Cameron's inflammatory comments against Pakistan: I meant Pakistanis are terrorists..

[mjnaushad]

Many Pakistanis who show utter disgust and anger here and use abuse, then go to the Afghanistan threads and brag about how they will send Indians in body bags from Afghanistan as soon as US leaves. They will of course use Taliban for this act.

And no, they are not double faced and do not support terrorism as a tool of foreign policy.

Well if you think some body here on a defence.pk will say that we'll send them back in body bags and you take that as Pakistans policy...

And yes some pakistani might have shown Utter disgust but Indian they dont need to show....They are disgusting....


Give respect get respect.

 

[karan.1970]

But your statement that there cannot be smoke without fire is proven wrong. Because I gave you a counter-example (and there's a few other instances in western history that can also be mentioned besides that one) and through proof by counter-example, the statement is dis-proven.



Thus the onus is on you to show that there is indeed fire. Smoke can be there, but not necessarily fire.

See, that's the problem with applying simplistic statements to things which are not so simple, such as public opinion and perception. I see such simplistic statements a LOT of times on this forum.

You mentioned that "A past instance of finding smoke without a fire does not gaurantee that every time it will be fireless smoke.. ". Putting it into context, that's equal to that public perception being wrong before does not mean it's wrong now. True, but, it also means it may be wrong.




Yes, well no doubt about it and I agree with it, but I was specifically talking about public perception and you mentioning that there cannot be smoke without fire.

Sir.. its a figure of speech.. Not a literal meaning. And again (4th time in this thread I think), we are not in a court of law.. No matter how many instances you show of smoke without fire, every instance of smoke will create a panic of fire, because for every one instance that you show, there will be a thousand where smoke is accompanied by fire...

And perceptions are never right or wrong.. They are just perceptions. And they drive most happenings in the world. Pakistan did not have any proof that Taliban will be friendly to them when they installed them in Afghanistan in late 20th century.. They just perceived them to be friendly. Just like they did with USA back then and China now.. Some of these perceptions stick, some change with time.. But they are what drive most individual decisions.

And as I said, one can ignore them at one's own peril...

 

[ice_man]

Sir.. its a figure of speech.. Not a literal meaning. And again (4th time in this thread I think), we are not in a court of law.. No matter how many instances you show of smoke without fire, every instance of smoke will create a panic of fire, because for every one instance that you show, there will be a thousand where smoke is accompanied by fire...

And perceptions are never right or wrong.. They are just perceptions. And they drive most happenings in the world. Pakistan did not have any proof that Taliban will be friendly to them when they installed them in Afghanistan in late 20th century.. They just perceived them to be friendly. Just like they did with USA back then and China now.. Some of these perceptions stick, some change with time.. But they are what drive most individual decisions.

And as I said, one can ignore them at one's own peril...

sticking to your logic when david miliband came to india last year and "PERCEIVED" that terrorism is fueled by india's insistence to not solve kashmir that was a "smoke" that pointed out that india SHOULD solve kashmir?

 

[SMC]

^ Yes, I know about perceptions and your court of law statement. Interesting to note that indians call Pakistanis illogical and irrational for believing in Indian involvement without proof but through out that same logic and rationality when the tables turn.

My main point was regarding you suggesting implicitly earlier that since there is fire, there must be smoke, i.e. since some of the public believes something to be true, it must be true.

 

[SMC]

Btw, as far as public perception goes, indians severely overestimate anti-Pakistani perceptions in the west, but more importantly, do not mention what the real public opinion is.

1. From my experience, vast majority of americans don't even consider Pakistan to be an important part of war.
2. Indians misrepresent western perception - the implicitly suggest that western public wants their respective states to attack Pakistan. On the contrary - they want their state to withdraw from the region. This is opinion is becoming more and more popular.
3. Their public speaks nowhere near as aggressively against Pakistan as Indians do. For instance, they do not even speak too strongly about any Pakistani involvement as they haven't seen any proof.

 

[Ras]

A past instance of finding smoke without a fire does not gaurantee that every time it will be fireless smoke.. Whoever believes that does that at his own peril. If you find your house full of smoke, you bloody well try and find the fire. You wont sit idle thinking that smoke does not mean fire necessarily...

Same with Argumentum ad populum... This is not a court of law.. The policies of countries are not decided by lawyers. They are decided by politicians who are voted into power by common masses for who the perception is reality..

But to each his own....

You know it really does not matter what the people think...Pakistan has got bashed by conservative commentators from some couple of years now..since the Afghan war started going south in 2007. In a govt to govt level this does nothing..

Watch Fox to see what goes on...unfortunately the most watched channel in the US.Pakistan bashing is endemic in there and it it did not start yesterday.

 

[notsuperstitious]

Well if you think some body here on a defence.pk will say that we'll send them back in body bags and you take that as Pakistans policy...Then i think i have never seen an Idiot like you before.....

And yes some pakistani might have shown Utter disgust but Indian they dont need to show....They are disgusting....


Give respect get respect.

When I talked about people who will use abuse, I was referring to people like you. And I did not talk about the official / semi official /unofficial policy of Pakistan, I specifically spoke about posters here and their infinite hypocricy.

As to the official / semi official /unofficial policy of Pakistan, how can I claim to know it? Even you can not.

But even an idiot like me knows that when you openly ban LET as a terror group but at the same time let the same people use the LET headquarters in Muridke under a new banner - JUD, then you are officially protecting terrorists. But thats too simplistic for the complex Pakistanis.

 

[ice_man]

When I talked about people who will use abuse, I was referring to people like you. And I did not talk about the official / semi official /unofficial policy of Pakistan, I specifically spoke about posters here and their infinite hypocricy.

As to the official / semi official /unofficial policy of Pakistan, how can I claim to know it? Even you can not.

But even an idiot like me knows that when you openly ban LET as a terror group but at the same time let the same people use the LET headquarters in Muridke under a new banner - JUD, then you are officially protecting terrorists. But thats too simplistic for the complex Pakistanis.

& you have proof about this surely the part in bold?? please care to share a NON INDIAN SOURCE.

 

[karan.1970]

sticking to your logic when david miliband came to india last year and "PERCEIVED" that terrorism is fueled by india's insistence to not solve kashmir that was a "smoke" that pointed out that india SHOULD solve kashmir?

THat was his perception and thankfully a man with that perception is not sitting in the govt of UK anymore.

 

[karan.1970]

^ Yes, I know about perceptions and your court of law statement. Interesting to note that indians call Pakistanis illogical and irrational for believing in Indian involvement without proof but through out that same logic and rationality when the tables turn.

My main point was regarding you suggesting implicitly earlier that since there is fire, there must be smoke, i.e. since some of the public believes something to be true, it must be true.

I am not asking you to accept people's perceptions as a barometer of truth. Only that there must be something that sets that perceptions and in the global village, at time perceptions drives actions more than actual events...

 

[karan.1970]

Btw, as far as public perception goes, indians severely overestimate anti-Pakistani perceptions in the west, but more importantly, do not mention what the real public opinion is.

1. From my experience, vast majority of americans don't even consider Pakistan to be an important part of war.
2. Indians misrepresent western perception - the implicitly suggest that western public wants their respective states to attack Pakistan. On the contrary - they want their state to withdraw from the region. This is opinion is becoming more and more popular.
3. Their public speaks nowhere near as aggressively against Pakistan as Indians do. For instance, they do not even speak too strongly about any Pakistani involvement as they haven't seen any proof.

1. Yes they dont.. They still consider Pakistan as a part of the problem and not solution. This is not intended as a flame but is based on my conversations with my American collegues who have nothing to do with defence or WOT business.
2. There may be some but I dont think public of any western nation wants their country to attack Pakistan.
3. I agree..

 

[notsuperstitious]

& you have proof about this surely the part in bold?? please care to share a NON INDIAN SOURCE.

? Its common knowledge, unless there are two different complexes in Muridke, one used by LET and another by Markaz or JUD.

DAWN.COM | World | Who are the Lashkar-e-Tayiba?

India may target Muridke to avenge attacks

And even now JUD operates freely under original name, just like LET did . I have a Pakistani acquaintance who in 2005 fought to get a LET collection camp closed from his heart of lahore locality. So much for 'banning' terrorists.

Encore, NOS, The News International

More like protecting them

China backed ban

 

[SMC]

I am not asking you to accept people's perceptions as a barometer of truth. Only that there must be something that sets that perceptions and in the global village, at time perceptions drives actions more than actual events...

That's exactly a problem. When you say that "there must be something that sets that perceptions", you're implicitly suggesting a whole list of things.

What's setting perceptions here is the media and perhaps individual from the state.

 

[karan.1970]

That's exactly a problem. When you say that "there must be something that sets that perceptions", you're implicitly suggesting a whole list of things.

What's setting perceptions here is the media and perhaps individual from the state.

Media also can not create perceptions from thin air. Such perceptions get created when people get to hear something that conforms to their earlier suspicions. Basically something that reinforces a belief. Even for fake perceptions to be created, there needs to be a thread of underlying accepted belief that predates the media blitz..

And its commulative...Every time a Pakistani origin guy is caught anywhere in the world and is suspected of terrorism, that thread becomes stronger. Unfortunately, negative instances reinforce much stronger than positive ones. People remember a Pakistani being suspected of terrorism, but will forget that the charges were dropped a few weeks later??

 

[mjnaushad]

..

When I talked about people who will use abuse, I was referring to people like you

Ohh so now its me....I didn't know that calling someone disgusting directly or indirectly doesn't count as abuse but saying same thing to indians will become Abuse.......so much for your "Pakistani hypocrate and Indians Angels"...

. And I did not talk about the official / semi official /unofficial policy of Pakistan, I specifically spoke about posters here and their infinite hypocricy.

You talked about foreign policy.....

As to the official / semi official /unofficial policy of Pakistan, how can I claim to know it? Even you can not.

Then lets not presume from single post the policy of Pakistan...And use it just for sake of winning argument.

But even an idiot like me

I apologizes for that part...But you insulted Pakistanis first....

knows that when you openly ban LET as a terror group but at the same time let the same people use the LET headquarters in Muridke under a new banner - JUD, then you are officially protecting terrorists. But thats too simplistic for the complex Pakistanis.

JuD is doing many charity works...Its not banned doesn't mean Govt isnt monitring it.....You have proof against Let Or JuD why didn't you bring them when their was a case in progress in court. You could become a party in the case and present proof (if you had any) and could have achieved your purpose. But you didn't bother to do anything. Now As India is doing nothing in Balochistan as there is no proof same way Pakistan or JuD is doing nothing in India as their is no proof. But no For Indians India is clean because no proof but Pakistan not just because they think this way....Shows who is hypocrate.
[/QUOTE]