No proof against Hafiz Saeed, can't put him in jail to please anyone: Pak

[dravidianhero]

Well.. there will never be proof to nail this guy.. His rants and calls for Jihad against India are available in plenty... but they are not admissible in court...

Even if there are evidences,pak doesn't have balls to lay hands on him.

 

[Alfa-Fighter]

Actually AQ Khan was stripped of his position and placed under house arrest under the terms of a Presidential pardon, so Pakistan did in fact act against the individual once credible evidence was made available against him.

Yes, Was those evidence provide and gathered by PAK? Hell No, when CIA published those evidence then only PAK forced to act.

Wonder CIA collected evidence which is supposed to be collected by Pak and should have known to PAK govt before hand. All the evidence was gather inside PAK.

Eg , PAF Plane fly full load of material to Libya and forth and PAK govt / PAF don't know about it and you believe wold believe that. Only when US said enough is enough and pull the string then only PAK govt forced to act when US found that he supplying nukes to terrorist.

No one knew where he really was until the US eventually tracked him down (with intelligence inputs from Pakistan, though Pakistan was not aware of the target at the time).

Well PAK Govt/ ISI already declared him dead and not in PAK. it is US who conducted everything without PAK intelligence input and when he find it take him out .

When PAK find out it don't how to react and then claimed it helped US bla bla..

One can judge from the fact that PAK govt. put the Dr jailed which help to find OBL and free the man on which help to build the house. Infact that is ISI safe house for J&K terrorist.

When you can find a country as large as Pakistan that has ZERO crime, only then can you argue that Pakistani security services were incompetent in not locating a man who went to extreme lengths to remain hidden.

Once you find the proof, let the world know please, and if it is credible, Pakistan will act.[/quote]

Well any country which can't find proof what their Air force doing etc. then it should lead other country to find proof.

The fact of the matter is that Indians do a song and dance (must be all that Bollywood influence) about "soooooo many dossiers provided to Pakistan", but when asked to reproduce the so called 'credible evidence against HS" in the dossiers, fail to do anything.

No evidence is sufficient for PAK. When PAK accuse for terrorism to india , can't even produce iota of evidence. What happen to Mumbai terrorist , what evidence gather by oak other then provided by outside country ?

 

[karan.1970]

The allegation you point out is the watered down one that supporters of Modi like to bandy around to minimize his alleged culpability. The stronger allegations against Modi, that many in India and Pakistan believe are valid, are that he was either actively involved in directing the carnage or deliberately looked the other way (silent approval). Either allegation places him in the same category as the allegations against HS.

That's asinine mate. Allegations such as the ones you mention and even worse have been labled against Jinnah (for his role in Kashmir carnage in 1947-48), Yahya Khan for east Pakistan, Musharraf for his role in curbing the Shia uprising in G&B and each of the above allegations have been proven. Would you put them in the same category as HS? No, you wont and rightfully so. HS is a UNSC designated terrorist. Period. Pakistan can chose to dance around the technicalities of court orders and evidences, but by designating HS as a terrorist and JuD as a terrorist organization, UNSC has declared that they believe that the case against him is valid, atleast as much as the case of calling Kashmir as disputed. You can't have it both ways. Either support both resolutions or junk both

If India or any other country believes that the limited sanctions against HS/JuD are not being implemented, the proper avenue to address those misgivings is in the UN. Has India or the US done so? Has the UN censured or warned Pakistan about not implementing the resolutions against HS/JuD?

Pakistan seems to be simply hiding (i am not sure intentionally or not) behind its declared incapability to rein in the terror groups spread across its land at this time. It would be foolish for India to expect a UN response against Pakistan when Pakistani public themselves is stumbling from one terror strike to the other and even when Pakistani military and military establishments are not safe from terror attacks. And why would India complain about sanctions not being enforced. That's really between UNSC and Pakistan.

Which does not change the fact that the US and Afghanistan were blatantly lying and got caught out by their own leaked diplomatic cables.

Countries routinely lie to each other due to variety of reasons. But hardly seems appropriate that Pakistan complains about USA and Afghanistan lying about an innocent civilian's consensual presence in their territory when Pakistan herself has been caught lying about the presence of the world's most wanted terrorist on its soil.

And I still don't quite understand your focus on this - the comment I responded to was:

I responded to the above - what does Brahamdegh's conviction (or not) have to do with it?

Pretty simple. In your response, you called Brahamdegh Bugti as a terrorist despite him neither being convicted nor having being termed as a terrorist by any UN body, while you refuse to accept HS as a terrorists because he is not convicted by Pakistani courts, even though the UNSC has declared him as a terrorist.

What matters is that Pakistan fulfill her responsibilities as a member of the UN by implementing the UN sanctions to the best of her abilities, and if India or any other country believe that Pakistan is not doing so, they are free to address the issue at the UN. Has India done that? Has Pakistan been censured for not implementing UN Resolutions correctly?

Have already answered this above. though the point being made was about hypocrisy of accusing someone like Bugti of being a terrorist without any proof, conviction or international designation... where as you choose to use a totally different set of parameters for HS simply because he uses those terror tactics against India.

Yes, implicated in lying about sheltering a known terrorist leader, and no, the individual was not innocent given that the cables also highlight the fact that the UN and US engaged in negotiations with him to help in the release of UN officials kidnapped by Baloch terrorist organizations in Pakistan, and has personally admitted that he is supporting the use of violence against the Pakistani State.

Which terrorist leader? Has that terrorist leader been convicted by Pakistani courts. If not, rest of the argument has no basis. and now are the US internal cables being used as proofs. Do you know how many times the same US officials have refered to ISI as a terror sponsoring organization. Want to take them on face value?

No, Pakistan expects Indian to implement the UNSC Resolutions on Kashmir and engage in discussions over demilitarization of Siachen with a return to the situation prior to the launch of Indian hostilities in Siachen.

India is already implementing the UNSC resolution in Kashmir to the best of its capability. Has UN censured India for not following its resolution lately ?

 

[Bang Galore]

No, Pakistan expects Indian to implement the UNSC Resolutions on Kashmir and engage in discussions over demilitarization of Siachen with a return to the situation prior to the launch of Indian hostilities in Siachen.

Still amounts to the same thing. There is no need for India to care about what you expect or bother doing anything that we feel is not necessary. Your expectations are after all, yours, we do not have to care much for them. Which is why I'm fairly pleased with the Pakistani attitude of "we don't give a damn what you want". We have bigger things than Hafeez Saeed to reply in the same vein even if we are far more circumspect with our choice of words.

 

[Alfa-Fighter]

No, Pakistan expects Indian to implement the UNSC Resolutions on Kashmir and engage in discussions over demilitarization of Siachen with a return to the situation prior to the launch of Indian hostilities in Siachen.

The UN sanctions against HS do not prescribe "jail", so you are conflating the two issues incorrectly.

Can you please tell the world what is UNSC Resolution of 1947 on Kashmir???
A) What is the Very First Condition of that resolution ?
B) What PAK has done on that very first Condition on UNSC resolution ?

 

[AnnoyingOrange]

Thank you - that is what many of us have been trying to point out to Indians ever since the Mumbai attacks - hate speech, ranting and raving against India is not grounds for "arrest and implication in the Mumbai attacks".

Badhiya hai.... kuch na karo.... its your youth thats getting radicalised ...picking up guns to kill you own people...as far as i know.. this HS is a great diplomatic asset for Indian foregin policy against Pakistan. So believe me when i say that you will here a lot of rants from indian diplomatic community against Pakistan leveragin this Guy for a long long time....and guess who the world believes these days.

 

[Tshering22]

Then how can discussions proceed forward? This is a diplomatic setback.

 

[airmarshal]

Hafiz Saeed and India. Certainly this is a love affair. Every thread on Hafiz Saeed stormed by Indians giving their raging, foolish opinions.