India basks in a nuclear afterglow

[A.Rahman]

But i will try to be more sensitive from now on. Who knows maybe 90 percent of the people on PFF are bhindians.

hi my name's A.rahman, but you can call me suckdeep ...

russell peters is the man

 

[A.Rahman]

Thanks neo, i am now begining to realize the power of these Bhindians lurking about on this forum..idenifiable only when they blink or show their teeth. I was just responding to a really offensive statement form a member names Zeeshan.s who was defending his pimp Prashant. But i will try to be more sensitive from now on. Who knows maybe 90 percent of the people on PFF are bhindians.

They havent done anything wrong (as far as i know).So It gives us no reason to ban them, we cant ban them because they are Hindu or they are of Indian origin. It will be discrimination and racist, remeber even our religions tells us to be fair and just.

O ye who believe! stand out firmly for Allah, as witnesses to fair dealing, and let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. Be just, for this is closest to Piety: and fear Allah. For Allah is well-acquainted with all that ye do. ) (Al-Ma’idah: 8)



As long as they follow the rules they are OK ( This is for all the members)

 

[Bull]

I was just responding to a really offensive statement form a member names Zeeshan.s who was defending his pimp Prashant.

If u have been offended report the bad post to the moderator.
or else mind your language.

 

[A.Rahman]

SATAN if you find some post that hurt your feelings please report it, I will look into it. ( THis goes for all of the members)

 

[Spring Onion]

Besides Bagliar dam is a run-of-the-river type and has no effect on the flow of the river. That dam is to help generate electricity that will earn the state of J&K valuable revenue. [/FONT][/SIZE]

i think i had to reserve my comments on Baghliar dam as if you analyse the water treaties and the proceerings on the issue you will know who is at losing end
So lets get back to the real topic.

 

[RAPTOR]

‘N-package essential for Pakistan’


By Ahmed Hassan
ISLAMABAD, April 7: Foreign Minister Khurshid Mahmood Kasuri said on Friday that Pakistan was endeavouring to convince the United States to enter into a package deal on civil nuclear energy as it had done with India so that a balance of power could be maintained in the region.

Informally talking to a group of newsmen at the parliament house lobby about his talks with US Assistant Secretary of State Richard Boucher, the foreign minister claimed Pakistan had removed most of the misgivings that recently came into being between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

He said apart from engagement with the US, Pakistan was also asserting its own options by using diplomatic channels to approach the Nuclear Suppliers Group of 44 countries.

Mr Kasuri said if Pakistan was seeking a nuclear package deal from the US it did not amount to begging but it was being done in the interest of peace and stability.

About his recent meeting with US Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia Richard Boucher, he said: “I have told Mr Boucher that Pakistan would like to enter into a package deal with the US in order to save the region from any disaster.”

As far as Pakistan’s energy needs were concerned, he said Pakistan was cognizant of them and was taking all initiatives, including contacting the nuclear supplier ground (NSG).

He, however, parried questions regarding Mr Boucher’s statement on the democratic future of Pakistan. Mr Boucher had expressed American support for a civilian democracy instead of continuity of a military-run regime.

When asked whether the US official’s statement was tantamount to interfering in the internal affairs of the country, he said: “We do not have to comment on his (Boucher’s) comments about democracy”.

He said both President Pervez Musharraf and Afghan President Hamid Karzai remain in telephonic contact on various issues and were able to defuse tension following some serious misunderstandings created by Mr Karzai’s statements in the press.

He advised the Karzai administration to take up all conflicting issues at the forum of three countries’ commission instead of going to the press.

Responding to a query regarding APHC leader Mir Waiz Umar Farooq’s proposal of including China in the process of dialogue on Kashmir with India, he said both Pakistan and India were engaged in bilateral negotiations for the settlement of the outstanding issue.

He said though Pakistan seeks a diplomatic role by the US and the international community but it has never demanded from any country to mediate between the two countries.

About the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline, he said that despite American opposition Pakistan would like to consider meeting its growing energy needs.

 

[Bull]

‘Foreign Minister Khurshid Mahmood Kasuri said on Friday that Pakistan was endeavouring to convince the United States to enter into a package deal on civil nuclear energy as it had done with India so that a balance of power could be maintained in the region.

How does the N deal btw India and US affect the balance of power in the region???

 

[RAPTOR]

Dang, miss india puts one leg down and gets nasty.


India won't define minimum N-deterrent: Saran

April 08, 2006 17:46 IST

India Saturday rejected the US suggestion that it define its credible minimum nuclear deterrent, asserting that it has "no responsibility" to "declare" it.
In an interview to NDTV a day after US Assistant Secretary of State Richard Boucher made the suggestion, Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran said "what our credible minimum deterrent would be is really for India to decide".

• He said India had on various occasions pointed out this to the US.

"Certainly there is no responsibility on part of India to declare what its minimum deterrent is," Saran said.

• US asks India to define minimum deterrent​

Boucher Friday had said India should "further define" its 'minimum credible deterrent' in the nuclear field, contending that it was "absolutely necessary" for decreasing tensions in Asia.
Saran, who met Boucher Friday, said the US official had not raised this issue with him.
"We have a strategic dialogue with the US where we have agreed to exchange views on our respective nuclear doctrines as well as issues like missile defence," he said.
On the Bush administration's contention that it was pushing India and Pakistan for moratorium on missile tests, he said New Delhi's position was that it would work with Washington in the conference on disarmament in Geneva on a multilateral Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty.
This has been under discussion in Geneva for several years and India has been an active participant in these negotiations, Saran said adding, "We are prepared to take part in those negotiations."
He, however, made it clear that the FMCT that India is talking about is a multilateral instrument.

 

[RAPTOR]

Revisions to N-deal unacceptable: Saran

April 08, 2006 16:44 IST

Maintaining that the Indo-US deal was delicately balanced, Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran has made it clear that substantial changes or revisions to it were unacceptable to India.
Saran said he hoped the new US legislation to implement it will be framed within already agreed parameters.
'We have preserved all our basic positions,' Saran said, debunking apprehensions of the deal damaging the credibility of India's nuclear deterrent.

• Coverage: The Indo-US nuclear tango​

'I see no reason why there should be anxieties that we are always vulnerable to pressure,' he said in an interview to Karan Thapar on CNN-IBN to be telecast on Sunday.
'No, absolutely not. 100 per cent no,' he shot back on whether India's defence security has been sacrificed in finalising the agreement on civilian nuclear energy cooperation.
Saran, who recently returned after talks with the Bush Administration on implementation of the agreement, said, 'It is very important to remember that whatever we have agreed upon is the result of very, very difficult, very tough negotiations.

• Also See: The Bush Visit​

'What we have at this point of time is an extremely carefully, delicately balanced understanding. Whatever legislation that is passed must remain within those parameters.'
Saran, who met several American lawmakers in Washington, said he expressed the 'strong hope' that 'revisions will not be made' and there will be 'no substantial changes'.
Contending that India has done 'rather well' in the negotiations, Saran said, 'We have preserved all our basic positions. We have preserved our basic interests.'
'Why are we always so worried about the screws being tightened on us... as if someone can come and turn the screws on us and we will just lie back and be screwed,' he said.
On concerns voiced by former prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee who demanded that India should try to get an all-time waiver from Washington as was the case with China, Saran said there was a 'factual problem' in this contention.
He said while China is a nuclear weapon state under the NPT, India wasn't.
Asked how India would respond if China and Pakistan carried out nuclear tests, Saran said under the agreement, India's decision on a moratorium on further testing remains but there was no mention of any 'permanent ban'.
He said India had taken a very conscious decision of undertaking nuclear tests in 1998 on the ground that it was important to take the step despite knowing what would happen.
'In the future, it will be exactly the same.'
Denying that he had received a 'chilly reception' from Congressmen and Senators during his Washington trip, Saran said all of them agreed that the nuclear deal was an important element of the emerging Indo-US relations. The American lawmakers said they were questions that needed to be answered.

 

[RAPTOR]

And now the game begins. The dangerous nuclear deal with rouge state india will not conclude.



Pakistani doctors advocate Pakistan’s cause on Hill
By Khalid Hasan

WASHINGTON: Pakistani-American doctors spent a day on Capitol Hill lobbying congressmen and senators to support Pakistan’s cause and strengthen Washington’s relations with Islamabad.

Several lawmakers came to address the doctors, who had assembled from all over the country, at a luncheon reception organised by the Association of Pakistani Physicians of North America. Sen Tom Harkin of Iowa, a staunch friend of Pakistan, spoke of his long association with the Pakistani-American community. The audience was reminded by Dr Murtaza Arain from Chicago, who introduced the senator, the senator had called the Indian nuclear explosion in 1998 a “provocation” and Pakistan’s response “self-defence”.

Harkin has always been proud of the fact that the first mosque in America was built in his home state of Iowa. He said that Pakistan has always been a friend to the US and, whenever needed, has always stepped forward to help. He called Pakistan “our No 1 ally in the fight against terrorism”. He praised Pakistani doctors for their great service to society. He said that were it not for Pakistani doctors “willing to work at small community health centres”, there would be no proper healthcare in many parts of Iowa.

The senator said that he does not like the language being used these days by some in America about immigrants, “which is ironic because America is a land of immigrants. It is a mosaic.” He said that his own mother came to America as a young immigrant from Europe with nothing more than seven dollars and a one-way ticket to Des Moines, Iowa. He deplored the fact that Pakistani doctors were facing visa and immigration difficulties and promised to promote their legitimate interests and cause. He called on the administration not to shut down J1, HI and 2451 visas for doctors. “You have no better friend in the Senate than Tom Harkin,” he declared amid ovation.

Congressman Edward Markey from Massachusetts, who is strongly opposed to the US-India nuclear cooperation agreement now before Congress, said the US has no grounds to have India play by a separate set of rules from others. He said he would fight this deal “until the very end” and do what he can to block its passage. He called the Bush policy towards India “wrong-headed”.

Congressman Chris Van Hollen, democrat from Maryland, said that he was born in the city of Karachi in Pakistan and thus had a special affinity with the country. He spoke against the discriminatory treatment to which some Muslims had been subjected since the 9/11 attacks and criticised such “targeting” as “unconstitutional and violative of the American spirit and way of life”. He denounced the “arrogance and indifference” displayed by the Bush administration on so many issues, He said that “if you single out and weaken a certain community, you are actually weakening this country and this society”.

Congressman Bobby Rush, democrat from Illinois, a well-known activist for black rights in the late 1960s, spoke against discrimination, stressing that when he spoke on that subjects, he knew what he was talking about as it was based on his own experience. He assured the Pakistani community that it would always have a friend in him, who would stand up for its legitimate rights. Congresswoman Sheila Jackson-Lee, vice-chairperson of the Pakistan Caucus in Congress, denounced the difficulties Muslim charities had faced since 9/11.

It seemed that all of them had become suspect, she said. She called such assumptions on the part of the law enforcement agencies a “shame” and urged them not to discriminate against Muslim charities simply because they were Muslim. She spoke in strong terms against anti-immigration forces, stressing that America was great because of the people from different parts of the world, professing different faiths, who had come together to build it into what it was today.

Bruce Robertson, chairman of the South Asia diplomatic programme at the State Department, also addressed the doctors

 

[RAPTOR]

India says failed nuclear deal to “impact” US ties
(Reuters)

8 April 2006



NEW DELHI - A decision by the US Congress to block a landmark nuclear deal between the two countries would hit warming India-US relations, India’s foreign secretary said on Saturday.
“Given the kind of expectations which have been built up, if this deal does not for any reason go through, there will be some disappointed expectations,” Indian Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran told NDTV news New Delhi.
“There will be a sense of lowered expectations which will have an impact on India-US relations.”
President George W. Bush’s agreed a civil nuclear cooperation deal with India during a visit to the country last month. It needs approval by the US Congress to be enacted.
Under the deal, energy-hungry India will receive US nuclear technology -- including reactors and nuclear fuel-- and in return separate its military and civilian facilities, and open up some of its atomic plants to international inspections.
This week, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice urged Congress to approve the deal, saying it would reduce India’s dependence on Iranian oil and create thousands of American jobs.
Faced with tough questioning from US lawmakers, Rice admitted that, under the deal, India would be free to build up its nuclear arsenal. But she told lawmakers it would not cause a nuclear arms race between India and its rival Pakistan.
New Delhi has made it clear that the pact would not limit its nuclear weapons programme.
“What our credible minimum deterrent would be is really for India to decide,” Saran said to NDTV.
In response to a statement from US Assistant Secretary of State Richard Boucher asking for “minimum credible deterrent” to be further explained, the Foreign Ministry issued a statement saying it “requires no further elucidation”.
”It reflects our response to a dynamic and changing security environment,” the statement said.
​