It’s time to be patriotic citizens

[roadrunner]

LOL!! Bharat Rhashak monitor. Now we know where you get your opinions on Pakistan from!!

GIVE ME CREDIBLE LINKS. I will check more of those stories later, but if this is the standard of them, I wouldnt take them seriously

Bin Laden’s personal pilot reported to be former PAF officer.
BHARAT RAKSHAK MONITOR - Volume 6(3) November December 2003

In fact most of the examples that you've quoted in there look to be of Arabs that grew up somewhere in the Middle East, then some went to Pakistan for one or two years. These are not Pakistanis, their indoctrintion comes from the Middle East where they grew up. It's a foreign element.

One could easily make the same arguments for the Indian suicide bombers in Glasgow, or the case of state sponsored terrorism/genocide in Kashmir, or indeed that of Georg Fernandez supplying the Tamil Tiger terrorists with arms to kill and maim. One could go on about Assam, or the 100+ uprisings in India. On could make a similar list of course of Indians like Hekmat Lakhani, arms supplier to Al Qaeda, or Dhiren Barot. The list is pretty endless, especially if you take places like Balochistan into account as acts of terrorism.

Give me a link from a credible source that says "world opinion is that Pakistani madrassas are the source of world terrorism". Not your opinion based on some example that BHARAT RHAKSHA gives!! One credible link from any government in the world, even the UN will be acceptable,saying that Pakistani madrassas are a source of world terrorism. If you cannot then I'll take it your statement was wrong.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

The facts are there.

The ones in bracket are the source and date.

It is because you do not read, you are ignorant to even understand that or be abreast with world events!

Anyone who has been following world news would have understood and even recongised that the facts are true and in case of doubt could check the original source which is also written.

But if one is an ostrich, one would not even recognise the facts and answer with sillt LOLs.

And don't try to even act clever.

Please understand you are making a fool of yourself!

I will no longer engage on this issue since I will not rise to your bait!

 

[roadrunner]

I told you that it was the mild ones including the second one -

When it comes to fomenting and supporting terrorism, Pakistan is still the main threat to the world

Why are you forcing me into something that I feel is not worth the trouble except mentioning in generalisation since the links and facts are unpalatable.

Do you have reading difficulty? I asked for a credible link to a quote from a GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION (or one of repute like the UN for example), that says Pakistani madrassahs are the source of world terrorism, as per your quote. It's not difficult to understand. I don't want your opinion, the opinion of "Farhana Ali" whoever she is, the opinion of some obscure person off French Lycos, or the opinions off Bharat Rhaksha. These are IRRELEVANT.

Give me one credible link to a quote from a GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION (or one of repute like the UN for example), that says Pakistani madrassahs are the source of world terrorism. Is this too much to ask, or simply you cannot do it, because noone has said so. In which case your OPINION is as good as that of a Pakistani or a Sri Lankan who considers India to be the epicentre of terrorism.

You may notice I mentioned asking for a link twice. This is to ensure you don't keep running away and coming back with irrelevant quotes from "Farhana Ali" or some dude off the street's personal website that says Pakistan is the source of world terrorism. I'm looking for something CREDIBLE. Read it again, let it sink in.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Pakistan Stays a Terrorism Source

By Jay Solomon
Word Count: 1,132

Five years after the U.S. began counterterrorism operations inside Pakistan, the country remains a principal center for terrorist training globally, say intelligence and counterterrorism officials in the U.S., Central Asia and Middle East.

Over the past year alone, the U.S., Lebanon, Afghanistan and the United Kingdom have arrested suspected militants who either had trained in Pakistan, or were preparing to do so -- most recently in what British authorities said was a London-based plot they interrupted that would have attacked U.S.-bound airliners.

British officials have categorized 24 suspects they arrested Thursday as "homegrown" terrorists radicalized while living inside the U.K. ...
Free Preview - WSJ.com

 

[IceCold]

I personally dont want this thread to end up in another flame war but Mr. Salim i would wana point out something in the long list of terrorism that pakistan is being blamed off. You see the people you mentioned are mostly from arab countries, Saudiarabia in paticular and other middle east countries and therefore pakistan could not be held accountable for that. However certain elements if they did come to pakistan, the government of pakistan reacted accordingly and while you mention all the wrong doing, what your forget was that it was pakistan who made it possible in the capturing of the top al-queda personal. It was pakistan that stopped Uk bomb blast, it is because of pakistan that the allied forces are successful in afghanistan and yet they are unwilling to acknowlege the fact how much we are suffering. But like i have mentioned it before and i will like to put your attention at the same issue is, someone who was not even born in pakistan, lived all his life in another country, only his ancestors were of pakistan origin, how can you blame pakistan for the wrong doing of his. Instead the country that he grew up in is responsible for his behaviour not pakistan.
And please dont bring bharat rakshak quoting into the tread, it doesnt leave the post debatable. If you do a close analysis of this forum known as the bharat rakshak, the tread that starts with the heading terrorist islamic republic of pakistan, what else can you expect out of them. Have you ever seen a thread like this on this forum though its a pakistan based forum.
And no government in the world except of india has said that pakistan is directly involved in spreading terrorism, even india these days has also lowered its voice. As for the western media, its biased, and they are on some kind of agenda of theirs to prove that pakistan is on the verge of collaspe and its nuclear weapons may fall into the wrong hands, the fact is even US government doesnt bother with it.

 

[IceCold]

[BOver the past year alone, the U.S., Lebanon, Afghanistan and the United Kingdom have arrested suspected militants who either had trained in Pakistan, or were preparing to do so -- most recently in what British authorities said was a London-based plot they interrupted that would have attacked U.S.-bound airliners.

Wasnt this the plot that pakistan made possible to counter. Why is that only this part is not considered relevant to be included. Doesnt this show how bias the reports are?

British officials have categorized 24 suspects they arrested Thursday as "homegrown" terrorists radicalized while living inside the U.K. ...
Free Preview - WSJ.com

The homegrown terrorists are radicalized while living inside the U.K. Does that makes pakistan at fault or UK?

 

[roadrunner]

Pakistan Stays a Terrorism Source

By Jay Solomon
Word Count: 1,132

Five years after the U.S. began counterterrorism operations inside Pakistan, the country remains a principal center for terrorist training globally, say intelligence and counterterrorism officials in the U.S., Central Asia and Middle East.

Over the past year alone, the U.S., Lebanon, Afghanistan and the United Kingdom have arrested suspected militants who either had trained in Pakistan, or were preparing to do so -- most recently in what British authorities said was a London-based plot they interrupted that would have attacked U.S.-bound airliners.

British officials have categorized 24 suspects they arrested Thursday as "homegrown" terrorists radicalized while living inside the U.K. ...
Free Preview - WSJ.com

So who are these "intelligence and counterintelligence officials"? I've not seen another source saying the same thing. Let's assume it's true though, and there have been some intelligence agencies saying this. A "terrorist training source" is not the same as a source of terrorism. Apparently the charge levelled in this article is that FOREIGNERS (which I don't deny entirely are a problem in Pakistan, particularly from the Middle East and central asia), get their training in Pakistan and then commit terrorist acts. However, a far more important source of terrorism is the country in which these people were indoctrinated. The article even starts to mention this. For example, it mentions terrorists as "homegrown" and not Pakistani. So what does Pakistan have to do with being a source of terrorism in this case? Indoctrination is the source of terrorism. All these "terrorist" peoples appear to be from foreign countries, which is exactly what I've been saying in this thread.

The link does not give a government source, but it is one article that exists which does say intelligence officials claim Pakistan (not the people, or the Pakistani government, simply some places within the country) as a source of terrorist TRAINING, whatever that means. But if this is the same intelligence that thought there were WMD in Iraq, then this is hardly evidence.

 

[Karma]

RR, I know that I am wasting my time explaining you the facts. However, let me put some efforts before giving up.

"Source of terrorism" doesn't mean the terrorist are the citizens of that particular nation nor they are indoctrined there. It means the place where the logistics, training, funds etc. are arranged for those willing to commit the act of terrorism.

Why those all involved in those terrorism acts travel to Pakistan prior to the event or in near past, a coincident? Why most of these terrorists choose Pakistan as their launch pad? Releigion? No, more than that. If they need only religious sentiments, then they can choose any muslim country such that they can find some individuals having sympathy to their cause. But, they need funds, training, weapons and official support to move free without the fear of getting arrested and fake passports to travel abroad. They can get most of these in Pakistan. They can move freely without any restriction. They can display their weapons in public and become a hero of the muslim world. It is easy to get funds or organize events to collect donations in the name of jihad and the police will simply protect them. There are military instructors available to teach you how to use guns and bombs.

Then why the hell home grown terrorists of Britian visit Pakistan before they commit the act? Support! Support to their terrorism.

 

[roadrunner]

RR, I know that I am wasting my time explaining you the facts. However, let me put some efforts before giving up.

"Source of terrorism" doesn't mean the terrorist are the citizens of that particular nation nor they are indoctrined there. It means the place where the logistics, training, funds etc. are arranged for those willing to commit the act of terrorism.

Lay off the weed, it's not healthy to have it smoking out of your ears. "Source of terrorism" can mean many different things. Indoctrination of particular ideology is the main thing. If you remove the training, a terrorist will still be a terrorist. if you remove the indoctrination, a terrorist no longer exists. Therefore, "source of terrorism, if anything means indoctrination.

Why those all involved in those terrorism acts travel to Pakistan prior to the event or in near past, a coincident?

They don't all. Prove your assertion. Did the Indian terrorists at Glasgow travel to Pakistan? No, they travelled to India though. What does this prove? That India is a "source of terrorism" because the training of these terrorists was carried out there?

Why most of these terrorists choose Pakistan as their launch pad? Releigion? No, more than that. If they need only religious sentiments, then they can choose any muslim country such that they can find some individuals having sympathy to their cause. But, they need funds, training, weapons and official support to move free without the fear of getting arrested and fake passports to travel abroad. They can get most of these in Pakistan.

I would agree Pakistan is a soft spot because there are some autonomous regions of Pakistan where people can appear and disappear with ease. This is unfortunately the law in Pakistan. However, it does not mean that Pakistan provides any form of support for these people. They simply find it easy to slip through the net. A tightening of the borders is what is needed, and removal of autonomous areas. The indoctrination of these FOREIGNERS has occurred in other countries and this is the "source of the terrorism".

They can move freely without any restriction. They can display their weapons in public and become a hero of the muslim world. It is easy to get funds or organize events to collect donations in the name of jihad and the police will simply protect them. There are military instructors available to teach you how to use guns and bombs.

Which military instructors teach at madrassas? Don't talk nonsense you made while having your latest joint, please.

Then why the hell home grown terrorists of Britian visit Pakistan before they commit the act? Support! Support to their terrorism.

Why did the Indian terrorists of Britain visit India before they committed an act? Support! Support to the terrorism. DUH. You obviously have difficulty believing the possibility that the "Pakistani" homegrown terrorists, and the Indian terrorists were visiting friends and family in those countries.

 

[Karma]

They don't all. Prove your assertion. Did the Indian terrorists at Glasgow travel to Pakistan? No, they travelled to India though. What does this prove? That India is a "source of terrorism" because the training of these terrorists was carried out there?

Terrorists? There was only one Indian and an exception. Where did you get this idea of "terrorists"? He just visited his home and not for any training. No tranining to terrorists provided here. In case of Pakistan, it is different. They visit the training camps there.

I would agree Pakistan is a soft spot because there are some autonomous regions of Pakistan where people can appear and disappear with ease. This is unfortunately the law in Pakistan. However, it does not mean that Pakistan provides any form of support for these people. They simply find it easy to slip through the net. A tightening of the borders is what is needed, and removal of autonomous areas. The indoctrination of these FOREIGNERS has occurred in other countries and this is the "source of the terrorism".

Still you are responsible.

Which military instructors teach at madrassas? Don't talk nonsense you made while having your latest joint, please.

There were training camps and everybody know it. ISI & military (or retired) instructors provided training to them. There are madrasas provided weapons training.

 

[roadrunner]

Terrorists? There was only one Indian and an exception. Where did you get this idea of "terrorists"? He just visited his home and not for any training. No tranining to terrorists provided here. In case of Pakistan, it is different. They visit the training camps there.

Precisely my point Sherlock. The Indian terrorists visiting India does not mean there is a link between India and terrorism, just as any Pakistani terrorist (and I can't think of any abroad), visiting Pakistan does not mean there is a link between Pakistan and terrorism. You can't have it both ways. If you insist that Pakistanis visiting their homeland and then commiting a terror act is a sign of terrorist training, then you have to also admit that any Indian visiting their homeland and then committing terrorist acts is also a sign of terrorist training.

Still you are responsible.

I'm not responsible for anything genius. And Pakistan is not responsible for anything they legally do in Pakistan. If for example, it is not illegal to take shooting lessons whilst in the US, then any future terrorist that takes shooting lessons there is not doing so with the acceptance of the US government or people, just as any future terrorist that undergoes weapons training in Pakistan is not doing so with the acceptance of the Pakistani government of people. Do you consider the US to be a terrorist haven because the 911 hijackers took flying lessons there? No, because what they were doing is legal. The source of these terrorists was not the US since they underwent their indoctrination in the Middle East.

There were training camps and everybody know it. ISI & military (or retired) instructors provided training to them. There are madrasas provided weapons training.

LOL Provide some evidence for that. Not something like Bharat Rhaksha. Just one reference that Air Vice Chiefs were hanging out at semi literate madrassas to teach semi literates how to push a trigger. I'm sure they've got more able people to train. But give me your links. No doubts you'll provide me with lots of biased Indian links showing how the military trains up terrorists!!

 

[Energon]

LOL! "predetorial atrocities", that's a good one. Rather than "Indian terrorism" and "Islamist terrorism" you would choose "predetorial atrocities" Oh, how balanced of you! You need to look up the definition of terrorism and see that it is applicable to both a foreign state-sponsored army that kills, tortures, or steals a land by force such as in Kashmir, as it is to foreign rag tag individuals trying to take over another land. I'll quote Mencius and the Oxford dictionary

""When one by force subdues men, they do not submit to him in heart. They submit, because their strength is not adequate to resist."

"(a) Policy intended to strike with terror those against whom it is adopted; (b) the employment of methods of intimidation; (c) the fact of terrorizing or condition of being terrorized."

How does this not apply to Indian forces in Kashmir?

Is it a matter of comprehension or just lack of critical thinking? I can attempt to help you with these but not really sure you have the capacity to actually internalize these rather basic concepts. Here's a last ditch attempt nonetheless...
Terrorism (in the setting of the Kashmir conflict which is categorized as an Insurgency) is tactic employed by the party that does not have the adequate strength to openly resist or confront their adversary on account of a smaller force and logistical limitations. A predator is one who has a stronger logistical base and larger resource that puts him in a position of power which is then used to commit acts of violence against people who are unable to defend themselves. (I know you're not much for reading, but if that ever changes I suggest you look into Bard O'neal's "Insurgency and Terrorism: Inside modern revolutionary warfare)

As usual you have failed to understand the material and jumped to the conclusion that: terrorism (in the Kashmiri insurgency setting) > predatorial atrocities... when in reality the relationship is actually: Terrorism (in the Kashmiri insurgency setting) =/= predatorial atrocities (as orchestrated by the Indian army in the same setting). The magnitude of which is worse is a dynamic variable based on events on the ground. The two adversaries are not on the same footing and neither are their tactics... which is why it's called irregular warfare. Now please attempt to apply the model to the 1971 Bangladesh war scenario and determine the roles.
You also don't seem to understand the concept of scope of arguments because you keep going on tangents despite repeated requests.

You obviously rely too much on books

Guilty as charged! I don't draw conclusions upon anything unless I've reviewed a spate of material and books from varying sources.

Not interested in books when I more or less know the situation anyway.

It is abundantly clear that you are unaware of most situations being discussed. But it certainly presents a clear picture as to why your posts are devoid of substance and heavy on unfounded drivel which is totally out of perspective and scope. What's even funnier is your attempt to deride other posters on their 'lack of logic' or comprehension, when it is clearly you who lacks the basic understanding of both these concepts.

Please make attempts to read up more so that your contributions to the discussions are more valuable. Until then your abysmal understanding of basic concepts and woefully inadequate knowledge of the topics at hand will make it impossible for me to engage you in any meaningful debate.

 

[Energon]

You see the people you mentioned are mostly from arab countries, Saudiarabia in paticular and other middle east countries and therefore pakistan could not be held accountable for that. However certain elements if they did come to pakistan, the government of pakistan reacted accordingly and while you mention all the wrong doing, what your forget was that it was pakistan who made it possible in the capturing of the top al-queda personal. It was pakistan that stopped Uk bomb blast, it is because of pakistan that the allied forces are successful in afghanistan and yet they are unwilling to acknowlege the fact how much we are suffering. But like i have mentioned it before and i will like to put your attention at the same issue is, someone who was not even born in pakistan, lived all his life in another country, only his ancestors were of pakistan origin, how can you blame pakistan for the wrong doing of his. Instead the country that he grew up in is responsible for his behaviour not pakistan.

Ice Cold, there is no doubt that when this problem first started during the Afghan conflict in the 80s that there were many other players involved. The Arabs and other Islamic states (with Saudi Arabia in the lead) and most of all the CIA. However where Pakistan comes into play is that Zia brought all of them together and facilitated the entire radical movement because he saw the major potential in it as a weapon which could then be unleashed at his behest. He used the vast amounts of resources available to him to build a complex infrastructure of radicalism and it is the remnants of this self sustaining organization that is the source of Pakistan's problems today.

There is no doubt in my mind that Pakistan now wants to seriously rid itself of radicalism as the author of the article in the OP clearly indicates. But my point is that unless the society realizes that this problem exists amidst them the attempts to eradicate will be unsuccessful. It will be akin to providing treatment for a bacterial infection when the ailment is actually an autoimmune disease.

 

[IceCold]

There is no doubt in my mind that Pakistan now wants to seriously rid itself of radicalism as the author of the article in the OP clearly indicates. But my point is that unless the society realizes that this problem exists amidst them the attempts to eradicate will be unsuccessful. It will be akin to providing treatment for a bacterial infection when the ailment is actually an autoimmune disease.

The thing is Energon, that when we talk about pakistan and paticulary in the west specially in the western media, they protay pakistan as some sort of hot bed for terrorists and a country that is on the verge of a collaspe. Whereas in actual its completely the opposite. It may have been like you mentioned back at zia's era but zia was not the only person involved but CIA who actually wanted this to counter communism. Pakistan as a society now is very moderate and they are people busy with their own lives. Let me quote you with an example here that majority if not all of the suecide attacks done in pakistan are mostly found to be Uzbik, afghan, chechian. But instead of being shown the way it is, instead it is shown that the whole pakistan nation is somewhat terrorists. The nuclear weapons can fall at anymoment into the hands of extremist and all kind of nonscense i would say. Extremist dont enjoy even 10% of the majority in pakistan and this can easily be found out with the results of polls. But some what the western media only wants to see what they call the truth and nothing more.
I have quote various examples of pakistan contribution in WOT, but not even once i've ever heard from any western source appreciating it not even by the members of this forum who are busy proving it otherwise, hell they even dont consider that part worth enough mentioning. For e.g the media likes to quote the UK terror plot blaminig pakistan that the guy who was never born in pakistan was trained in pakistan, but they would never ever indicate that it was actually pakistan that made it stop. ISI is being blamed on numerous occasions, yet its the same ISI that is tracking al-queda terrorists and have captured them and handed over to the US. Why is that only the bad part is shown and not the good one?
This constant ranting will serve both pakistan and US with absolutely no benefits instead increase the distance between the two nations.

 

[MastanKhan]

Karma,

Two post on this board and you come out aswinging. I think that you need to step back a little bit and put some positive feedback in your posts----it does not seem appropriate to enter a guest house and be confrontational with the host right from the word go.