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

[Dance]

coming from a man whose country released a convicted terrorist in order to appease a provider and a facilitator (the embattled BP)

he has enough problem with british born confused jihadis; he can focus on the domestic merchandise rather than worry about export/imports


how convenient that he says it during a trip to ....... hindustan.

now watch their news headlines go at it for days --perhaps weeks.

Thats the most important thing to realize, he said just to suck up to them for economic reasons. He didnt say this while he was in the UK or any where else, but just in india

 

[prototype]

Who cares? He said this in india meaning he saying it just to please the audience there and suck up to india for economic reasons.

but i always thing why no one is ready to praise pakistan and throw dirt at India on Pakistan's favor

because nobody care about Pakistan and no body want to piss of India

and if he is saying all this only to please India's it just show how much is our influence over the globe where a Prime minister of one of most powerful nation is openly throwing dirt at Pakistan

stop perceiving urself as the center and masterpiece of the world,no body care a damn about u,see the example-PRIME MINISTER OF BRITAIN

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Thats the most important thing to realize, he said just to suck up to them for economic reasons. He didnt say this while he was in the UK or any where else, but just in india

yeah because there's no better way to get their attention and their applause...


even tony blair wasnt such a lota

 

[ramu]

these comments are extremely damaging.

in the court of public opinion pakistan is being devastated - the headlines are damaging.

the majority of people will not look at the veracity of the reports/claims, they will simply nod their heads and agree, thats the sad truth.

and because of this the us/gb government has domestic support it normally needs.

r3alist, I agree that this damaging and a very bold statement. Thanks for atleast owning up that the media attention gained by Pakistan is indeed bad. Some members have gone on to say they do not care but the point is your country does care.

This I would like to underline is not the first and will not be the last unless Pakistan finds a solution to its problems or the problems will just go larger. I dont even see a strong protest from Paksitan in its media. The whole news about British PMs visit is muted in Pakistan for obvious reasons.

 

[r3alist]

Thats the most important thing to realize, he said just to suck up to them for economic reasons. He didnt say this while he was in the UK or any where else, but just in india

thats scant comfort, if any at all

the damaging headlines are there, you need to realise that people will not look at the details like we do, its not in their interest do, so they take alot of the headlines at face value.

without a robust means to counter these claims pakistan is at the mercy of the us/gb

cameron has essentially mocked the civilian casualties and disregarded the military ones as well - hardly anyone in the mainstream will bring this up

 

[sparklingway]

Cameron sparks diplomatic row with Pakistan after 'export of terror' remarks
​

• David Cameron makes strongest criticism of Pakistan yet
• Islamabad accuses PM of damaging prospects for peace
guardian.co.uk
Wednesday 28 July 2010 18.07 BST

David Cameron today sparked a furious diplomatic row with Islamabad after accusing elements of the Pakistani state of promoting the export of terrorism.

In the strongest British criticism of Pakistan so far, the prime minister warned Islamabad it could no longer "look both ways" by tolerating terrorism while demanding respect as a democracy.

But in an angry response, Pakistan's high commissioner to Britain accused Cameron of damaging the prospects for regional peace, and criticised him for believing allegations in the Wikileaks documents published in the Guardian earlier this week.

The leaked documents claim that the ISI, Pakistan's intelligence agency, is still encouraging the Taliban.

Wajid Shamsul Hasan, Pakistan's high commissioner, writes on the Guardian Comment is free site: "One would have wished that the prime minister would have considered Pakistan's enormous role in the war on terror and the sacrifices it has rendered since 9/11.

"There seems to be more reliance on information based on intelligence leaks which lack credibility of proof. A bilateral visit aimed at earning business could have been done without damaging the prospects of regional peace."

The prime minister initiated the row this morning in a speech to Indian business leaders in Bangalore, when he spoke of his horror at the 2008 terrorist attacks in Mumbai. Delhi directly blamed the Pakistani authorities for the attacks.

Cameron came close to endorsing Delhi's view when he said: "We cannot tolerate in any sense the idea that this country is allowed to look both ways and is able to promote the export of terror, whether to India or Afghanistan or anywhere else in the world.

"That is why this relationship is important. But it should be a relationship based on a very clear message: that it is not right to have any relationship with groups that are promoting terror. Democratic states that want to be part of the developed world cannot do that. The message to Pakistan from the US and from the UK is very clear on that point."

Pakistan took the rare step of issuing a rebuttal. Abdul Basit, a spokesman for the Pakistani foreign ministry, told Radio 4's World at One: "There is no question of Pakistan looking the other way. I think the prime minister was referring to these reports, which are unverifiable and outdated. If we start drawing inferences from these self-serving reports, then obviously we are distracting ourselves."

Pakistani senator Khurshid Ahmad, vice-president of the Islamist Jamaat-e-Islami party, said: "I am deeply concerned. The basis on which this statement has been made is very fragile. The documents released are unreliable: 90% of them have been attributed to Afghan intelligence agencies, whose reports are totally unreliable and fabricated. On the basis of such a report, it is not acceptable to make the statement that has been made."

Britain has spoken in the past of the terror threat from Pakistan, though ministers have restricted themselves to criticising Pakistan for tolerating terror groups. But the prime minister's language came close to endorsing the Indian view that authorities in Pakistan have a hand in the terror.

Cameron named several terror groups which are, according to India, sponsored by Pakistan. "We – like you – are determined that groups like the Taliban, the Haqqani network or Lakshar e Taiba should not be allowed to launch attacks on Indian and British citizens in India or in Britain."

Downing Street insisted that the prime minister was not accusing the Pakistan government of sponsoring terrorism. But a few minutes after his speech, Cameron made clear that official agencies in Pakistan were some way culpable.

Asked on the Today programme whether Pakistan exports terrorism, Cameron said: "I choose my words very carefully. It is unacceptable for anything to happen within Pakistan that is about supporting terrorism elsewhere. It is well-documented that that has been the case in the past, and we have to make sure that the Pakistan authorities are not looking two ways. They must only look one way, and that is to a democratic and stable Pakistan."

Cameron confirmed in his speech that he had discussed the terror threat from Pakistan with Barack Obama and officials at the Pentagon last week. The PM's remarks indicate that he and Obama discussed one of the key issues at the heart of the leaked intelligence documents days before their publication in Monday's Guardian.

The prime minister's words on Pakistan overshadowed the first day ofa visit to India designed to herald a new special relationship. Downing Street says the trip is meant to show that Britain can treat India as a normal trading partner, with the security issues surrounding Delhi's troubled relations with Pakistan dealt with on a separate tack.

But the main business announcement – a relaxation of licence rules to allow the export of civil nuclear technology and expertise to India – had the potential to upset its nuclear neighbour. Pakistan and India have both refused to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, prompting the last government to refuse to offer co-operation to India on civil nuclear power. British ministers had feared there would be leakage to its military nuclear programme.

The US sanctioned the use of civil nuclear technology to India in 2008. Britain believes yesterday's agreement is compatible with the NPT, which bans the sale of nuclear technology to nuclear powers that have not signed it. The Nuclear Suppliers' Group, of which Britain and the US are members, granted India a waiver that allows the transfer of technology.

Vince Cable, the business secretary who has championed the change, said: "There are obvious security sensitivities. We are conscious of those, as are the Indians. But within those constraints we really want to push ahead with civil nuclear co-operation. That would be quite a big sector within which we could really make progress."

 

[ramu]

yeah because there's no better way to get their attention and their applause...

even tony blair wasnt such a lota

IMHO, Cameron the British PM knows just a little more than a think tank on PDF.

 

[sparklingway]

Why David Cameron's words disappoint Pakistan


Pakistan has made huge sacrifices in the war on terror. Yet the PM criticises us based on intelligence leaks that lack credibility​

Wajid Shamsul Hasan
guardian.co.uk
Wednesday 28 July 2010 19.00 BST

I was surprised to read the reported remarks made by David Cameron when speaking to Indian businesspeople in Bangalore this morning, especially when he said: "We cannot tolerate in any sense the idea that this country [Pakistan] is allowed to look both ways and is able, in any way, to promote the export of terror, whether to India or whether to Afghanistan or anywhere else in the world". These remarks are completely contrary to the realities on the ground, and are intended to embroil Pakistan in issues for which it cannot alone be held responsible.

One would have hoped that the British prime minister would have considered Pakistan's enormous role in the war on terror and the sacrifices it has made since 9/11. He seems to be more reliant on information based on intelligence leaks, despite it lacking credibility or corroborating proof. A bilateral visit aimed at attracting business could have been conducted without damaging the prospects of regional peace.

His remarks have come soon after the leak of US military documents about the war in Afghanistan and the alleged involvement of Pakistan's security institutions. As far as Pakistan's role in the war is concerned, it is sufficient to quote the Persian proverb: "Fragrance does not need recommendations of a perfume seller". The sacrifices endured by Pakistan are enormous. Since 2001 more than 2,700 members of the security forces have laid down their lives and more than 9,000 have been severely wounded. These figures far exceed the total casualties suffered by Nato allies in the region over the same period.

For the west, it may seem as though terrorism began on 9/11. But Pakistan's experience started back when the Soviet troops occupied Afghanistan. The invasion posed a threat to the "free world", so we were told, and Pakistan was declared a "bulwark against communism". We are still struggling with the devastating and economically crippling fallout with limited resources and in an environment of mistrust.

We should not forget that the resistance offered by the Afghans against the Soviets mesmerised the west so much that it bestowed the title of "mujahideen" upon them. The new madrassas – in reality, more like guerilla training centres – were financed in Afghanistan and Pakistan by the free world to recruit and train religiously fanatic elements as mujahideen.

The so-called intelligence leaks that allege Pakistani involvement do not have any credibility. The timing of the leaks is instructive. Just a week ago an international conference held in Kabul called for the need to stabilise the situation in Afghanistan through reconciliation, reintegration and the gradual withdrawal of coalition forces by 2014.

This conference offered an opportunity to stabilise Afghanistan by engaging antagonists in order to find a political solution. The overwhelming majority of the conference favoured this approach. However, a few factions within Afghanistan and some countries in the neighbourhood who are trying to dominate the country do not like the idea.

For the stability of Afghanistan and for a smooth withdrawal of coalition forces, it is important not only that the political process in Afghanistan should be led by Afghans themselves but also that the country's neighbours honour the commitments made at the Kabul conference of 20 July. Mere lip service will not bring stability.

Pakistan has proved through its actions that stability in Afghanistan is an imperative. Pakistan has taken firm action against terrorists and observes zero tolerance against foreign extremists trying to take refuge within its borders. More importantly, the democratic government in Pakistan believes in a stable Afghanistan and by extension a stable region so that all nations in the region may focus their energies on addressing the plight of their poor. Instead of manufacturing evidence against Pakistan, it would be advisable for us all to work for stability in Afghanistan through peaceful means.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

but i always thing why no one is ready to praise pakistan and throw dirt at India on Pakistan's favor

because nobody care about Pakistan and no body want to piss of India

and if he is saying all this only to please India's it just show how much is our influence over the globe where a Prime minister of one of most powerful nation is openly throwing dirt at Pakistan

stop perceiving urself as the center and masterpiece of the world,no body care a damn about u,see the example-PRIME MINISTER OF BRITAIN

you can go ahead and throw the dirt.....does it change anything on the ground? No it doesn't. Will it suddenly change our stance on Kashmir? No it won't. Will it make us fight the war in a way that would be counter-productive or against our interests? No, it won't.

Will it change ANY of the status quo? Maybe in your bollywoody dreams.


The fact of the matter is, yes it hurts Pakistan's image. But the damage has already been done for years, we don't have any hawkish leaders who are willing to go on record vociferously and dismiss and bastardize any of these ridiculous claims.

Furthermore, there DOESNT exist any evidence that Pakistan as a STATE ''exports'' terrorism anywhere. We are at the receiving end of most terrorism going on in the world lately, only indians and other such blind naturally moronic people would not be cognizant to this reality.


such statements have been going on for years! they are all baseless, and we can dismiss them and toss them in the rusty round dustbin where they belong



















p.s. glad to see that after years of fake baseless self-perceived ''glory'' for those maharajas on makeshift wooden horse carts, you still idolize the Britishers

 

[deckingraj]

Its a shame that you dont realize that hes only saying this to suck up to india and nothing else.

If you honestly circumspect a bit more you will see that he is a leader of a nation and ideally no leader should be saying crap about a third nation when on official visit to an an adversary...and here we are talking about PM of Britain not some tiny little country having no or very less significance....In short we can atleast assume that this is what British Govt official stand, weather they will do anything about it or not is a different ball game....

Let me flip the question a bit more....Do you see US/UK or for that matter any nation saying such things about India in order to please Pakistan???? If the answer is no then think why is it happening??? Even though they need you in WOT still they are saying such things....there has to some amount of truth behind it???? Don't you think????

An easy way to answer is "Its Indian Money they are after"...but then are you interesting in finding out can there be more to it????

 

[Mirza Jatt]

Cameron sparks diplomatic row with Pakistan after 'export of terror' remarks
​

• David Cameron makes strongest criticism of Pakistan yet
• Islamabad accuses PM of damaging prospects for peace
guardian.co.uk
Wednesday 28 July 2010 18.07 BST

David Cameron today sparked a furious diplomatic row with Islamabad after accusing elements of the Pakistani state of promoting the export of terrorism.

In the strongest British criticism of Pakistan so far, the prime minister warned Islamabad it could no longer "look both ways" by tolerating terrorism while demanding respect as a democracy.

But in an angry response, Pakistan's high commissioner to Britain accused Cameron of damaging the prospects for regional peace, and criticised him for believing allegations in the Wikileaks documents published in the Guardian earlier this week.

The leaked documents claim that the ISI, Pakistan's intelligence agency, is still encouraging the Taliban.

Wajid Shamsul Hasan, Pakistan's high commissioner, writes on the Guardian Comment is free site: "One would have wished that the prime minister would have considered Pakistan's enormous role in the war on terror and the sacrifices it has rendered since 9/11.

"There seems to be more reliance on information based on intelligence leaks which lack credibility of proof. A bilateral visit aimed at earning business could have been done without damaging the prospects of regional peace."

The prime minister initiated the row this morning in a speech to Indian business leaders in Bangalore, when he spoke of his horror at the 2008 terrorist attacks in Mumbai. Delhi directly blamed the Pakistani authorities for the attacks.

Cameron came close to endorsing Delhi's view when he said: "We cannot tolerate in any sense the idea that this country is allowed to look both ways and is able to promote the export of terror, whether to India or Afghanistan or anywhere else in the world.

"That is why this relationship is important. But it should be a relationship based on a very clear message: that it is not right to have any relationship with groups that are promoting terror. Democratic states that want to be part of the developed world cannot do that. The message to Pakistan from the US and from the UK is very clear on that point."

Pakistan took the rare step of issuing a rebuttal. Abdul Basit, a spokesman for the Pakistani foreign ministry, told Radio 4's World at One: "There is no question of Pakistan looking the other way. I think the prime minister was referring to these reports, which are unverifiable and outdated. If we start drawing inferences from these self-serving reports, then obviously we are distracting ourselves."

Pakistani senator Khurshid Ahmad, vice-president of the Islamist Jamaat-e-Islami party, said: "I am deeply concerned. The basis on which this statement has been made is very fragile. The documents released are unreliable: 90% of them have been attributed to Afghan intelligence agencies, whose reports are totally unreliable and fabricated. On the basis of such a report, it is not acceptable to make the statement that has been made."

Britain has spoken in the past of the terror threat from Pakistan, though ministers have restricted themselves to criticising Pakistan for tolerating terror groups. But the prime minister's language came close to endorsing the Indian view that authorities in Pakistan have a hand in the terror.

Cameron named several terror groups which are, according to India, sponsored by Pakistan. "We – like you – are determined that groups like the Taliban, the Haqqani network or Lakshar e Taiba should not be allowed to launch attacks on Indian and British citizens in India or in Britain."

Downing Street insisted that the prime minister was not accusing the Pakistan government of sponsoring terrorism. But a few minutes after his speech, Cameron made clear that official agencies in Pakistan were some way culpable.

Asked on the Today programme whether Pakistan exports terrorism, Cameron said: "I choose my words very carefully. It is unacceptable for anything to happen within Pakistan that is about supporting terrorism elsewhere. It is well-documented that that has been the case in the past, and we have to make sure that the Pakistan authorities are not looking two ways. They must only look one way, and that is to a democratic and stable Pakistan."

Cameron confirmed in his speech that he had discussed the terror threat from Pakistan with Barack Obama and officials at the Pentagon last week. The PM's remarks indicate that he and Obama discussed one of the key issues at the heart of the leaked intelligence documents days before their publication in Monday's Guardian.

The prime minister's words on Pakistan overshadowed the first day ofa visit to India designed to herald a new special relationship. Downing Street says the trip is meant to show that Britain can treat India as a normal trading partner, with the security issues surrounding Delhi's troubled relations with Pakistan dealt with on a separate tack.

But the main business announcement – a relaxation of licence rules to allow the export of civil nuclear technology and expertise to India – had the potential to upset its nuclear neighbour. Pakistan and India have both refused to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, prompting the last government to refuse to offer co-operation to India on civil nuclear power. British ministers had feared there would be leakage to its military nuclear programme.

The US sanctioned the use of civil nuclear technology to India in 2008. Britain believes yesterday's agreement is compatible with the NPT, which bans the sale of nuclear technology to nuclear powers that have not signed it. The Nuclear Suppliers' Group, of which Britain and the US are members, granted India a waiver that allows the transfer of technology.

Vince Cable, the business secretary who has championed the change, said: "There are obvious security sensitivities. We are conscious of those, as are the Indians. But within those constraints we really want to push ahead with civil nuclear co-operation. That would be quite a big sector within which we could really make progress."

what was the use of this, when cameron was just trying to impress Indians..and why does Pakistan govt didnt think that this was said in India, so nothing not a big deal.

 

[DesiGuy]

let's just hope that he wouldn't change statement when visiting India.

 

[ramu]

Channel 4 on British television made a documentary that clearly highlighted the role of Pakistani handlers and Pakistani terrorists through the findings of an independent investigation team. The series unnerved a lot of people in the UK and contributed to the current public opinion about Pakistan here. No point thinking that the statement is based on Wikileaks. The assumption that Cameron's statements are based on wikileaks is first and foremost the biggest a$$-u-mption made by the author. Cameron is the head of a state that has over the years diminished in international politics but still holds a place of its own and has a strong stake in Afghanistan as well as in Europe. The comments from Cameroon are on his vist as Prime minister and a person in his position will choose his words well.

Pakistan, time for a pinch of introspection.

 

[r3alist]

you can go ahead and throw the dirt.....does it change anything on the ground? No it doesn't. Will it suddenly change our stance on Kashmir? No it won't. Will it make us fight the war in a way that would be counter-productive or against our interests? No, it won't.

i disagree

having the public support/indifference to damaging and false claims against pakistan is key.

if the us/nato do want to change some of the things you listed above its a whole lot easier when public opinion is swayed in their favour, essentially the ground work has been done, a whole lot more can be done with public support/indifference

you now have to cross your fingers that the US are not intent on changing any of the ground realities you mentioned.

 

[chakra]

.

Furthermore, there DOESNT exist any evidence that Pakistan as a STATE ''exports'' terrorism anywhere. We are at the receiving end of most terrorism going on in the world lately, only indians and other such blind naturally moronic people would not be cognizant to this reality.


such statements have been going on for years! they are all baseless, and we can dismiss them and toss them in the rusty round dustbin where they belong


p.s. glad to see that after years of fake baseless self-perceived ''glory'' for those maharajas on makeshift wooden horse carts, you still idolize the Britishers

The best evidence for you is to look at the negative opinion of pakistan in world's media. Its easier to blame indians for your current sorry state but that won't help you. The indians might have a problem with you but the entire world doesn't.
Its really shocking to see why you keep on ignoring all these evidences.
Its has become a fashion in pakistan to ridicule everybody who says against them. Be it a think tank or a journalist or anybody else as a matter of fact and ignoring what the world is saying.
Its high time to introspect.
I don't know what to call those persons who are miles away from the reality.
If this is the state of learned people in pakistan, god knows what is the state the general masses.