Candid Zardari accepts J&K militants are terrorists

[Black Stone]

Islamic militants fighting Indian rule in Kashmir were “terrorists”.

“India has never been a threat to Pakistan”

“There is no other economic survival for nations like us. We have to trade with our neighbours first.”

Shocking...

 

[third eye]

Who cares what 10% has to say he has no mandate, shimla arrgement cannot be canceled just like that.

This is the prob while dealing with Pak , one can never tell who has the last word :

- Bhutto signed the shimla accord, not agreed to by Mush.
- NS signed the Lahore decl, while Kargil was happening alongside.
- Mush did a Kargil & then when his *** was kicked by uncle sam, he sold his pals, did a U turn & suddenly became a dove..even giving suggestions " out of the box" to solve intangible probs.
- The PM makes announcements on the ISI, retracts when he is reminded that he is the PM only on paper & needs permission to take decisions.
- Zardari announces something but then " who cares for Mr 10 %"...a president elected thru the law of the land has no mandate.then who has ?


So.. whom do u deal with or trust ? Where is he bottom line to build on ?

 

[Spring Onion]

The rally was already planned it was not due to Zardari's statement.

But the intresting thing to note is the flow of anti-Pakistan statments from different quarters including Zardari.

If you have noticesd all the statements from NATO/ US commanders/Karzai/ Pentagon/ India and Zardari are all in harmoney.

When one makes a statment the other follows and the spiral goes on.

These statments are basicaly aimed at paving grounds for more harmful things that are going to be imposed on Pakistan sooner or later but before that as has been the tactic, they go for smoothening the grounds leading to preparing public for their planned in future line of action.

So beware at times their anti-Pakistan statments are aimed at confusing the Pakistani public and divert the attention from certain things.

 

[IceCold]

This is the prob while dealing with Pak , one can never tell who has the last word :

- Bhutto signed the shimla accord, not agreed to by Mush.
- NS signed the Lahore decl, while Kargil was happening alongside.
- Mush did a Kargil & then when his *** was kicked by uncle sam, he sold his pals, did a U turn & suddenly became a dove..even giving suggestions " out of the box" to solve intangible probs.
- The PM makes announcements on the ISI, retracts when he is reminded that he is the PM only on paper & needs permission to take decisions.
- Zardari announces something but then " who cares for Mr 10 %"...a president elected thru the law of the land has no mandate.then who has ?


So.. whom do u deal with or trust ? Where is he bottom line to build on ?

Dont try to take a meaning of your own out of my post. My post was only related to Zardari's comment on freedomfighters and frankly he is no body one should be bothered about when given such statements, the way he became the president, well that is too debatable. At the same time he enjoys no majority or mandate and his views does not represnt the views of the general public. He has virtually committed a political suecide by making a comment such as the above and in a way actually has done good for Pakistan, because that may help awake the sleeping Nation. Already the criticism has started and it will only take a peak with days to come.

 

[Kumar]

Zardari buckles, Pak says J-K struggle no terrorism


Islamabad: Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari on Monday backtracked on his remarks describing militants in Jammu and Kashmir as "terrorists" saying there is no change in Pakistan's Kashmir policy, a day after his comments triggered an outcry in his country.

The Pakistan government clarified Zardari's stand in an official statement asserting that the President has never called the legitimate struggle of Kashmiris "an expression of terrorism".

Former premier Nawaz Sharif's PML-N was among other parties which had slammed the President for his remarks in an interview to Wall Street Journal which was welcomed by India as a good step.

In the statement, Information Minister Sherry Rehman said Pakistan was committed to the Kashmiri people's right for self-determination.

The President, she said, had "made it very clear that the just cause of Kashmir and its struggle for self-determination has been a consistent central position of the (ruling) Pakistan People's Party for the last 40 years".


"There has been no change in this policy," Rehman said.

"The President has never called the legitimate struggle of Kashmiris an expression of terrorism, nor has he downplayed the sufferings of the Kashmiris. All his statements on India should be viewed in the context of Pakistan's current bilateral relations with that country," she added.

"The government is firmly committed to extending moral and diplomatic support to the just cause of Kashmiris for their right of self-determination," Rehman said.

PML-N, which is the main opposition, on Sunday took strong exception to Zardari's description of militant groups operating in Jammu and Kashmir as terrorists and said it would raise the issue in Parliament.

Zardari's statement was also criticised by hardline religious groups.

In the same interview, Zardari also said that "India has never been a threat to Pakistan".

Rehman described the ongoing Pakistan-India composite peace dialogue and several confidence-building measures as examples of the "warming bilateral relations".

"However, our efforts for peace with India will not be traded off with our principled stand on Kashmir," she said.

 

[IceCold]

I think the leadership at the time made a mistake to take it to the UN. The resolutions were passed at a certain time for certain conditions.

Time has changed, conditions have changed. There have been wars over Kashmir. There has been a decades long terror campaign.

The point is you did not keep yourself to just the UN resolutions to get Kashmir. You tried every trick in the book while talking of UN resolutions.

But as they say: daal nahi gali!

So now fall back to the UN. The simple point is you can't get on the table what you didn't in the war.

The best way is to start thinking of the welfare of the Kashmiris. The first step would be to forsake violence on the part of the insurgents.

So your are calling your leaders what? Stupid.
They did not made a mistake, infact they knew that the territory was disputed and needs a solution and hence took it to the UN.

Also the struggle that initiated in the valley was home grown give credit to the Indian army for that which crossed all limits of human rights violations inside Kashmir and even to this date is. We only supported such movement and it was all natrual for us to do so because India was not willing to sit on the table to negotiate and settle the dispute. So what other option was there left if not military struggle?

Also as for dall na galna, dude if this policy would have been consistent, defiantely, dall na gall jana tha, it was the leadership faliure that kept it from achieving its goals.

 

[IceCold]

Zardari buckles, Pak says J-K struggle no terrorism


Islamabad: Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari on Monday backtracked on his remarks describing militants in Jammu and Kashmir as "terrorists" saying there is no change in Pakistan's Kashmir policy, a day after his comments triggered an outcry in his country.

The Pakistan government clarified Zardari's stand in an official statement asserting that the President has never called the legitimate struggle of Kashmiris "an expression of terrorism".

Former premier Nawaz Sharif's PML-N was among other parties which had slammed the President for his remarks in an interview to Wall Street Journal which was welcomed by India as a good step.

In the statement, Information Minister Sherry Rehman said Pakistan was committed to the Kashmiri people's right for self-determination.

The President, she said, had "made it very clear that the just cause of Kashmir and its struggle for self-determination has been a consistent central position of the (ruling) Pakistan People's Party for the last 40 years".


"There has been no change in this policy," Rehman said.

"The President has never called the legitimate struggle of Kashmiris an expression of terrorism, nor has he downplayed the sufferings of the Kashmiris. All his statements on India should be viewed in the context of Pakistan's current bilateral relations with that country," she added.

"The government is firmly committed to extending moral and diplomatic support to the just cause of Kashmiris for their right of self-determination," Rehman said.

PML-N, which is the main opposition, on Sunday took strong exception to Zardari's description of militant groups operating in Jammu and Kashmir as terrorists and said it would raise the issue in Parliament.

Zardari's statement was also criticised by hardline religious groups.

In the same interview, Zardari also said that "India has never been a threat to Pakistan".

Rehman described the ongoing Pakistan-India composite peace dialogue and several confidence-building measures as examples of the "warming bilateral relations".

"However, our efforts for peace with India will not be traded off with our principled stand on Kashmir," she said.

This was expected. But anyways whats said cannot be undone and has actually created more anti sentiments against him. Good for Pakistan.

 

[third eye]

Dont try to take a meaning of your own out of my post. My post was only related to Zardari's comment on freedomfighters and frankly he is no body one should be bothered about when given such statements, the way he became the president, well that is too debatable. At the same time he enjoys no majority or mandate and his views does not represnt the views of the general public. He has virtually committed a political suecide by making a comment such as the above and in a way actually has done good for Pakistan, because that may help awake the sleeping Nation. Already the criticism has started and it will only take a peak with days to come.

Thats just the point I am making.. Bush's election too was contentious, once he took the oath, his word was accepted. Some counter views are natural in a democracy but outrightly dismissing an elected President ...again whom do u deal with ?

The man in the chair or the men behind the chair ?( to be or not to be !!..)

It takes a dope ( as most would like to think here ) to waken a sleeping nation !!

If after going thru the whirlpool that is is in, the nation is / was still ' sleeping' then . well.. Good Night & sweet dreams too!!

 

[Spring Onion]

Kashmir is integral part of India by way of instrument of accession. Its the part which not under control is disputed.

Right of plebiscite is outdated as mentioned earlier.

Take any position or Kargils the situation on the ground will never changes.

There was no instrument of accession at all.

The dogars sold the Kashmiri people what a joke. People can sell land which is legaly there but look Kashmir neither belonged to that idiot dogra nor the people howcome that idiot had the right to sell the land as well as its people.


Kashmir is an independent land which has been occupied by India and Indian brutal army is killing innocent women.childern and men there.

Get out of Kashmir murderers thats what Kashmiris want.

 

[IceCold]

Thats just the point I am making.. Bush's election too was contentious, once he took the oath, his word was accepted. Some counter views are natural in a democracy but outrightly dismissing an elected President ...again whom do u deal with ?

The man in the chair or the men behind the chair ?( to be or not to be !!..)

It takes a dope ( as most would like to think here ) to waken a sleeping nation !!

If after going thru the whirlpool that is is in, the nation is / was still ' sleeping' then . well.. Good Night & sweet dreams too!!

Keep on having an opinion which is usualy high on anti pakistan sentiments and less on commonsense.
Bush's elections were contentious, wow news for me. But anyways Bush was an election candidate, Zaradri on the other hand was not, infact he wasnt sure if he be a pm or perhaps a president. Besides you cant compare US system of democracy with that of Pakistan. In Pakistan PM has the powers, where as in the US the president does.
ZArdari as the president should be a nominal head with real powers with the PM, but since he is trying to take an undue advantage of the situation and as PM is just a stooge, he is therefore violating his authority. But as the govenment is a collation, he wont be able to do that for longer.
The whirl pool that we are going through has nothing to do with the political decision that the nation made thinking he would give them roti kapra, and certainly sleeping in that sense, since majority was unable to figure out the true man behind him. But dont worry that too is changing now.

 

[Spring Onion]

Zardari buckles, Pak says J-K struggle no terrorism


Islamabad: Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari on Monday backtracked on his remarks describing militants in Jammu and Kashmir as "terrorists" saying there is no change in Pakistan's Kashmir policy, a day after his comments triggered an outcry in his country.

The Pakistan government clarified Zardari's stand in an official statement asserting that the President has never called the legitimate struggle of Kashmiris "an expression of terrorism".

Former premier Nawaz Sharif's PML-N was among other parties which had slammed the President for his remarks in an interview to Wall Street Journal which was welcomed by India as a good step.

In the statement, Information Minister Sherry Rehman said Pakistan was committed to the Kashmiri people's right for self-determination.

The President, she said, had "made it very clear that the just cause of Kashmir and its struggle for self-determination has been a consistent central position of the (ruling) Pakistan People's Party for the last 40 years".


"There has been no change in this policy," Rehman said.

"The President has never called the legitimate struggle of Kashmiris an expression of terrorism, nor has he downplayed the sufferings of the Kashmiris. All his statements on India should be viewed in the context of Pakistan's current bilateral relations with that country," she added.

"The government is firmly committed to extending moral and diplomatic support to the just cause of Kashmiris for their right of self-determination," Rehman said.

PML-N, which is the main opposition, on Sunday took strong exception to Zardari's description of militant groups operating in Jammu and Kashmir as terrorists and said it would raise the issue in Parliament.

Zardari's statement was also criticised by hardline religious groups.

In the same interview, Zardari also said that "India has never been a threat to Pakistan".

Rehman described the ongoing Pakistan-India composite peace dialogue and several confidence-building measures as examples of the "warming bilateral relations".

"However, our efforts for peace with India will not be traded off with our principled stand on Kashmir," she said.

So once again your Indian media was showing the centuries old mentality by blowing things out of proportion.



But then keep on feeling happy over such statments while the ground reality is still the same.

 

[Vinod2070]

So your are calling your leaders what? Stupid.
They did not made a mistake, infact they knew that the territory was disputed and needs a solution and hence took it to the UN.

Also the struggle that initiated in the valley was home grown give credit to the Indian army for that which crossed all limits of human rights violations inside Kashmir and even to this date is. We only supported such movement and it was all natrual for us to do so because India was not willing to sit on the table to negotiate and settle the dispute. So what other option was there left if not military struggle?

Also as for dall na galna, dude if this policy would have been consistent, defiantely, dall na gall jana tha, it was the leadership faliure that kept it from achieving its goals.

You just called your leadership stupid.

Anyway, Indian leadership was not stupid, perhaps a bit too pacifist.

But as you are agreeing you had no trust in the UN to deliver. You tried other means, failed and here we are.

 

[IceCold]

You just called your leadership stupid.

Anyway, Indian leadership was not stupid, perhaps a bit too pacifist.

But as you are agreeing you had no trust in the UN to deliver. You tried other means, failed and here we are.

So the pot calling the kettle black here it seems.
Also its not about having trust, its about the resolutions that we are talking about and resolutions that were a result of India crying out loud and not Pakistan.
Perhaps then you felt it was the right thing to do going for the moral high horse and taking the issue to UN showing Pakistan was the aggressor, now since it does not serve the required purpose India anticipated, India wants to get off it. Not surprising though.

 

[Vinod2070]

So the pot calling the kettle black here it seems.
Also its not about having trust, its about the resolutions that we are talking about and resolutions that were a result of India crying out loud and not Pakistan.
Perhaps then you felt it was the right thing to do going for the moral high horse and taking the issue to UN showing Pakistan was the aggressor, now since it does not serve the required purpose India anticipated, India wants to get off it. Not surprising though.

I am not sure, I understand you.

You agree that the UN resolutions are irrelevant. We think they are irrelevant.

To kis baat ka jhagadaa hai bhai.

 

[Pk_Thunder]

I am not sure, I understand you.

You agree that the UN resolutions are irrelevant. We think they are irrelevant.

To kis baat ka jhagadaa hai bhai.

try read it once again,u will understand it...and come up with good reply