An Indian Colonel working on assignment in Afghanistan is presumed 'missing'

[Rollno21]

For example who is a bad guy to the west?

OBL

 

[django]

Poor sod, cant tell what is worse for him, being in the custody of ISI or a hairy and burly Pathan.

A big burly Pathan might make chappali kebab out of him and feed him to his dogs, the question arises, will the kebab be well cooked or will it be "RAW"

 

[Areesh]

If a Pakistani is saying so then he must be a good man.he is good terrorist.

Whatever. Keep electing criminals to rule you.

 

[Spring Onion]

OBL

And when exactly he became a bad guy for the rest of the world? can you mention the year and date please?

 

[Peshwa]

Jinnah was fighting for a separate. He was fighting to make undivided India divided. How come random people living in undivided India became his responsibility? He was leader of only muslims and not every krishna, yadav or kumar. Jinnah did what was right for his people and to achieve his goal. Modi did what his hindutva ideology asked him to. He killed his own people for that. Jinnah had no legal authority to start or stop anything unlike Modi who had complete authority and full force to stop killings. We consider a Muslim leader as our father of nation unlike others who vote and elect a ruler involved in mass murder as PM of their pathetic country. There is a huge difference.

You guys have this bad habit of comparing apples and oranges. But then you need it defend your week position and to cover your filth.

.

Random people?! Didn't Muslims die during partition? The ones killed were not deep within India but those that lived in the bordering states of India and Pakistan. So the lives of those people that died in the riots are on Jinnahs hands, whether they be Hindu or Muslim. PERIOD!

And the similarity with Modi doesn't end there.
If you claim Modi was trying to achieve his "Hindutva ideology" goals, then what the **** was Jinnah doing by creating a nation for muslims? Islamic agenda much? Both had a religious agenda if at all and both are tainted with blood due to their action or inaction.
Only difference is, we actually vetted Modi and our supreme court gave him a clean chit AFTER which we elected him to the post of PM. Now whether the judgement was right or wrong is debatable, but at least due diligence was done to bring him to justice. While Jinnah washed in the blood of millions became the Father of your nation with no accountability!

Also, Jinnah had all authority to stop people. I Mean if Direct action was his brainchild and bidding, then it pretty much sums up the power he wielded in controlling those masses. What's worse is that Modi can be accused of inaction to a violent event he did not start, but Jinnah orchestrated the violence by Direct action, meaning he intended the use of violence to achieve his religio-political goals.

But again, who am I trying to convince anyways. Your jaundiced green glasses only allow you to effectively judge Indians when bigger monsters live within your society who you salute and sing national anthems to on a daily basis.

 

[Areesh]

Random people?! Didn't Muslims die during partition? The ones killed were not deep within India but those that lived in the bordering states of India and Pakistan. So the lives of those people that died in the riots are on Jinnahs hands, whether they be Hindu or Muslim. PERIOD!

And the similarity with Modi doesn't end there.
If you claim Modi was trying to achieve his "Hindutva ideology" goals, then what the **** was Jinnah doing by creating a nation for muslims? Islamic agenda much? Both had a religious agenda if at all and both are tainted with blood due to their action or inaction.
Only difference is, we actually vetted Modi and our supreme court gave him a clean chit AFTER which we elected him to the post of PM. Now whether the judgement was right or wrong is debatable, but at least due diligence was done to bring him to justice. While Jinnah washed in the blood of millions became the Father of your nation with no accountability!

Also, Jinnah had all authority to stop people. I Mean if Direct action was his brainchild and bidding, then it pretty much sums up the power he wielded in controlling those masses. What's worse is that Modi can be accused of inaction to a violent event he did not start, but Jinnah orchestrated the violence by Direct action, meaning he intended the use of violence to achieve his religio-political goals.

But again, who am I trying to convince anyways. Your jaundiced green glasses only allow you to effectively judge Indians when bigger monsters live within your society who you salute and sing national anthems to on a daily basis.

Did Jinnah asked Hindus to kill Muslims or he asked Muslims to kill hindus? Unlike Indian leaders who directly or indirectly participated riots and killings of Muslims. Who can forget Indian state massacres to kill muslims? Indian army and not some random rioters fully participated killings muslims in Hyderabad. It was a state sponsored massacre. In Delhi muslims were killed despite several plea by Jinnah to Indian leaders to stop these killings. In jammu that Hindu dogra raja of Kashmir committed genocide of muslims. Indian state respects and loves that b@stard despite his massacre of muslims. Jinnah fought for his people. It is your politicians and your army that killed muslims. Direct action day was nothing. It was a call to fight for your rights and not to kill random civilians. There is no comparison with modi here who had full state authority to stop killings and massacres.

Jinnah fought for his people. For his nation. He *** no officebearer of any kind. No moral or legal authority to stop or start any killing. Modi fought for his ideology while in the oath he took when becoming CM he was supposed top protect his people and not to kill them for a filthy ideology. He violated his oath and banana republic of India rewarded him for that instead of punishing him. There is a big difference. There is no comparison and similarity between the both. We are proud of Jinnah and consider him our leader. Never ever try to compare leader of his stature with a criminal like Modi.

Hiding behind direct action day is useless since your history is too dirty and full of blood. Even a hundred direct action day can't hide those crimes of your state an your leaders.

 

[B2B]

So guys any other source other than PDF tweet " my uncle said so. " on this after 2 days.
Did duniya news report this already ?

 

[Majid Awan]

You mean people who hate everything in life and cant live peaceful with others

lol says who.

 

[B2B]

@nair @SarthakGanguly @Water Car Engineer @MilSpec @Horus @Areesh @Arsalan @AUz @Hindustani78 @indiatester

Just saw the news Zarvan bhai , really amazed that it took so long to come out with this letter , the Pakistanis were believed to be good with CGI.

 

[Didact]

@nair @SarthakGanguly @Water Car Engineer @MilSpec @Horus @Areesh @Arsalan @AUz @Hindustani78 @indiatester

The flaws as exists:
1. Writer does not identify himself clearly. Sukhvinder who? H. Sukhvinder, sukhvinder K????? Not done in official emails.

2. It's Director General, Military Intelligence, never of Military Intelligence.

3.Army HQ, which Unit? Which command? Which Corps or operational group?

4. Date not Dated, unless referring to a previous mail, in which case the number of that mail.

5. Subject doesn't start with about unless you're in class V or from a more religiously focused educational background, and your entire bloodline is bad in English.

6. Everything is wrong about the receiver's address. It's not even funny how wrong that is.

7. A junior rank mailing a senior rank is not done. And in case it's done, unless he wants to be out of a job, he won't dare ask the superior to do anything.

 

[Zarvan]

The flaws as exists:
1. Writer does not identify himself clearly. Sukhvinder who? H. Sukhvinder, sukhvinder K????? Not done in official emails.

2. It's Director General, Military Intelligence, never of Military Intelligence.

3.Army HQ, which Unit? Which command? Which Corps or operational group?

4. Date not Dated, unless referring to a previous mail, in which case the number of that mail.

5. Subject doesn't start with about unless you're in class V or from a more religiously focused educational background, and your entire bloodline is bad in English.

6. Everything is wrong about the receiver's address. It's not even funny how wrong that is.

7. A junior rank mailing a senior rank is not done. And in case it's done, unless he wants to be out of a job, he won't dare ask the superior to do anything.

He has mentioned his rank read carefully everything is mentioned

You want to remain in denial go ahead we would bring your Col forward

The e mail is fake according to Horus

 

[B2B]

He has mentioned his rank read carefully everything is mentioned

You want to remain in denial go ahead we would bring your Col forward

The email is fake according to Horus.

So its confirmed fake by Horus.
While Windjammer has claimed its a reliable source and even made a new thread on that.

So whom to believe you say?

 

[Srinivas]

At best these guys might have got this dismissed colonel from his duty, for obvious reasons. This is a one sided game in which India will always come on top.

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/...stan-kabul-pistols-army-colonel/1/932439.html

 

[AnnoyingOrange]

What a pack off bullshit.. An Army man will never send an official communication without mentioning his unit number and his department details... The original tweet that was used to create this thread was tweeted form Pakistan defence twitter handle...

 

[ranjeet]

Is this Col Vinay Joshi?

https://twitter.com/x/status/889541823072546819