taliban, 9/11 Islamic Jehadis and nuclear proliferation in the Islamic world and North Korea . The United States must further realize that the success of the dialogue for normalisation between India and Pakistan does not rely on President Musharaf or PM Vajpayee or the United States as a facilitator. The Indian public opinion does not perceive the United States as an “honest broker” when it comes to the India-Pakistan context . For India, it is peace which is the priority. On the other hand for Pakistan Army Generals it is Kashmir which is the priority. India can wait patiently for Pakistan's public opinion to get in favour of peace and put their Generals on notice.
Posted by: Mudy Mar 18 2004, 12:15 PM Medal to criminals, Kudos!!!
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 18 2004, 02:40 PM india.gif clap.gif
KARACHI, March 17: India will be enjoying an advantage of over 15.58 per cent in duties over Pakistani textile exports to European markets in the quota-free era beginning from January 2005, industry sources said on Wednesday.
Cheers cheers.gif
Posted by: Viren Mar 18 2004, 11:12 PM
QUOTE (Mudy @ Mar 18 2004, 02:45 AM) Medal to criminals, Kudos!!!
More on this..
The designation means Pakistan will join an elite group of nations, including Japan, Australia, Israel, Egypt, Kuwait, South Korea, Argentina, New Zealand and the Philippines, which are granted significant benefits in the area of foreign aid and defense cooperation.
Israel and Pakistan in same group - now is that the first ?
Posted by: Mudy Mar 18 2004, 11:32 PM
Seems like now it is 401% that Pakistan will lose its nuke capability, if not lost already. Basically TSP will get 51b state status. Now it tells why Mushy made sudden sprint toward Saudi Arabia and sudden ante towards "K". Well, i am waiting for election outcome in May and we will be back in business hiting TSP.
Posted by: Mudy Mar 19 2004, 12:27 AM U.S. stocks bounce; al Qaida target may be surrounded Thursday March 18, 1:49 pm ET By Michael Baron NEW YORK (CBS.MW) - U.S. stocks rebounded Thursday following reports that a 'high-level' al Qaida target has been surrounded along the border of Afghanistan and Pakistan. The Dow surged into positive territory briefly after the developing story appeared. The capture of the Osama bin Laden, obviously the top al Qaida target, would likely prompt an immediate bull run on Wall Street. Efforts to snare bin Laden have reported been stepped up of late, and he has long been believed to be hiding in the region. The latest reports from Reuters cite Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf(400%) as saying the country's forces may have cornered Ayman Al-Zawahri, the No. 2 man in al Qaida
Posted by: Viren Mar 19 2004, 02:37 AM
QUOTE (Mudy @ Mar 18 2004, 02:57 PM)
The latest reports from Reuters cite Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf(400%) as saying the country's forces may have cornered Ayman Al-Zawahri, the No. 2 man in al Qaida
I'm betting on yet another No. 3 to be dragged out of the caves. Dow has tempered down so I guess the new AQ org chart is being prepared. wink.gif
Posted by: Hauma Hamiddha Mar 19 2004, 02:38 AM
I think we must not take the news of US making TSP non-whatever Al-lie lightly. Let there be no mistake that the US must be having some plans for India. This whole India shining business is more than what meets the eye. A non-white, non-Anglo pagan polytheisitic nation growing in power would not have escaped the attention of the experts at the 0-sum game. I am sure the gamers are planning the next round of "contain Asia" games and what is more useful than a moderate modern friendly Islamic ally like TSP. The TSPian real estate has no oil and a lot of gas of the wrong kind, yet why is so crucial to uncle? The polytheisitic neighbor next door must be raising some concerns.
Posted by: Hauma Hamiddha Mar 19 2004, 02:51 AM
Welcoming the Pakistani military activities in the tribal areas, Powell said, "We are committed to a long-term relationship with Pakistan." What it means is that uncle finally decided to stop all his covert rendezvous with his dear GF TSP and go ahead and formally marry her. From now on TSP will walk as the youngest wife in uncle's varied haram. Keeping in line with her modern, moderate, friendly image she is likely not wear a burka in the haram. Al Jaw something and some mullahs are supposed to be dowry she brings along for uncle. Let's all wish uncle a happy married life. clap.gif graduated.gif
Posted by: acharya Mar 19 2004, 03:32 AM
I think we must not take the news of US making TSP non-whatever Al-lie lightly. Let there be no mistake that the US must be having some plans for India. This whole India shining business is more than what meets the eye. A non-white, non-Anglo pagan polytheisitic nation growing in power would not have escaped the attention of the experts at the 0-sum game. I am sure the gamers are planning the next round of "contain Asia" games and what is more useful than a moderate modern friendly Islamic ally like TSP. The TSPian real estate has no oil and a lot of gas of the wrong kind, yet why is so crucial to uncle? The polytheisitic neighbor next door must be raising some concerns. HH, Can you expand this. I want to take it for other documents. THis is great explanation. By making TSP as an anchor and the population increasing in future TSP can breakout of the jacket within a few decades bringing India down.
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 19 2004, 04:48 AM Bringing the madrasa into the mainstream would in some measure mean bringing the regular curriculum into the seminary. Is this curriculum any different from the twisted view of life taught to the boys who are then fed into jihad? There is some research that says that jihad in Pakistan was numerically fed from the mainstream educational institutions far more than from the seminaries President Pervez Musharraf, in his ‘breakfast meeting’ with foreign intellectuals on ARY channel on 1 March 2004, defended his government’s go-slow policy on the taming of the madrasas in Pakistan, saying Pakistan didn’t have the money to do it. The world thinks that unless the religious seminary in Pakistan is purged of its dangerous jihadi ideology Pakistan’s role in the campaign against terrorism would not be complete. He said the seminaries were being brought into the education mainstream through the introduction of secular subjects, but this will take years because of the financial constraints. The United States and the European Union are both focusing on the madrasa reform in Pakistan and will probably put more pressure on President Musharraf for it in the coming days. Mainstream no different from madrasa: But Pakistan’s allies in the war against terrorism have not focused on what Pakistan does in its regular mainstream schools. Bringing the madrasa into the mainstream would in some measure mean bringing the regular curriculum into the seminary. Is this curriculum any different from the twisted view of life taught to the boys who are then fed into jihad? There is some research that says that jihad in Pakistan was numerically fed from the mainstream educational institutions far more than from the seminaries. If seminary teaches jihad, should one presume that the normal school doesn’t? If the seminary inculcates prejudice against all non-Muslims, should we presume that the mainstream schools don’t? President Musharraf himself will be put off by the kind of textbooks the federal education ministry continues to propose to the provinces. Why doesn’t he do something about that? The truth is that he doesn’t know. Islamabad’s Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI) has examined the mechanism of school textbook-writing in Pakistan and presented its findings in 2003 in the hope that the government would look into some of the shocking revelations in them and take remedial measures. Not much reaction has come from the government to the report titled The Subtle Subversion: the State of Curricula and Textbooks in Pakistan. Federal education minister Ms Zubaida Jalal, known for her progressive views, may not have read it either because she has not commented on it. Her new textbooks for entire Pakistan are due to be published some time in 2005 but they are likely to be made on the basis of the guidelines provided by her ministry’s notoriously non-subtle Curriculum Wing targeted for criticism by the Report. Ideological poison of the Curriculum Wing: In 2002, SDPI got together a group of scholars to examine class one-to-twelve textbooks in the subjects of social sciences/Pakistan Studies, Urdu and English. The books were prepared on the basis of the curriculum set by the Federal Education Ministry in its Curriculum Wing. The Wing has been manned by a certain kind of officers who have served governments of all stripes without any minister challenging their modus operandi. The guidelines are all fashioned in the name of Islamisation, but if a minister had ever to looked at the vocabulary used and the direction given by the Wing to provincial textbook boards, he would have tried to reform the Wing, change the civil servants working there and replace them with more enlightened individuals. By and large, education as a subject has not appealed to any intellectual politician, most probably because it was feared that he would clash with the country’s ideology. It is quite possible that Ms Zubaida Jalal has the same concern. Before General Zia’s Islamisation, textbooks were not based on Muslim majoritarianism. They were sensitive to the fact that Pakistan was a multi-religious state and that non-Muslims were full citizens under the Constitution. Islamisation ended all that and the textbooks began a new nation-building process that excluded the non-Muslim. The philosophy of education followed was summed up in one Curriculum Wing directive given in 1995 in respect of class five: ‘In the teaching material no concept of separation between the worldly and the religious be given; rather all the material be presented from the Islamic point of view’. The general directive for textbooks implies that Pakistan is for the Muslims alone; that Islamiyat is to be forcibly taught to all students, whatever their faith, including compulsory reading of the Quran; that ideology of Pakistan is to be internalised as faith, and hate be created against the Hindus of India; and students be urged to take the path of jihad and shahadat. The crudeness of the message: Has the liberal world view of General Musharraf made any difference? Not really. A 2002 directive from the Curriculum Wing named National Early Childhood Education lists the objectives as follows: to nurture in children a sense of Islamic identity and pride in being a Pakistani and regard Pakistan as an Islamic country and acquire deep love for it. Throughout no thought is given to the possibility that a child in the school could be non-Muslim and might therefore feel that he is not a Pakistani simply because the textbook equates Pakistani with Muslim. Although Islamiyat is not compulsory for non-Muslims pupils, the fact that there are 25 percent extra marks for any non-Muslim studying it is a strong proselytising incentive. The 2002 directive also seeks to impart the following ‘life skills’ among the pupils regardless of their religion: use greetings as As-salamu aleikam; know when to say Bismillah; recite the first kalima and understand its meanings; name the five daily prayers; and learn about Ramadan and the Eids. Urdu textbooks written by such great people as Baba-e-Urdu Maulavi Abdul Haq before partition hardly contained any religious material. It was language that was sought to be taught and one objective at the matriculation level (class 9 and 10) was to introduce the youth to great works of Urdu literature. Later when religious instruction was considered necessary the subject of Islamiyat was added to the syllabus. The injection of religion in such subjects as Urdu, social studies/Pakistan Studies and English was added later, removing all subtlety and persuasion from indoctrination. While the crudeness of the message failed to transform children into good Muslims, the hate content in the textbooks rendered them bad human beings. A good Muslim was no longer necessarily a good human being. The 2002 directive ironically gave the following message: ‘To make the Quranic principles an integral part of curricula…to train the future generation of Pakistan as true practising Muslims who would be able to usher in the 21st century and the next millennium with courage, wisdom and tolerance’. Closing of the Pakistani mind: The 2002 directive for Pakistan Studies goes on to define the following learning objectives: ‘Develop understanding of Hindu-Muslim differences and need for Pakistan (Class 4); Hindu-Muslim differences in culture, India’s evil designs against Pakistan; identify the events in relation to Hindu-Muslim differences’. How did the textbooks respond to these directions? The SDPI report tells us that in the class 5 textbook prepared by Punjab there is a sentence that says ‘Hindu has always been an enemy of Islam’; a class 4 textbook said ‘The religion of the Hindus did not teach them good things, Hindus did not respect women’; a class 6 textbook said ‘the Hindus lived in small and dark houses. Child marriage was common in those days. Women were assigned a low position in society, in case a man died his wife was burnt alive with him, the killing of shudras was not punished, but the killing of a Brahmin was severely punished, caste system made people’s lives miserable’. The ‘hate material’ goes on: ‘Hindus thought that there was no country other than India nor any other people other than Indians, nor did anyone possess any knowledge’; [a cooked-up story titled The Enemy Pilot] stated that ‘he had only been taught to have no pity on Muslims, to always bother the neighbouring Muslims, to weaken them to the extent that they forget about freedom, and that it is better to finish off the enemy. He remembered that the Hindus tried to please the goddess Kali by slaughtering people of other religions, they regarded everybody else as untouchables. He knew that his country India had attacked Pakistan in the dead of the night to bleed Pakistani Muslims and to dominate the entire Subcontinent’ (Class Six, Punjab). ‘The Hindus who had always been opportunists cooperated with the British’ (Class Six Punjab). The class six books generally speak inaccurately about the nature of All-India Congress, seeking to convince the children that the party was Hindu and was close to the British and prevented them for doing anything in favour of the Muslims. Hate presaging war: The most notorious social studies textbook that the Curriculum Wing was able to coax Punjab into producing was An Introduction to Pakistan Studies by M. Ikram Rabbani & Monawar Ali Syed (1995). It was noticed by scholars abroad for the crudeness of its hate formulations. One sentence that the SDPI report quotes from it goes like this: ‘The Hindus always desired to crush the Muslims as a nation. Several attempts were made by the Hindus to erase the Muslim culture and civilisation. Hindi-Urdu controversy, Shuddhi and Sanghatan movements are the most glaring examples of the ignoble Hindu mentality’. A gem that would make anyone outside the Curriculum Wing laugh says: ‘While the Muslims provided all types of help to those wishing to leave Pakistan, the people of India committed cruelties against the Muslim refugees. They would attack the buses, trucks and trains carrying the Muslim refugees and they murdered and looted’. The government of Pakistan in its last volume of Jinnah Papers (volume five) has adduced evidence from the Quaid’s own office that atrocities were committed against refugees leaving Pakistan too! If President Pervez Musharraf were to read the textbooks on which the federal education ministry continues to pride itself he would simply give up his campaign against extremism in Pakistan. The brainwash in favour of jihad and shahadat is so consistent and widespread in the various disciplines targeted for indoctrination by the Curricular Wing that for many years to come Pakistan would be endangered by its own youth. The textbooks that the country’s four provinces would have next year will certainly contain the hate content we have reviewed only skimpily above. Perhaps he can’t do anything to completely surgically remove hatred from our textbooks, but he surely can remove the crudity of the message. We can still hate the Hindu but we can do it subtly. Maybe then our youth will not slaughter the Hindus and rape their women as ruthlessly if there is another war and we, instead of losing, start winning. Since there is no prospect of a war with India our youth can vent their hatred on their own country, especially on people who seek to normalise relations with India. With this hatred being fed daily into the minds of children from the time of its inception, how can we expect Lotastaan and Lotastaanis to ever live in Peace with India? Cheers
Posted by: acharya Mar 19 2004, 06:05 AM
Posted by: Viren Mar 19 2004, 10:30 PM Let's wait for the markets to close 4:00 pm EST to get more on this breaking news. IIRC, wasn't Saddam captured over the weekend (or atleast the announcement was made over the weekend)
Posted by: Mudy Mar 19 2004, 11:00 PM
As per latest news on different channels, Paki forces are fighting with local tribes and some Chechens. Alkeda are safe and sound in Mushy's favorite cottage. Well boy!! Now Pakis have put their head direct inside hornet nest, well, popcorm time ahead in TSP. biggrin.gif,00050002.htm Well, begining of civil war.
Posted by: Mudy Mar 19 2004, 11:11 PM
WANA, South Waziristan: Fresh contingent of Pakistan army has been dispatched to Wana along with artillery and vehicles, according to the latest reports. A tense and curfew like situation was observed in Wana as the roads gave a deserted look. Sounds of firing and use of other heavy artillery are heard from different areas. According to Geo correspondent the border has been sealed soon after the arrival of Army in the area. The resistance offered from different areas suggest that the top leadership of Al-qaida was under siege. The locals however say that it was just a rumor as these people in the past have also put up similar resistance like now.
Posted by: Hauma Hamiddha Mar 20 2004, 12:00 PM
QUOTE (acharya @ Mar 18 2004, 05:02 PM)
HH, Can you expand this. I want to take it for other documents. THis is great explanation. By making TSP as an anchor and the population increasing in future TSP can breakout of the jacket within a few decades bringing India down.
Posted by: Mudy Mar 21 2004, 12:45 AM
Stop Pakistan from being designated a key U.S. Ally Please sign this petetion and pass it on to all your friends.
Posted by: Mudy Mar 21 2004, 01:10 AM
Arms for the General US has learnt no lessons from past IT is difficult to wake up somebody who is pretending to be asleep. US Secretary of State Colin Powell’s statement on Thursday that his country would designate Pakistan as a major non-NATO ally reminds one of this adage. It implies that Pakistan will be entitled to a host of military benefits. Powell and his master alone know why the US suddenly felt the urge to bestow this enhanced status on Pakistan, which will place it in the league of Israel, Japan and the Philippines. The US decision lacks rationale of any kind. Had the US been guided by the conduct of Pakistan in recent years, it would have had every reason to come down heavily on Islamabad. What has pleased the US is the cooperation Pakistan has been extending to the US in its fight against terrorism. But is Pakistan in the forefront of the war on terrorism as the US seems to believe? Every major terrorist incident in the world has had a Pakistani connection. And the country where the remnants of the Al-Qaida settled themselves after they were smoked out of the Tora Bora hills in Afghanistan was Pakistan. Again, the destination of the Taliban was Pakistan. It was no other country but Pakistan which gave sanctuary to Osama bin Laden, who reportedly has to undergo dialysis to remain alive. If anything, this exposes the duplicitous beaviour of Pakistan, a fact which every nation save the US recognises. India has a large body of clinching evidence to suggest that Pakistan has a record of aiding and abetting jehadis for creating trouble in Jammu and Kashmir and elsewhere. The inglorious A.Q. Khan incident has brought to the public domain what everybody believed all through that one of the biggest nuclear proliferators was Pakistan. The pardon Pakistan hastily gave to the rogue scientist was more to cover up the misdeeds of the powers that be in Islamabad without whose knowledge he could not have acted as a peddler of the Islamic bomb. Pakistan’s clandestine dealings with North Korea, Iran and Libya in the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction should have alerted the US about the dangerous possibility of its nuclear know-how reaching undesirable elements. Far from condemning Pakistan for its transgressions, the US is rewarding it with a new status.
Posted by: Hauma Hamiddha Mar 21 2004, 03:33 AM Why the F**K are we still playing cricket with the Ghazis ?
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 21 2004, 01:26 PM
QUOTE (Hauma Hamiddha @ Mar 21 2004, 03:33 AM) Why the F**K are we still playing cricket with the Ghazis ?
Hauma Hamiddha : 1. Prime Minsister Giveaway Vajpayee can share the Nobel Prize with Riff Raff. 2. The Indians must lose so that the Muslims will Vote for the BJP at the coming Elections in India. Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 21 2004, 08:10 PM
Hauma Hamiddha : HAPPY NAVROZ TO YOU AND YOUR FAMILY clap.gif thumbup.gif Cheers cheers.gif
Posted by: Mudy Mar 21 2004, 09:40 PM
Yesterday, Tom Freidemen on CNBC programme TIM Russert said, India Inc forced Vajpayee to stop saying Nuke etc, stop war call, single day panic can cause big financial loss to us(India Inc). He said it is not State Department which brought peace talk with Terrorist state but GE did. See advantage of GE in India. Front runner for peace talk are Kenwal Rekhi and Infosys Murthy. thumbsdownsmileyanim.gif
Posted by: rhytha Mar 21 2004, 11:56 PM
QUOTE (Hauma Hamiddha @ Mar 21 2004, 03:33 AM) Why the F**K are we still playing cricket with the Ghazis ?
the cricket is basically to divert all paki minds from the operation in wana by UnKIL, prevent demonstrations by politcos, MMA and picking up arms by co-terrorist in other parts of paki and heading to NWFP. US had a role in this(maybe a major role) cricket series, i thnk GOI must have got its pound of flesh for letting our team visit TSP.
Posted by: Viren Mar 22 2004, 09:00 PM
QUOTE (Peregrine @ Mar 21 2004, 10:40 AM)
Hauma Hamiddha : HAPPY NAVROZ TO YOU AND YOUR FAMILY clap.gif thumbup.gif Cheers cheers.gif
Peregrine: If there's any info on Navroz, please paste it in Indian Festivals thread. Remeber spending some good times with Parsi friends in India.
Posted by: Mudy Mar 22 2004, 10:45 PM
More fuel to Pakistan's simmering fire ...In a significant development on Sunday, 70 of the country's most popular religious clerics, in a religious ruling issued from the federal capital Islamabad, called the Wana operation (Wana is the headquarters of South Waziristan agency) an "unjustified war" by the Pakistan army on their Muslim brothers. The clerics said that since the war had been unleashed on the mujahideen in support of the US cause in the region, anyone who died resisting the Pakistani forces would be a martyr, and any Pakistani soldiers killed would die "Motul Haram" - in other words, they would go to hell. The ruling also prohibits funeral prayers for soldiers killed in the conflict. . This declaration gives supporters of al-Qaeda in Pakistan even stronger reason to wage both political and guerrilla wars against the Pakistani authorities. The ruling is a major setback for the Pakistani ruling class, and even information minister Sheikh Rasheed, who is famous for his outspoken nature, has refused to comment. The Wana operation now has the potential to give liberal political groups as well as religious groups the opportunity to jump onto the anti-government bandwagon, and even to accentuate splits within the establishment. What began, therefore, as an operation to force al-Qaeda and the Afghan resistance from their base in Shawal - a no man's land on both sides of the border - where they are in protection of the Data Khali and Mada Khail tribes (not Zaka Khail as this scribe mentioned in a recent report) is rapidly escalating into a major crisis for the whole country. pakee.gif
Posted by: Mudy Mar 22 2004, 10:49 PM Atrocities on Minority Hindus in Peshawar, Northwest Frontier Province, Pakistan To: The U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations Dirksen Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510-6225 Majority Phone: (202) 224-4651 Minority Phone: (202) 224-3953 Re: Atrocities on Minority Hindus in Peshawar, Northwest Frontier Province, Pakistan Dear Honorable Senators: This petition aims to draw your attention to the disturbing reports in several South Asian media outlets (Nov. 7, 2003)*. These reports quote The Daily Times(, an English daily based out of Peshawar, which is the capital of the Northwest Frontier Province in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, about eviction orders being served by the local authorities upon seventy Hindu families to leave their ancestral homes, and the demolition of the local Hindu Temple. The Hindu community currently forms less than three percent ** (17% in 1948) of the present population of Pakistan. They continue to face rampant discrimination and persecution in every sphere of life. The goals of this systematic persecution seem to be the forcible conversion of the minority Hindu community to the religion of Islam as well as the expulsion of Hindus from their homes and lands in Pakistan. Therefore, we, the undersigned, urgently request your support and action in ensuring the withdrawal of eviction orders from The Peshawar Cantonment Board as well as ensuring immediate security to the Hindu families in Peshawar. We greatly appreciate your time and consideration in this extremely important matter. References * Media reports,0008.htm ** Central Intelligence Agency, The World Factbook 2003
fixed the URL -Viren
Posted by: Viren Mar 23 2004, 04:55 AM
From that passage, they found a 1.5-kilometre-long tunnel huh.gif running under the town of Kaloosha, about 15 kilometres from the Afghan border, to a dry stream bed on the edge of the mountains that straddle the frontier.
How does one "escape" using a tunnel about a mile long? Do they crawl or walk or run? rolleyes.gif liar.gif Wasn't there a news report in past that talked about these AQ bigwigs to have been travelling in their Toyota SUVs with atleast couple wives, dozen children and couple hundred goats. Must be pretty big tunnels I say laugh.gif
Posted by: Mudy Mar 23 2004, 10:03 AM
Pakistan marks pro-Al Qaeda clan Pakistani troops began bulldozing Yargul Khel homes Monday to punish those harboring militants. By Owais Tohid | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor WANA, PAKISTAN – The Pakistani military is refining its tactics in the ongoing battle to capture Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters in this semi-autonomous tribal belt bordering Afghanistan. It's targeting a specific clan, the Yargul Khel, and Monday began bulldozing all their mud houses as a punishment for a group of clansmen providing shelter to the "foreign terrorists," as Pakistani authorities describe them. The markets of South Waziristan's capital of Wana Monday were a scene of panic, as businessmen of the clan frantically emptied hundreds of shops ahead of a 48-hour deadline to turnover the "terrorists" or face the destruction of all tribal property. "If few people of the tribe have committed any crime or sin then why there is destruction to the whole tribe? This is no justice. I have never supported Al Qaeda.... My only crime is to be a member of the Yargul Khel," says enraged shopkeeper Mohammad Tahir while packing garments and imported crockery. Pakistan's approach is similar to 19th-century tactics used by the British when they ruled the subcontinent. The shift is seen as a move to diffuse anger among the other clans in the region, and a recognition that after a week of continued fighting, an estimated 500 militants are putting up unexpectedly fierce and enduring resistance. "It is a two pronged strategy. The punishment against the Yargul Khel clan will isolate it as a target and will defuse the prevailing anger among all the tribesmen who perceive ongoing military actions against them and their motherland," says Mohammad Tahir Khan, a local tribesman involved in agricultural development. "It is also an attempt to pressure tribal elders of the Zali Khel tribe [of which Yargul Khel is a clan] to hand over the most wanted men belonging to their tribe and expel foreign terrorists from their areas," he says. "By continuing targeted military actions, the authorities want to tell them that they have no other choice." The 600,000 inhabitants of South Waziristan practice archaic tribal law separate from the Pakistani state. The rules and regulations currently governing the relationship between the state and the tribes follows those formulated by the British Raj in its bid to control these tribesmen. Under the system, if any member of the tribe commits a crime and is not handed over to the authorities, then the whole tribe can be punished under the clause of collective responsibility. "The tribe has failed to fulfill its responsibility for months, so their tribesmen have to suffer according to tribal rules," says Azam Khan, a top government official in South Waziristan. "The tribe members are providing shelter to foreign terrorists, its members are fighting for Al Qaeda," Mr. Khan says. "Their elders promised and promised but never delivered. That is why the operation was launched. It is high time for them to cooperate, otherwise there will be further destruction in the region." There are two main tribes, Ahmed Zai Wazir and Mehsud, living in South Waziristan - and they are rivals. Most of the tribesmen belonging to the Ahmed Zai Wazir tribe are illiterate and staunch Islamists. Thousands participated in the battles against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s. The ongoing Pakistani military operation was launched in the areas where the Ahmed Zai Wazir tribe lives. Yargul Khel is a sub-clan of the Zali Khel tribe which is part of the Ahmed Zai Wazir tribe. The shift in Pakistan's military tactics comes as its 5,000 troops continued its biggest-ever operation in the region. On Monday, a Pakistani Army convoy was ambushed in a rocket attack as it tried to bring in reinforcements to Wana. And security forces killed three "foreign terrorists" said to be Uzbeks. They were found hiding in the bunker of a mud house in the nearby town of Kallu Shah. Two Chechens were reported killed on Sunday. In the early hours Monday, a group of "terrorists" attacked a military base in Wana with rockets and heavy fire. Pakistani forces retaliated with heavy artillery for several hours and sent in gunship helicopters against the guerrilla hideouts. A delegation of 22 Zali Khel elders spent Monday visiting the affected towns and villages trying to negotiate for the surrender of four wanted Yargul Khel tribesmen fighting along with Al Qaeda against Pakistani security forces. The mission was the result of a meeting Sunday between 150 tribal elders and government officials in an effort to bring a halt to military actions in South Waziristan. Local tribal sources say the "foreign terrorists" have the backing of 1,500 to 2,200 trained and armed tribesmen, known here as the Men of Al Qaeda. "The terrorists are trying to cash in on human miseries to collect sympathies. They often make civilians human shields. Now if the villages are vacated, then they will try to attack security forces to make them hostile. The security forces would want to isolate them and avoid civilian casualties. It will be a battle of nerves now," says a tribal elder, Malik Behram Khan. Thousands have fled the troubled towns and villages with white flags hoisted on their carts, trucks, and cars to take refuge in safer places, while hundreds of families are still trapped. Perhaps explaining how militant leaders may have escaped an army cordon thrown around the area, Pakistani troops have discovered tunnels - including one that was a mile long - under the fortress-like compounds in the town of Tellu Shah. Local sources and a government official in South Waziristan say communications equipment and tunnels were found in the house of Sarwar Khan, a tribal elder of the Yargul Khel clan. Ret. Brig. Gen. Mahmood Shah, who is secretary of security in the tribal areas, told reporters in Peshawar that the Pakistani forces had discovered "a 2-kilometer long tunnel running between the houses of two wanted tribesmen and leading to a stream." Authorities were also doing DNA tests on six bodies recovered from the battle to determine their identities.
Posted by: rhytha Mar 23 2004, 03:59 PM
My daughters are calling me back to Mumbai And so there is cause for great celebration! India and Pakistan are resuscitating the near collapse in relations. The Wagha border in Lahore has become the latest haunt of reunion for many. Indian celebrities arriving for the cricket season have given an attack of hysteria to our glamour impoverished people. And the game of cricket itself has become a strong axis of friendship by reaching people in a way that should put politics to shame. Everybody is happy. Everybody is rejoicing. Everybody, except Fatima Bibi: an Indian national serving a jail term well past her sentence at the Kot Lakhpat Jail, in Lahore. She was not booked for espionage neither was she convicted of drugs trafficking. She was arrested and sentenced for one year under the 14 Foreigners Act, which meant that Fatima had illegally entered the Pakistani soil. Fatima has already served her sentence of one year and an extended term of four for her crime of 'great scale'. But Fatima is lost somewhere in time. She does not realize how long she has been holed up in jail. All she remembers is that it has been very long - far too long to calculate time. Behind the thick walls of the Kot Lakhpat Jail, she cannot see the easy cross-border flow of Indians and Pakistanis. Her insular world does not let in the sound of the cheering cricket crowds. Fatima has no idea of the changed political atmosphere, which has allowed the Indian cricket team to play here after an interval of nearly 14 years. For her, the people-to-people contact is her daily communication with the other inmates. It matters not that trade will soon begin between her country and Pakistan. She is a woman living in an abyss from where her voice remains unheard. Her sobs are drowned in the political rapprochement celebrations where each country is trying to outdo the other in cramming its container of 'confidence building measures'. But, none of them are ready to take that crucial step for Fatima which could mean the difference between living and dying a painful death. Perhaps, the misery of one woman is far too less a price to pay for political heroism and a slick victory at the hustings. Each night Fatima cries herself to sleep. And each night she has a recurring dream that her three daughters are calling her back to Mumbai. "She has related this dream to me several times. Everybody at the jail feels for her, wants her to go back," says Rehana Yasmin, in charge of the woman's ward. "Please do something for her! Tell her embassy to take her back otherwise she won't survive for too long," presses Rehana. Fatima is a shy and quiet woman. Unlike the other prisoners she keeps mostly to herself. It is only with Rehana Yasmin that she gives in to her emotions. "She's more like a mother to me than a prisoner. I'm the only one with whom she talks freely," says the female ward's in charge. When Fatima is brought for the interview to a small white-washed, cemented cubicle, serving as a special area for visits, her eyes instantly light up. "Am I going back to Mumbai?" is her first question. But just as soon she realizes that the call to leave her cell is not for her release. The light is gone from the eyes, leaving in its place a blank, distant look. Fatima's life was not always an account of tragedy. She lived a happy life with her husband, Abdulla, and three daughters at Worli Nakha, Mumbai, before he was shot in the 1992 Hindu-Muslim riots. She had to sell her house to support herself and her daughters, shifting to her sister's house in the same area. Fatima's sister, Jameela and her husband, who was an imam at a local mosque, were already raising their huge family of seven and could not bear the additional burden. Jameela and her husband advised Fatima to spend the money from the house in finding work as domestic help in Dubai, while they looked after her three daughters. Fatima went there, found work and got married to Ramzan, a widower working as a salesman at a cloth shop. Ramzan and his mother encouraged Fatima not to leave work after marriage, making her believe that her monthly earnings were being sent to her family in Mumbai. They were not! A few months into the marriage were enough for Fatima to find out what was happening. She started pleading with her husband to send her back to India. That was when the beatings and the physical abuse started. "My mother-in-law and husband would both hit me whenever I asked to go back. In one of the fights, she burnt my hands and face with a burning rod," says Fatima. Her scorched chin and left hand still bear the marks. In the middle of the story, Fatima falters. "My memory has gone bad. I don't remember names and places. I don't even remember the place I lived at in Worli. All I know is that there was a dargah nearby," apologises Fatima, brushing aside a lone tear escaping from her eye. With shoulders hunched, she goes away into that world of oblivion. Cupping her head with both her hands, Fatima shakes her head several times to recall the depressing events leading to her imprisonment. Her story is completed by Rehana Yasmin who explains that her husband and mother-in-law finally bought a ticket for Pakistan. "She thought that she was being sent home to India." Fatima never reached home. Instead, she landed at the airport in Islamabad where she was immediately booked under the Foreigners Act. An FIR (no: 16/99) dated July 21, 1999 was registered against her and she was sent to the Rawalpindi Central Jail. She was sentenced to one year imprisonment and a fine of Rs 100. A year later, Fatima was shifted to the Women's Jail, in Multan, and on Feb 2, 2001, was brought to the Kot Lakhpat Jail, Lahore. Jail Assistant Superintendent Noor Hasan Baghaila said that theoretically Fatima's jail term is long over. "Through the Punjab government's special branch, her case is now with the interior ministry and will be disposed of by the Federal Review Board. The FRB consists of three justices of the Supreme Court. Now, it is up to the FRB to review her case," explains he. Rehana Yasmin hopes the case is reviewed before it is too late for Fatima. "She is epileptic and near madness. Of late her fits are becoming frequent. We're giving her medication, but that's not the only thing she needs. She needs to go back to her children," says a concerned Rehana. Fatima gets up to leave the room. The heavy double iron-doors leading to her cell are opened and she disappears from sight. Should she hope for that much-cherished, much-fought for right - the right to freedom? After the trumpets have died, will her government make an effort to wipe her tears?
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 24 2004, 04:43 AM POWELL : BEGUILING BY SYMBOLISM Cheers
Posted by: Hauma Hamiddha Mar 25 2004, 01:49 AM
dhanyavaad Peregrine ji. I fear to imagine how the cricket money would come back to India.
Posted by: Viren Mar 25 2004, 02:22 AM
Could it be that Pakistani army is giving their best honest shot as true ally wink.gif but are Either way H & D is Flush.gif
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 25 2004, 05:04 AM
QUOTE (Hauma Hamiddha @ Mar 25 2004, 01:49 AM)
dhanyavaad Peregrine ji. I fear to imagine how the cricket money would come back to India.
Hauma Hamiddha : Sahebji Saheb. There was an article an year or two ago possibly in the Yawn questioning the Indian stand for not Playing Cricket with Lotastaan in Pakistan i.e. not Touring Lotastaan. Did the Indians think that the sums thus earned by the PCB would be used for the perpetrators of Cross Border Terrorism? I believe due to India not Touring Lotastaan the PCB lost about USD 25 Million or so – this is proved by the PCB statements that the present Indian tour would help them to wipe out there huge losses accumulated over three years. If you have the Article fine and if not I will locate and post it here. Await your “Orders”. BTW : Viren on seeing my Navroz greetings to you wanted some information on Navroz on the festival Thread. I know that it celebrates the Spring Equinox and would request you to please post, if possible, relevant information on the Festivals Thread. Thanks Cheers
Posted by: Mudy Mar 25 2004, 10:04 PM,001300430001.htm thumbup.gif
Posted by: Viren Mar 26 2004, 01:18 AM
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 26 2004, 11:13 PM
With a per capita gross national income (GNI) of $420, poverty rates, which had fallen substantially in the 1980s and early 1990s, started to rise again towards the end of the decade. According to the latest figures (for 1998-99), as measured by Lotastaan’s poverty line, 33 percent of the population is poor.
There are reports by various Lotastaani Writers that Lotastaani Poverty Level is at 40% as measured by Lotastaani Poverty Line which is substantially below – possibly half - the Universally recognized level of USD 1 per day. Cheers
Posted by: Sudhir Mar 27 2004, 04:12 AM
Posted by: Peregrine Mar 27 2004, 02:45 PM
Meanwhile back at the Pig Sty :
ISLAMAWORST : March 26: An outspoken ally stunned the government on Friday as he attacked its vows about transparency by telling the National Assembly that he had traced 40,000 bogus votes in one constituency where he had lost in the last elections. Pakistan Awami Tehrik (PAT) chief Mohammad Tahirul Qadri said it took him 10 months to find the allegedly bogus entries in the NA-89 constituency of Jhang in the Punjab province through a computerized exercise and promised to resign his seat in the National Assembly if he were proved wrong.
WASHINGTON, March 26: The United States had Saudi Arabia lean on Pakistan "very, very heavily" to make Islamabad abandon the Taliban regime but failed, a US panel was told.
The sanctions imposed on Pakistan before and after the May 1998 nuclear tests prevented the United States from taking any practical step to push Pakistan to abandon the Taliban, he said. "There was nothing we could say, we'll take this away from you, because we weren't giving them anything. But we leaned on them very heavily. We had the Saudis lean on them very, very heavily," said Mr Berger. He said the only thing that the US administration could have done but did not was to cut off Pakistan's access to IMF loans. Severing Pakistan's access to these loans, he said, "would have collapsed Pakistan, and we would have had a failed nuclear state in South Asia, which probably would not have been the best thing for the United States."
Posted by: Gargi Mar 27 2004, 09:59 PM
Severing Pakistan's access to these loans, he said, "would have collapsed Pakistan, and we would have had a failed nuclear state in South Asia, which probably would not have been the best thing for the United States
Terrorist State of Pakistan nuclear blackmail works. And US lacks courage to fight with this demon. thumbsdownsmileyanim.gif
Posted by: rhytha Mar 29 2004, 04:44 PM
At least few are sensible Musharraf has learnt nothing, forgotten nothing March 29, 2004 The great thing about winning is that you can afford to be magnanimous. This is as true for war as it is of cricket. Now that the Indian cricket team has won the one-day series against Pakistan, it has become the norm to shower gratuitous praise on the Pakistan team. India's tour of Pakistan This time, we have been reliably informed by all those who matter, Pakistan did indeed play with a straight bat. Consequently, as the purveyors of inanity have repeated, India won the cricket and Pakistanis won the hearts. So many shopkeepers in Lahore have refused to charge so many Indians for goods and services that I begin to wonder or not anyone makes money in Pakistan. When Lahore becomes the centre of focus, we can always expect an overdose of mushy sentimentalism from those who are naturally at ease with the Punjabi language. Lahore, after all, always exercised a macabre cultural fascination for the average middle class Punjabi. The problem begins when this mood of cross-border linguistic bonhomie is sought to be extended to the realms of foreign policy. Hospitality has always played an important role in Pakistani diplomacy. Like General Zia-ul Haq who actually managed to persuade many Stephanians that he was one of them, General Musharraf's satraps have done a fantastic job convincing important people that Pakistan does not correspond to the stereotype created by Narendra Modi. The BJP lot are the most gullible. Last week, I met an important BJP functionary, fresh from a bout of official hospitality in Lahore, who was insistent that India take a more nuanced view of Pakistan. I don't think anyone would disagree with that assertion. You must be an absolute clown to equate the well-heeled from Clifton, Karachi with the bearded mullah who has motivated many thousands to join the jihad in Kashmir. Yes, Pakistani society operates at various levels. Some of these are quite normal and wholesome while others are stark, raving lunatic. I guess that is true of any society. In its dealings with India, it is the lunatic fringe of Pakistan that has hitherto prevailed. If saner voices are now being heard it is not because the hatred of India has been subsumed by a love for civilised values, it is because Pakistan has become acutely aware of its international pariah status thanks to its flirtations with international terrorists and its encouragement of nuclear mercenaries. It needs a good character certificate from countries like India to resume its place in respectable circles. This is a point that is insufficiently grasped by Indians who imagine that Pakistani society has suddenly woken up to the delights of business and brotherhood. In our desperation to garner a peace dividend, we seem to committing two very familiar mistakes. First, our perception of Pakistan is being moulded by an extra dose of self-censorship. We are digesting what is expedient and shutting out whatever is awkward. Almost everyone who sat through General Musharraf's long tirade at the India Today Conclave came away with the conclusion that it was both provocative and offensive. Musharraf's preoccupation was Kashmir, Kashmir and Kashmir. He had learnt nothing, forgotten nothing. Yet, India chose to look the other way although I am reliably informed that Brajesh Mishra did use the pretext of the cricket match to tell the other side privately that such outbursts were unhelpful. We are pretending that Pakistan has had a change of heart and overlooking all evidence to the contrary. This is precisely what we did between the bus journey to Lahore and the grim realisation that Pakistan had launched an audacious bid to redraw the Line of Control in Kargil. Are we repeating history? Second, our political leadership is proceeding on the assumption that it must do nothing to compromise General Musharraf's fragile hold on Pakistan. Indeed, there are well-meaning suggestions that India should run that extra mile to ensure that Pakistan does not face any domestic backlash for engaging with India. We can presume that the same advice is being heaped on Washington: reward Islamabad for its cooperation in the hunt for Osama bin Laden. After all, it is being said that Musharraf is risking everything to satisfy the Americans. Pakistan is mounting an elaborate but highly successful blackmail exercise. It wants cash and weapons from Uncle Sam to facilitate the hunt for a celebrated Islamist criminal. It even wants the US to lean on India on Kashmir. From India, it wants an unending trickle of concessions as the price of holding back the flow of its jihadis to Kashmir. These concessions, Pakistan insists, will help sustain and sell the dialogue process within the country. For a start, we are being told that a healthy first step would be abandoning our forward positions in Siachen. That would be a very major step and one that is almost irreversible. It can be done only when we have cast iron guarantees that Pakistan will not unilaterally try to redraw the LoC as it attempted during the Kargil war. Can we honestly say that we have reached that comfort level with Musharraf? And what if Musharraf is toppled tomorrow? Will we be in a position to regain those difficult heights without incurring a tremendous cost both in terms of men and material? Sometimes, circumspection is preferable to euphoria. At the beginning of the year, Pakistan was in the international doghouse. In just four months, it has clawed its way back to being flaunted as a non-NATO ally of the US. Just six months after the two countries exchanged abuses at the UNGA in New York, Pakistan has bowled over India's social butterflies. The world has lowered its guard against Pakistan. Judging from history, this is the time to start worrying. Let us enjoy the cricket and the kababs but let us imagine that we have secured peace with honour and peace in our lifetime
Posted by: Viren Mar 29 2004, 08:44 PM
He said troops had killed 63 militants, including an al Qaeda intelligence chief whom he identified only as "Mr. Abdullah." He would not provide further details such as the man's nationality, full name or how and when he was killed.
Remember the scene in Schindler's List when the Nazi goon wants to know who stole the chicken in the prison camp. All Jews are lined up, no one answers. To extract an answer and show he's serious, the Nazi shoots one of the prisoner and asks the question again. A smart kid steps up and points to the dead man. Methinks Mushy is pulling similar fast one here dry.gif point to a dead guy and say this dead Pashtun/Tajik (who we've never heard of before) was "Mr. Abdullah" the spy chief of AQ laugh.gif
Posted by: Viren Mar 30 2004, 11:10 PM
Press Association, the British news agency, said all ohmy.gif eight were of Pakistani descent, but police would not comment on that.
Posted by: Mudy Mar 31 2004, 12:23 AM
Viren, This is nothing, BBC South Asia desk which is headed by Pakistan origin naturalised citizen of Britian, spin on this news He assured the Muslim community the police knew the "overwhelming majority are law abiding and completely reject all forms of violence". "We have a responsibility to all communities to investigate suspected terrorist activity," he said. ____________ In case of India they would have mentioned, India which is ruled by Fasict Hindus .....after Gujarat riots where 2000 muslim killed my facist Hindus .....
Posted by: Viren Mar 31 2004, 06:03 PM
found in in-box: ------------------------------- At last Pakistan admited that the “High-Value Target” was a “No-Value Target”!!! Pakistan military admits Al-Qaeda scalp was just local militant More backstabing by Pakistan = More rewards coming from America!! After the MNNA & $460M loan forgiveness, what is that America can offer to Pakistan to get the Osmana? May be Kashmir! With bunch of terror supporting jokers around, this administration can go to any extent to appease the Pakistani terrorism. At last Pakistan is their “Ally in Terror” (forget that “War-on-terror”. It has been scrapped long time back) Has the US promised Kashmir to Pak? Uncle Sam has just strengthened the hand of Pakistan in the upcoming Kashmir negotiations. What the US has done (by granting MNNA and the aid), is to strengthen the Pakistani economy significantly and also changed the odds visibly in the arms race equation. So, Powell slapped us – Now what? All these underline the following truth about the America. US policy toward India is war by other means
Posted by: Gargi Mar 31 2004, 11:55 PM By Syed Saleem Shahzad KARACHI - As the Pakistan military establishment's pro-United States policies continue to receive harsh criticism domestically, Washington is now pressuring Pakistani President General Pervez Musharraf to undertake yet another operation against foreign militants and their proteges in Pakistan's tribal regions of South and North Waziristan near the Afghanistan border. The most recent operation in South Waziristan kicked off two weeks ago and failed miserably, with the official figure listing about 50 of the Pakistan Army's officers and soldiers killed and no "prize targets" captured. Asia Times Online sources maintain the casualty figure is actually much higher. Now, Musharraf has been pushed back under the microscope. Through many reshuffles in the Pakistan army, Musharraf has managed to maintain his writ as chief of army staff, while holding onto his position as president of Pakistan - however this issue is reemerging as a source of contention in Pakistan. There is also intense debate in the armed forces hierarchy following the failed operation in Wana, the headquarters of South Waziristan agency, that the two offices should be separated to keep the army out of politics. Such calls for the division of military and state come in the wake of several "high value target" myths established over the duration of the operation. At the start of the fighting, it was implied that al-Qaeda number two, Dr Ayman al-Zawahiri, was hiding out in the region, an allegation later dismissed by the army. More recently, it was suggested that two high-level al-Qaeda members, Tahir Yuldevish and "Abdullah", were seriously wounded and killed - in that order. Yuldevish is the leading commander of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, meanwhile Abdullah's story would have ridiculed the army had the world known his background, given that Pakistan's Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR) department initially branded him to be a key al-Qaeda member. Yuldashev and "Abdullah" are two of the most famous characters among the Pakistani jihadis - each featured in movies that are in circulation all over the country. Yuldashev can be seen addressing the Islamic cause in which he justifies their fight against the US by providing various glimpses of brutalities in Israel and in Chechnya. "Abdullah" is a Chechan guerilla who is known among the jihadis for his classic guerilla fights. He is shown in the movies killing Russian soldiers. US bombings in Afghanistan forced Yuldevish to leave northern Afghanistan some time ago, his whereabouts are currently unknown, however, he was last believed to have been hiding out in Khost. Pakistani authorities took the lead from there and established their own guess that Yuldevish was hiding out in the Shawal mountains - a no-man's land on the Pakistan-Afghan border - and even claimed that he was wounded. Given the popularity of Abdullah in Pakistan, it was presumed that he should also be in Afghanistan, and his status was elevated by the ISPR to that of chief spy master of al-Qaeda. Soon after, however, it was recognized that there was no evidence of his presence in Afghanistan. He was eventually presumed dead, but it was later stated by the ISPR that he is not the chief spy master, but rather an ordinary spy: "an Egyptian" whose body had not yet been recovered. These attempts to "glorify" the Wana operation were unable to cover up its failure and repercussions. The Pakistan army is split on an ethnic basis. Before the operation started in South Waziristan, Musharraf prematurely retired Corps Commander Peshawar Ali Jan Orakzai, a Pashtun, and installed Lieutenant-General Safdar Hussain - a Punjabi. The development was seen as anti-Pashtun among the Pashtun officers who are the second largest majority after Punjabi officers. These feelings of tension were clearly reflected during the operation, from both sides. Several soldiers and a few officers of Pashtun origin refused to participate in actions taken against the Pashtun tribals. The way in which Pashtun tribals dealt with hostages is also a reflection of this split. The tribals that held Pashtun paramilitary force members hostage are said to have treated them with respect, later releasing them after a deal with Pakistani authorities. However, the soldiers that were of Punjab descent were killed and their bodies mutilated. High-level sources tell Asia Times Online that in the face of these failures, Musharraf now faces two immediate challenges. Firstly, the US military high command has been regularly been visiting Pakistan and is stressing the need for a complete crackdown on foreign fighters along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border area, starting from Khyber Agency to South Waziristan. They emphasized that the mission can only be successful if both US and Pakistani forces conduct joint operations in the area. The aim of this operation is once again to destroy the base of jihadi fighters believed to be in the Shawal mountains. Thus another operation in South and North Waziristan is inevitable, despite the public outcry sure to ensue. The second challenge Musharraf is up against comes from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). IAEA inspectors are now in Iran and aim to come Pakistan to verify the Iranian centrifuge facility with Pakistan - which means they will be paying a visit to Pakistan's nuclear installations, another issue sensitive to the Pakistani public. Non-compliance with these two challenges is difficult for Pakistan, as the country is under heavy US pressure. But, on the other hand, compliance means giving Islamic radicals the chance to wreak further havoc. They are already seeking out this opportunity - under broader designs chalked out by the International Islamic Front - in which the success of the Afghan resistance can only be ensured once it takes control of Pakistan's backyard. This is only possible if the country falls into the hands of Islamic radicals or deep into anarchy and chaos.
Posted by: Hauma Hamiddha Apr 1 2004, 05:39 AM
Civil war in TSP can be the best thing that can happen for India. It will be an outlet valve for the steaming Jihadi violence.
Posted by: Reggie Apr 1 2004, 07:10 AM
“I will be out of this process if there is no progress in the talks,” Musharraf told a gathering of intellectuals and journalists yesterday.
Is RAW up to this challenge?
Posted by: Peregrine Apr 1 2004, 11:09 AM
QUOTE (Hauma Hamiddha @ Apr 1 2004, 05:39 AM)
Civil war in TSP can be the best thing that can happen for India. It will be an outlet valve for the steaming Jihadi violence.
Hauma Hamiddha : If it were to happen then India should get ready for at least 20 Million Refugees from Lotastaan – Remember the East Lotastaan Civil War? Cheers
Posted by: Hauma Hamiddha Apr 1 2004, 12:50 PM
QUOTE (Peregrine @ Apr 1 2004, 12:39 AM)
If it were to happen then India should get ready for at least 20 Million Refugees from Lotastaan – Remember the East Lotastaan Civil War?
I admit you may have a point there. I am wondering if that could happen without allowing this to happen.
Posted by: Peregrine Apr 1 2004, 01:11 PM
QUOTE (Hauma Hamiddha @ Apr 1 2004, 12:50 PM)
I admit you may have a point there. I am wondering if that could happen without allowing this to happen.
Hauma Hamiddha : HOW? Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Apr 1 2004, 01:13 PM
Mudy : Sorry you missed Jalebis on Tuesday. I was having Ladoos, Barfi, Jalebis etc. at the Ram Navmi Celeberations on Tuesday Night. London mein yeh be hota hai – In addition to the Rinky Dinks of the Islamic Terrorists. Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Apr 2 2004, 04:48 PM According to Jang, Sindh killed 39 people in one month under karo-kari (suspicion of dishonour). In the month February, rural Sindh saw 39 murders out of which 27 were women. Out of the 27 women done to death, 13 were killed by their husbands while the rest were killed by brothers and fathers. The murdered women were not given normal burial. Their corpses remained unwashed and they were buried in the desert sand without any trace of the grave. In one case a brother killed his sister and buried her in sand while she was still alive. IN LOTASTAAN ONE HAS TO DIE TWICE ROTFL.gif Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Apr 3 2004, 01:53 PM clap.gif Cheers cheers.gif
Posted by: Peregrine Apr 5 2004, 04:26 AM
Meantime back at the Pig Sty : KARACHI: Five policemen, including a sub-inspector (SI), were shot dead and a head constable (HC) was injured, when unidentified gunmen opened indiscriminate fire on the Gulistan-e-Jauhar Police Station in the wee hours of Sunday. The gunmen also took away three official sub-machine guns (SMGs). A head constable, who was in the adjacent mosque, returned the fire at which the attackers sprayed bullets on the mosque and also hurled two crackers, injuring the HC. Around a dozen gunmen came to the police station in four vehicles and opened indiscriminate fire, killing five policemen. Later they fled. The injured HC informed the central police control of the incident immediately after the attackers left the crime scene but police contingents reached the spot after one hour. The bullet-riddled bodies of the policemen were shifted to the Jinnah Postgraduate Medical Centre (JPMC). The dead were identified as SI Umed Ali Meerani, 40; Police Constables Malik Sarfaraz, 32, Muhammad Ismail, 28, Ashfaq Ahmad, 34, and Ghulam George, 35. Two accused, Nawaz and Basheer, who were in the lock-up of the police station, told The News that the attackers were abusing the police. They said: "One of the attackers yelled, ‘go inside’ and we both took refuge in the bathroom of the lock-up." The JPMC doctors referred the injured cop - HC Hussain Jatoi - to the Aga Khan Hospital, after providing him with first aid. Giving details of the incident to the police party that reached the police station after the incident, injured HC Hussain Jatoi said, "I was in the mosque at about 5:45, when I heard heavy firing. I saw that some gunmen were firing on the duty officer’s room. I retaliated with my official gun. The attackers fired towards me and threw two fire crackers at the mosque. Perhaps one of the attackers suffered injuries from my fire, after which they escaped with their injured accomplice." IGP Sindh Syed Kamal Shah, DIG (Operations) Karachi Tariq Jamil, DIGs (Investigations) Zone I and II Fayyaz Leghari and Muhammad Akbar reached the police station after they were informed about the incident. Terming the incident a tragedy, DIG Tariq Jamil told The News, "It was obviously a terrorist attack. We cannot tolerate this anymore." He said that the terrorists who had attacked the Rangers’ picket at Sharea Faisal might be involved in this attack. The DIG said, "We are beefing up security arrangements and sentry posts are being established at all police stations in the city, where spy cameras would also be installed." A responsible officer of the investigation branch, conducting investigation at the police station, told The News, "126 empties of SMG and three empties of TT pistol were collected from the duty officer’s room, while 40 empties were found from the mosque." There were dozens of bullet marks on the wall of the mosque, he said. Bullet dents were also visible on a police vehicle (SP-4807) parked inside the police station, sources in the investigation branch informed. Police have taken into custody a Suzuki car (AB-9638), which was found abandoned near Liaquat Market in Malir locality in the jurisdictions of Saudabad Police Station. The car had a few bullet marks. Sources close to the investigators believed that the vehicle was one of the four used in the attack on the police station. It was later transpired that four armed men had intercepted Muhammad Anwar, a banker, while he was passing through Bahadurabad and snatched this vehicle from him on April 3, sources told. However, a case vide FIR No 44/2004, has been registered on the complaint of the injured HC Hussain Jatoi, against unidentified attackers under Sections 452/353, 302, 304, 395 and 295 PPC and 3/5 RW 6-ATA. Meanwhile, the funeral prayers of SI Umed Ali Meerani and PC Sarfraz were offered with full protocol in South Police Headquarters. It was attended by Chief Minister’s Advisor on Home Affairs Aftab Ahmad Shaikh, the IGP Sindh and others. Later, two of the bodies were sent to Shikarpur (Sindh) and Sargodha (Punjab), while the funeral prayer of PC Ismail was offered in Paposhnagar. He was laid to rest at a local graveyard. The body of PC Ashfaq was despatched to Attock, his hometown, while the last rites of PC Ghulam George will be held on Monday in Karachi. Cheers
Posted by: Mudy Apr 5 2004, 06:52 AM Hindus from Pak allege conversions, excesses Rashmi Talwar Attari (Amritsar), March 15 Members of nearly 15 Pakistani Hindu families from Sindh province, who arrived here today on the Samjhauta Express, narrated their tales of woe and the pitiable condition of the Hindus and Sikhs living in frontier provinces of Pakistan. Family members of Dhian Chand, 86, (name changed) said they could not send their girls out due to fear of abduction. Dhian Chand, sporting a traditional Hindu “pagri”, condemned the Sindhi Muslims who “pressurised us to convert to Islam.” He asserted that his family would never return to Pakistan despite the fact that they had no valid documents for permanent immigration and legal residency in India. “Forcible conversion of a Hindu family of six a month ago in Sindh led to a feeling of insecurity among Hindus in Jakbabad”, said Sham Kumar (name changed). He alleged that they threatened to eliminate the family and take away their daughters and then forced them to adopt Islam. The incident shocked all Hindu and Sikh families — numbering nearly 5,000 — in the area, he said. The system of “hafta” (weekly payments) to area hoodlums was common and the Hindus and Sikhs were insecure about their families, alleged some victims. The Hindu family said a top Pakistani politician’s son was accused of conversion. A Sikh boy who tried to talk to a journalist about a similar incident had been missing for nearly two and a half months, they added.
Posted by: Peregrine Apr 6 2004, 03:12 AM
Is Lotastaan Nook Nude or is it? ISLAMABAD: Pursuing the road map for the peace process, Pakistan on Monday offered to host next month expert level talks on nuclear confidence building measures with India, which said it would be responding to it. "Pakistan has proposed May 25 and 26 as the dates for hosting expert level talks to discuss nuclear confidence building measures," a brief statement by the Pakistan Foreign office said here. It said that the proposal was in pursuance of the road map worked out by the foreign secretaries of both the countries on February 18 for resumption of composite dialogue to discuss Kashmir and other contentious issues. The dates for the talks on nuclear CBMs were conveyed to Indian Deputy High Commissioner T C A Raghavan by the Director General for South Asia in the Pakistan Foreign office, Jalil Abbas Jilani. New Delhi said that it had received from Pakistan dates for the talks in the second half of May and would be responding to it. This was one of the items that was part of the joint press statement issued in Islamabad on February 18. We have received the dates (from Pakistan) in the latter half of May and we will be responding," external affairs ministry spokesman Navtej Sarna told reporters in New Delhi when asked about Islamabad's proposal. If Lotastaan still had its nooks under its control then why would it ask for CBM with India since Lotastaan has always maintained that its nooks are better and far greater in number than India’s. Cheers
Posted by: Mudy Apr 6 2004, 05:02 AM
"Pakistan has proposed May 25 and 26
Why they are rushing for this date? So near to formation of new Indian Govt., Are the presuming weak Govt will be in place and they will be in stronger position. Pass between Indian & Pakistan will be clear for terrorist to attack in India. Too much pressure from US as Nov date is very near, to handover OBL and other who are Mushy's guest. Mushy need some pressure release area. Pakistan forces will be on the way to Iraq. Mush need to divert fundos attention. Or they are presuming as usual Vajpayee aways do something interesting during first month after oath. biggrin.gif
Posted by: Viren Apr 6 2004, 10:28 AM
N^3 better copyright his slogan on giving peace a chance soon... biggrin.gif
"Paki's Khallas ... Ab Aur Badi Hai Pyaas (Now that we've finished off the Pakistanis, our thirst has increased).'s~'Paki's~Khallas'~ad~creates~furore
Posted by: Peregrine Apr 7 2004, 02:29 AM
Lotastaani Headlines. In the recent SAF Games held at Islamworst the valiant Jehadi Ansaar Beef Eating Tall and Fair Islamic Warriors of Pakistan ever ready for Sehadat were Runners Up, despite the stiff opposition offered by the other Nations, at the Eight Nation Games. The short, dark skinned rice eating Idol Worshiping Kafirs from India’s Team could only manage to stand Eighth from Last. Cheers
Posted by: Peregrine Apr 7 2004, 04:03 AM Cheers
Posted by: Viren Apr 7 2004, 08:16 PM
From Subscription site - posting in full: PAKISTAN The Masters of Jihad By ERICH FOLLATH, Der Speigel Published: April 5, 2004
A poorhouse and a nuclear power, an ally of the United States and an incubator for Islamist violence: Pakistan is a land of contradictions and poses a danger to the world. Washington is backing Musharraf, who indulges radical mullahs but allows the CIA's special forces to hunt for bin Laden. Betrayal, say the American members of congress. And the members of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States are convinced they know who the traitor is. In a report that is currently making waves in Washington, the politicians claim that the former Pakistani chief of intelligence, Hamid Gul, promised Taliban leaders in July 1999 that he would give them "three to four hours of advance warning" prior to each planned American missile attack. These are embarrassing allegations, especially at a time when everyone is talking about the Islamabad-Washington alliance and about Pakistan, the US' most important ally in George W. Bush's war on terrorism. Did the former chief of intelligence really betray Pakistan's American allies? Could it be that he is still doing so today, as Islamabad's elite troops, together with US military advisors, hunt down Osama bin Laden and his Al Qaeda compatriots in the wild, mountainous region along the border with Afghanistan, all the while encountering an astonishingly well-prepared enemy? Is Gul responsible for the fact that bin Laden's second-in-command, Ayman al-Zawahiri, managed to elude the attackers in the eleventh hour, escaping through a secret tunnel? A luxurious bungalow in Rawalpindi, Wembley lawns, tasteful rattan furniture. This is the refuge of Pakistan's rich and powerful, a place where former chief of intelligence and lieutenant general Hamid Gul has been able to retire with full honors. The accused shrugs his shoulders and says: "Oh, the Americans," as if that explained everything, and asks for tea to be served. Then he proudly presents the souvenirs of his past. The prayer rug given to him by his former Saudi Arabian intelligence colleague, Prince Turki Ibn al-Faisal ("a great friend of the Taliban and bin Laden"); the plaque from the German Federal Intelligence Service (Bundesnachrichtendienst), which contains a piece of the Berlin Wall and the inscription: "To our respected ally, for his valuable contribution." Of course, says Gul, who sympathizes with the Islamists, he knew bin Laden well, calling him a "modest and brilliant warrior." He says that he was the Taliban's guest of honor a government function in Kabul. "However, I did not depart from the common line. It was the Americans and the Europeans who made the shift. Once upon a time, they were all in favor of the holy war, and jihad was one of their favorite expressions. In the 1980s, when the Mujaheddin were fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan, they couldn't supply them with enough weapons, and they continued to have dealings with the Taliban later on. Back then, the USA used my services. Now they are slandering me. I have long since lost my access to exclusive information." The telephone rings. Gul is invited to an exclusive Pakistani conference on intelligence and security issues. Gul says he will think about whether to attend. In his opinion, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf is in the process of become George W. Bush's lackey and, in doing so, digging his own grave. "American soldiers operating on our territory; our proud people will not forgive him for that." And then former spy chief Gul, suddenly the conspiracy theorist, leans forward and whispers: "A few of my CIA counterparts, the US military and the Israeli Mossad must have been in the know about the attack on the Twin Towers." Otherwise, he says, why so long before the fighter jets took off? Welcome to Pakistan, the land of schizophrenia and stark contrasts: a poorhouse (it has an illiteracy rate of about 54 percent) and nuclear power (it has up to 50 nuclear warheads; home to some of the world's top teams in the colonial sport of cricket as well as the age-old equestrian sport of Buskashi, in which the object of play is a decapitated calf. It's Bush country and at the same time it's bin Laden country: a close ally of the United States, but also an incubator for Islamist terrorism. Pakistan, created during the bloody partition of the Indian subcontinent in 1947 into a predominantly Hindu India and a predominantly Muslim "land of the pure," is the only country in the world that owes its existence to Islam. Upon being founded, Pakistan was immediately catapulted into the center of global politics, and three wars with India followed. By no later than September 11, 2001, and in light of its dramatic shift toward the West, the world's attention once again became focused on Pakistan, a country wracked by terrorism and at risk of nuclear war with its neighbor and of breaking apart.
Posted by: Sunder Apr 7 2004, 10:51 PM
Posted by: rhytha Apr 7 2004, 11:07 PM
Mudy, New Thread Plz

<< Home

November 2003 / December 2003 / January 2004 / February 2004 / March 2004 / May 2004 / June 2004 / July 2004 / August 2004 / September 2004 / October 2004 / November 2004 / December 2004 / January 2005 / February 2005 / March 2005 / May 2005 / August 2005 / September 2005 / October 2005 / November 2005 / December 2005 / March 2006 / June 2006 / July 2006 /

Powered by Blogger