'Blaming India for blasts premature'

[Goodperson]

Solid Proof

Do one favour , ask your mantri jee take these proof to UNO for approval

Batain bana to koi tum se sekah

Yes Solid living Proof and Pakistan is not even providing counselor access. Who compelled Pakistan to accept him as its Citizen.

Look for definition of newly formed word "Sate less actor" you get all the truth.

 

[champion]

well i think it was backfire now ISI should stop terrorist link pak govt is too waek against ISI

pak govt must do against ISI

problem is ISI+TALIBAN link

 

[SMC]

One tiny problem - the date. The dawn article is dated 14th December 2009 and this one 14th March 2010.

Ignoring the rest of your blah blah, ok yes I didnt read the date, but personally I don't think he has seen the proof. There's another thread just opened about these attacks. But it really doesn't change anything because the same person you're quoting blamed india for attacks that happened not too long ago.

 

[SMC]

here is your article


So cant find a single proof in the article... It is same as XYZ ......... says

Second sentence? If you're going to quote a person, quote him fully.

 

[Goodperson]

You should blame persons responsible to for security rather than listening its leaders blaming neighbor country which no country in the world supports.

Pakistan claimed to have So....lid proof but who stopped it from remove lid from Sold and present it to UN or appropriate forum ?

 

[SMC]

You should blame persons responsible to for security rather than listening its leaders blaming neighbor country which no country in the world supports.

That's akin to india totally ignoring Pakistani citizens for 26/11. I don't think indians would be so cool with that. Yes, government is responsible for security but doesnt change the rest of the story. What do you mean no country in the world supports our leaders?

Pakistan claimed to have So....lid proof but who stopped it from remove lid from Sold and present it to UN or appropriate forum ?

For the 100th time, UN is western controlled. Get that through your head.

 

[Bang Galore]

Solid Proof

Do one favour , ask your mantri jee take these proof to UNO for approval

Batain bana to koi tum se sekah

Well funny you should say that. that's what the Indian government did and convinced the security council to slap sanctions on JuD and Hafiz Saeed.

US slaps sanctions on LeT leaders



US expects Pakistan to adhere to sanctions on JuD: Rice

United Nations, Dec 17 (IANS) US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice Tuesday said she expects Pakistan to ‘adhere completely’ to UN Security Council sanctions on Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD) and other terrorist organisations in letter and spirit.

Last week, at the request of India and the US, the UN Security Council had slapped sanctions on JuD and four of its leaders for their alleged involvement in the Mumbai terrorist attack. Pakistan followed with a crackdown, which included arrests, freezing their assets and sealing their offices.

When referred to the Pakistani foreign minister’s statement that his government would not take action against the charitable activities of JuD and asked if this would be violation of UN sanctions, Rice told reporters at the UN headquarters in New York that it is for Pakistan to figure it out how they are going to implement the Security Council sanctions.

‘Pakistan is going to have to untangle the difficult circumstances the Jamaat offers — they are — because I understand there are so called charitable activities. But we learned - the United States learned the hard way - that sometimes these are too intertwined with organizations that have terrorists ties and have just been designated here,’ Rice said.

‘So we will be pressing all member states to adhere completely and to the letter of the designations that the United Nations has taken,’ Rice told reporters, emerging out of the Security Council meeting on issue related to piracy in Somalia.

‘I know the Pakistani government to be a government that wants to deal into the good faith of the world. It is the new civilian government that is a legitimate government that wants very much to be respected in international politics,’ she said.

Rice said the new Pakistani government wants to deal with terrorism that in itself is having direct consequences on Pakistan. As such, Rice said: ‘I expect that there will be cooperation.’

Sindh Today - US expects Pakistan to adhere to sanctions on JuD: Rice

Ask your government to do the same if they indeed have the proof that they claim.

 

[Bang Galore]

Ignoring the rest of your blah blah, ok yes I didnt read the date, but personally I don't think he has seen the proof. There's another thread just opened about these attacks. But it really doesn't change anything because the same person you're quoting blamed india for attacks that happened not too long ago.

Exactly ! What does that say about that person and the government that he represents? What should his credibility be when he says something else tomorrow?

 

[SMC]

Exactly ! What does that say about that person and the government that he represents? What should his credibility be when he says something else tomorrow?

Tell me what does it say about him? What is he saying contradictory?

As far as saying such and such about the government goes, well yes I agree this is a useless puppet government. Army would have the same policy throughout and it would be very clear what they say. Not sure if you'll like that though. The status quo favours india.

 

[Chappal Chor]

Second sentence? If you're going to quote a person, quote him fully.

Ok as u say Mr. Qureshi says "However, Islamabad has substantial evidence to prove India’s involvement in terror activities in the country.
"


Again he just says does not proove..........

 

[Bang Galore]

Tell me what does it say about him? What is he saying contradictory?

As far as saying such and such about the government goes, well yes I agree this is a useless puppet government. Army would have the same policy throughout and it would be very clear what they say. Not sure if you'll like that though. The status quo favours india.

The contradictions are clear. On December 14th 2009, your FM claims that Pakistan has substantial proof of India's involvement in terror attacks within Pakistan. It actually follows a protestation of innocence regarding state involvement in the Mumbai attacks. Following his startling accusation, what does he do? Nothing! Three months later and no proof produced. Now, on the eve of a visit to Saudi Arabia just after that kingdom has made comments about terrorism in Pakistan, he changes tack and says there is no proof of any Indian involvement in the Lahore attacks. What changed his standards for accusation? Where's any proof? For any attack?

 

[SMC]

Ok as u say Mr. Qureshi says "However, Islamabad has substantial evidence to prove India’s involvement in terror activities in the country.
"


Again he just says does not proove..........

Here's what I am trying to say.

You're using what he said against the indian involvement articles. The same person said india is involved in terrorism and there's proof for that. In other words, whether or not there's proof becomes irrelevant - you cannot use that person to disprove/against the story.

 

[SMC]

The contradictions are clear. On December 14th 2009, your FM claims that Pakistan has substantial proof of India's involvement in terror attacks within Pakistan. It actually follows a protestation of innocence regarding state involvement in the Mumbai attacks. Following his startling accusation, what does he do? Nothing! Three months later and no proof produced. Now, on the eve of a visit to Saudi Arabia just after that kingdom has made comments about terrorism in Pakistan, he changes tack and says there is no proof of any Indian involvement in the Lahore attacks. What changed his standards for accusation? Where's any proof? For any attack?

Right, so he's saying that India is involved in past terror attacks, and as far as this particular one goes there's no proof (as far as he knows) ATM. What's contradictory there?

 

[Chappal Chor]

Here's what I am trying to say.

You're using what he said against the indian involvement articles. The same person said india is involved in terrorism and there's proof for that. In other words, whether or not there's proof becomes irrelevant - you cannot use that person to disprove/against the story.

are yaar any damn politician in the sub continent can come up with the claims and go for it. A politician is a breed which cannot be trusted without the backing of the legitimate proofs.

Even if you talk about the pune blasts some started claiming it on pakistan and then there was a call from NWPF region somewhere which was aptly debunked by the security agencies as fake. Its all in proper investigations.

 

[SMC]

Right, I am not saying otherwise, but try to understand that you cannot just use the same person for your benefit when not too long ago they said something you wouldn't like to hear.