Pakistan News and Discussion-8

[Guest]

<b>Pakistani clerics, scholars want pope removed</b>

They think they are delaing with MMS of India

[Guest]

<b>US threatened to bomb Pakistan 'back to stone age' after 9/11: Musharraf </b><!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->NEW YORK (AFP) - The United States threatened to bomb Pakistan "back to the stone age" unless it cooperated in the US-led war on terror, President Pervez Musharraf said in an interview.

Musharraf, whose support for the US-led invasion of        Afghanistan was instrumental in the fall of the hardline Taliban regime after the September 11, 2001 attacks, said the threat came from former deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage.

"The intelligence director told me that (Armitage) said, 'Be prepared to be bombed. Be prepared to go back to the stone age'," Musharraf said in the interview with the 60 minutes investigative news programme to be broadcast Sunday.
.....<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Nothing new, he is trying to sell his book.

Today Bush gave Pakistan fresh reminder. <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->

[Guest]

<b>INDIA – PAKISTAN HAVANA AGREEMENT (SEPTEMBER 2006) – PERSPECTIVES & IMPLICATIONS</b>

[Guest]

FT
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>SUCH GUP </b>
<b>Oh no, not again!</b>
Last year, the real PM elicited an outcry when in the US he pronounced that “Pakistani women are lining up to get raped so that they can get Canadian visas” or words to that effect. He seems to have gone and done it again. Our mole reports that in his soon to be released magnum opus, the real PM has written on the gang-rape victim Mukhtaran Mai and stated that she was never raped. Apparently, the book goes on to admit that Mai was kept against her will in a room by a group of men for a matter of minutes and came out looking slightly disheveled, the implication being that there couldn’t possibly have been a gang rape in that short a period of time. Has the real PM put his foot in it again? <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif' /><!--endemo-->

<b>Dressing down</b>
We’ve read statements from senior politicos of the ruling party expressing their regret at the killing of Nawab Akbar Bugti. These statements have gone down very badly in the higher echelons of khakidom. Our mole reports that one of the outspoken politicos was given an unequivocal dressing down by a senior khaki.

    <b>
Even Maududi was under the sword</b>
Columnist Khurshid Nadeem wrote in daily Jang that he was shocked to hear of the attack on Syed Manzur ul Hassan. Syed Manzur is the editor of “ishraq”, a journal published under the famous scholar Javed Ahmad Ghamidi. Fundamentalism and extremism is now rampant in Pakistan. It is extremism to kill someone because of his beliefs. The clerics often take people to an emotional pitch wherein these people decide on their own to kill for Islam. In a famous incident one young man entered into a gathering addressed by Maulana Maudoodi with a knife, because a local maulvi told him that Maulana Maudoodi blasphemes against the companions of Mohammad (PBUH).

<b>Damn democracy! We want Khilafat!</b>
As reported in daily Nawa-i-Waqt, the leader of Jamaat Islami (S), Maulana Sami ul Haq, said the Muslim world is representing American interests. <b>We shall break the arms of those who say jihad is terrorism. </b>Pakistan Peoples Party and Nawaz Sharif should try to get rid of military dictatorship. Democracy has destroyed Muslims and our goal is Khilafat. The rulers don’t want political parties to unite, but infidels have already united against Muslims.

<b>Charsi Taliban!</b>
According to daily Khabrain, President Musharraf said Pakistan is fighting three types of Taliban. One are religious fanatics, the second ones are moderate Taliban and the third ones are charsi (hash smokers) Taliban.

<b>Bernard Lewis’ plan for Balochistan</b>
Writing in daily Khabrain magazine, Arshad Virk wrote that Indians were supplying arms to rebels in Balochistan. In April, 2006, an exile government of Balochistan was announced by Mir Azad Khan Baloch, who declared himself the General Secretary of Baloch government, which would be headquartered in Jerusalum. The Khan of Qalat was pronounced King, and Nawab Akbar Bugti the hero of Balochistan. A map was published on internet showing some areas of Iran and Pakistan as greater Balochistan. This map was similar to map drawn by Jewish scholar Bernard Lewis who made it to justify greater Israel. Bernard Lewis is an expert on the Middle East and George Bush and ex Foreign Minister of Afghanistan Abdullah Abdullah are his followers. Abdullah Abdullah was made foreign minister of Afghanistan with the help of Bernard Lewis. Now, the American think tank , “Armed Forces Journal” has printed that map again and has pointed to possible changes in the Middle East region.

<b>Knickers at marathon in Lahore and Miss Bikini</b>
Sarerahe wrote in Daily Nawa-i-waqt, that a Pakistani girl participated in a Miss Bikini contest in Washington. We want to congratulate the enlightened moderaters, who were wearing knickers at Marathon in Lahore. Now the 22 year-old Maria has surpassed them by wearing a bikini. Now President Bush will be happy with our partnership in war on terror and our efforts for enlightenment. This interpretation of Islamic culture that Maria has shown to her parents will fill them with happiness. Her supple limbs have brought fame to her parents.  <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo-->

<b>Dark night of oppression</b>
Columnist Haroon ur Rashid wrote in daily Nawa-i-waqt that educated and enlightened individuals are killing the uncivilized (Muslim) population of the world. We are worried about Balochistan and European armies are killing Muslims in Afghanistan, Kashmir and Iraq.<b> The Muslims are being killed in Burma like Jews were killed in Germany.</b> The revolution against Western Christian Authority – the so called renaissance and the industrial revolution that brought secularism, which is based on a rejection of God. This atheist movement was supported by imperialism and has now got the strength in Muslim societies. Now the atheists are ruling Muslim countries and are puppets of western powers.

<b>More alcohol consumed than permit holder’s quota</b> <!--emo&:o--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ohmy.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='ohmy.gif' /><!--endemo-->
As reported in daily Jang, the Minority Reform Association has filed a petition in Lahore High Court to stop the selling of illegal alcohol. The petition said there are only 15 thousand permit holders in Punjab who pay 625 rupees annual fee, but the sales show 70 thousand permit holders. The High Court has asked secretary excise to submit its report.

<b>Hijabi girls so good but still too much</b>
Writing in daily Jang, columnist Jevan Khan said that when he saw the BA and BSc results of 2006, he noticed girls got the first five positions.<b> The pleasant surprise was that all the five girls were wearing hijabs.</b> Thank God that our new generation is becoming more religious. But what worries me is that very few are from government institutions. Private schools are now ahead of government schools in Pakistan. Also, if boys don’t perform equally it would create a lot of imbalance and problems. It is something to be worried about.  <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo--> 

<b>Integrate into Australian society</b>
According to daily Nawa-i-Waqt, the Australian President John Howard said Muslims shall condemn terrorism. He said Muslims shall learn English and respect women as equal and shall integrate into Australian society. Moderate Muslim advisory committee spokesman Amir Ali said such remarks can trigger the clash between Arab Muslims and Caucasian Australians.
 
<b>Deity of Mao Tse-Tung</b>
According to daily Jang, the Chinese citizens now consider Mao Tse-Tung a deity. They have placed sculptures of Mao Tse-Tung in their homes and pray in front of it.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Naresh]

[center]<b><span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>Pakistan ranks 95th among : Economic freedom 127 nations</span></b> <!--emo&:flush--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/Flush.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='Flush.gif' /><!--endemo-->[/center]

<b>ISLAMABAD, Sept 21 : Pakistan ranks 95th among 127 countries in terms of economic freedom, mainly due to an ineffective implementation of legal system, security of Property Rights and access to sound money.

Pakistan even stands behind many under-developed and developing countries such as Madagascar, Senegal, Uganda and some African countries, says Economic Freedom of the World--2006 annul report.

The report, a copy of which was made available to Dawn, indicated that among the South Asian countries <span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>India had the highest ranking of 53 followed by Sri Lanka and Bangladesh standing at 83 and 95, respectively. The Nepal has the worst ranking of 118 in the region.</span></b>

Pakistan, according to the report, has the worst ranking in legal structure and security of Property Rights (119); as against India’s rank of 44, suggesting clearly the need for independent judiciary, availability of a trusted legal framework for private businesses to challenge the legality of government actions, protection of Intellectual Property Rights and non-military interference in the rule of law and political process.

Similarly, Pakistan has the most horrible rank of 117 in access to sound money, thus proposing that to earn a high rating in this area, it must follow policies and adopt institutions that lead to low and stable rates of inflation and avoid regulations that limit the use of alternative currencies, should the citizens want to use them.

Despite opening up the international trade unilaterally, Pakistan still has a long way to go as indicated by its rank of 106 under the freedom to trade internationally. This showed that Pakistan’s trade faced a wide variety of restraints like high tariffs, quotas, hidden administrative restraints, exchange rates and capital controls.

The report suggested that for achieving a higher rating in this area, a country must have low tariffs, a trade sector larger than expected, efficient administration of customs, a freely convertible currency and few controls on the movement of capital.

Pakistan has a better rank in credit market regulation (61), labour market regulations (10), among the South Asian countries. However, the report recommended for an effective private banking system to allocate credit to private parties and to refrain from controlling interest rates to receive higher rating for this component of the regulatory area.

Moreover, Pakistan should allow market forces to determine wages and establish the conditions for dismissal of workers, avoid excessive unemployment benefits — that undermine work incentives — and refrain from the use of conscription.

However, in terms of business regulations, Pakistan ranks 88. This showed high restraints and bureaucratic procedures that retard entry into business, which lead to high cost of doing business.

The report recommends that countries like Pakistan must allow markets to determine prices and refrain from regulatory activities that retard entry into business and increase the cost of manufacturing products. They also must refrain from playing favourites, that is, from using their power to extract financial payments and reward some businesses at the expense of others.

According to the report, Hong Kong and Singapore occupy the top two positions. The other nations in the top 10 countries are: New Zealand, Switzerland, United States, Ireland, United Kingdom, Canada, and Luxembourg.

Cheers <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo-->

[Naresh]

<b>Pakistan, Iran agree to proposal: Private shippers may be allowed between Gwadar, Chabahar</b> <!--emo&tupid--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/pakee.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='pakee.gif' /><!--endemo-->

<b>QUESTION :</b> Why would People & Goods be shipped from Gwadar to Chah Bahar and vice-versa when the land distance is only about 150 Kilometre?

Cheers <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo-->

[Guest]

<b>The most interesting of the reports quoted above is the one relating to US threat to take Pakistan to the Stone Age. The past military record of the United States from the time of the Korean War till the ongoing war in Iraq indicate that it has mostly faced failures the most glaring of which is Vietnam. Therefore, it is unlikely that the threat really worked with Pakistan. It is a fact that Pakistan has helped USA in the fight against terrorism but this decision may have been based on come other consideration.
We in India have not been happy with Pakistan as it has not taken measures as promised earlier to curb cross border terrorism across the border into India. After the recent developments and the continued failure of the Pakistan Government and of the US Government in apprehending Osama bib Laden, obviously Pakistan is under pressure to take more vigorous action against the terrorists operating from within its territory. So far, it was only India which was complaining about these terrorists but of late the Government of Afghanistan is also voicing its concern on the same lines. The resurgence of the Taliban in the Southern parts of Afghanistan has also not gone UN noticed by the US authorities and by the NATO troops. They cannot be taken for a ride any more by the false promises of the Pakistan Government. They now want to see more vigorous actions against the terrorists. In the face of such pressure, it may be impossible for Pakistan to divide the terrorist organizations operating from its territory as two separate groups one operating against India and the other against Afghanistan, and take action only against the later group. This is perhaps the reason for Pakistan to now sing a different song after the Havana meeting.</b>[SIZE=7][COLOR=blue]

[agnivayu]

Bush is becoming politically weaker, so Mushrat feels that he can/ needs to distance himself from the U.S. to appease his own people. 95% of Pakistani's are Islamic fanatics, so Mush has to make a strategic decision.

I have no doubt they were threatened to be bombed, that's the only way to get them to act. Pakistani's were also scared that the U.S. would have worked with India against them.

The question is why is Pakistan getting modern U.S. weapons when their leader could easily switch sides to the Taliban. They are already signing cease-fire agreements with them.





<!--QuoteBegin-Ravish+Sep 22 2006, 04:40 PM-->QUOTE(Ravish @ Sep 22 2006, 04:40 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>The most interesting of the reports quoted above is the one relating to US threat to take Pakistan to the Stone Age. The past military record of the United States from the time of the Korean War till the ongoing war in Iraq indicate that it has mostly faced failures the most glaring of which is Vietnam. Therefore, it is unlikely that the threat really worked with Pakistan. It is a fact that Pakistan has helped USA in the fight against terrorism but this decision may have been based on come other consideration.
We in India have not been happy with Pakistan as it has not taken measures as promised earlier to curb cross border terrorism across the border into India. After the recent developments and the continued failure of the Pakistan Government and of the US Government in apprehending Osama bib Laden, obviously Pakistan is under pressure to take more vigorous action against the terrorists operating from within its territory. So far, it was only India which was complaining about these terrorists but of late the Government of Afghanistan is also voicing its concern on the same lines. The resurgence of the Taliban in the Southern parts of Afghanistan has also not gone UN noticed by the US authorities and by the NATO troops. They cannot be taken for a ride any more by the false promises of the Pakistan Government. They now want to see more vigorous actions against the terrorists. In the face of such pressure, it may be impossible for Pakistan to divide the terrorist organizations operating from its territory as two separate groups one operating against India and the other against Afghanistan, and take action only against the later group. This is perhaps the reason for Pakistan to now sing a different song after the Havana meeting.</b>[SIZE=7][COLOR=blue]
[right][snapback]57727[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The most interesting of the reports quoted above is the one relating to US threat to take Pakistan to the Stone Age<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It worked that is why Paki assets are in control, Pakistan had surrendered its 4-6 airports to US. All Pakistani airports are monitored by US. US had its terrorism monitor office opposite to Al-jajerra news agency in Islamabad/Karachi.
US problem is they don't have foot soldiers in border area. US are buying people in Pakistan.

Anyway, Mushy is here to sell his book. He always gets more TV time then any Indian PM. MMS can sing his off tune in Havana.

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The past military record of the United States from the time of the Korean War till the ongoing war in Iraq indicate that it has mostly faced failures the most glaring of which is Vietnam.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But cold war was most impressive. Disintegration of USSR, Yugoslavia and other communist countries are pretty impressive

[Naresh]

<b>Ravish Ji :</b>

Re : Your Post Today, 22nd September 2006 04:40 PM

It is rather naïve of the India Leadership to believe that any Pakistani Leader will ever agree to have Peace with India.

If Pakistan lives in Peace with India then the Two Nation Theory stands discredited.

At this juncture, I must reiterate that, I am a firm believer that Pakistan and Bangladesh must be allowed to remain Individual Independents states and India should not in any manner try to have a Union – either as a Single unit or on the lines of the European Union. It would be the greatest blunder on part of the Indian Leadership to even have a Visa Free Travel or as they say “Open Borders”

For the Last nearly Sixty Years the Pakistani People have been inculcated – via their School Curriculum – with a veritable putrid hatred for India in General and Hindus, Sikhs, Jains & Buddhists in Particular. In addition the Conquer and Destruction of India is the raison d’être of the Pakistani Leadership and encompasses the Bureaucratic, Feudal, Military, Political & Religion sectors of Pakistan.

The International-Foreign Relations of various Nations, be it is the USA or China or Russia or whatsoever Nation, is dictated by the Domestic Needs-Situation of the USA or China or Russia or whatsoever Nation.

The Indian Leadership seems to be trying to have its relations with Pakistan as per the Domestic Needs-situation of Pakistan.

If India follows this line of action then India is bound to fall flat on its face – be it today, tomorrow or whenever.

<b>Ravish Ji :</b> You can take that to the Bank!

In ending the only saving grace for India is that the Prime Minister, Foreign Minister-Secretary can make all sorts of agreement but the same have to be endorsed by the Indian Parliament.

One will have to repose one's faith in the Indian Parliament even though it is not beyond the realms of possibility-imagination that at a particular juncture the Lok Sabha may be hit with a Severe Attack of Acute Docility!

Cheers <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo-->

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->
Bush deflects charge that Pakistan threatened
MSNBC News Services
WASHINGTON - With Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf standing at his side, President Bush President said Friday he was “taken aback” by Musharraf's allegation that Washington threatened to bomb Pakistan back to the Stone Age if it did not cooperate in the fight against terrorism after the Sept. 11 attacks.

“The first I heard of it was when I read about it in the newspaper today,” Bush said when asked at a press conference about whether Musharraf’s allegations were true. “I guess I was taken aback by the harshness of the words.”

“I don’t now of any (such) conversation,” he added.

Musharraf, for his part, refused to comment, saying he was not allowed to elaborate given a contract he has for an upcoming book he has written.

On other issues, Musharraf said a peace treaty between his government and tribes along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border is not meant to support the Taliban.

He said news reports had mischaracterized the deals. “The deal is not at all with the Taliban. This deal is against the Taliban. This deal is with the tribal elders,” Musharraf said.

Said Bush: “I believe him.”

He said that Musharaff had looked him in the eye and vowed that “the tribal deal is intended to reject the Talibanization of the people and that there won’t be a Taliban and there wont be al-Aqaida (in Pakistan).”

<b>What did Armitage say?</b>
Earlier Friday, the White House said it was not U.S. policy to threaten Pakistan after the Sept. 11 attacks.

White House spokesman Tony Snow said Richard Armitage, who was deputy secretary of state at the time, had denied warning Musharraf that the United States would bomb his country if it did not cooperate with the U.S. campaign against the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Musharraf, in an interview with CBS News’ magazine show “60 Minutes,” to air on Sunday, said that after the Sept. 11 attacks, Armitage had told Pakistan’s intelligence director, “’Be prepared to be bombed. Be prepared to go back to the Stone Age.’”

Snow said he did not know what Musharraf had been told but that U.S. policy was to seek Musharraf’s cooperation.

“U.S. policy was not to issue bombing threats. U.S. policy was to say to President Musharraf: ’We need you to make a choice,’” Snow said.

As for what Armitage said to the Pakistanis: “I don’t know,” Snow said. “This could have been a classic failure to communicate. I just don’t know.”

Armitage told CNN on Thursday that he never threatened to bomb Pakistan, wouldn’t say such a thing and didn’t have the authority to do it. Armitage said he did have a tough message for Pakistan, saying the Muslim nation was either “with us or against us,” according to CNN. Armitage said he didn’t know how his message was recounted so differently to Musharraf.

The Pakistani leader, whose remarks were distributed to the media by CBS, said he felt insulted.

“I think it was a very rude remark,” he told reporter Steve Kroft. But Musharraf said he reacted responsibly. “One has to think and take actions in the interests of the nation and that is what I did,” he said.

<b>Relations with the Taliban</b>
Before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Pakistan was one of the only countries in the world to maintain relations with the Taliban, which was harboring al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden, and many Pakistanis were sympathetic with the neighboring Islamic state.

But within days of the attacks Musharraf cut his government’s ties to the Taliban regime and cooperated with U.S. efforts to track and capture al-Qaida and Taliban forces that sought refuge in Pakistan.

The official 9/11 commission report on the attacks and their aftermath, based largely on government documents, said U.S. national security officials focused immediately on securing Pakistani cooperation as they planned a response.

Documents showed Armitage met the Pakistani ambassador and the visiting head of Pakistan’s military intelligence service in Washington on Sept. 13 and asked Pakistan to take seven steps.

They included ending logistical support for bin Laden and giving the United States blanket overflight and landing rights for military and intelligence flights.

The report did not discuss any threat the United States may have made, but it said Musharraf agreed to all seven U.S. requests the same day.

In an interview with MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, former Secretary of State Colin Powell said that “we gave them a list of things we wanted Pakistan to do, which essentially required Pakistan to completely reverse its policy with respect to the Taliban.”

Musharraf “saw the wisdom in the decision he took,” Powell said.

<b>'Ludicrous' demands</b>
Musharraf said in the CBS interview he was irked by U.S. demands that Pakistan turn over its border posts and bases for the U.S. military to use.

He said some demands were “ludicrous,” including one insisting he suppress domestic expression of support for terrorism against the United States. “If somebody’s expressing views, we cannot curb the expression of views,” Musharraf said.

With Taliban fighters still fighting in Afghanistan and statements by the Afghan government that Pakistan must do more to crack down on militants in its rugged border area, the issue is again a sensitive one between Islamabad and Washington.

Musharraf reacted with displeasure to comments by Bush on Wednesday that if he had firm intelligence bin Laden was in Pakistan, he would issue the order to go into that country.

“We wouldn’t like to allow that. We’d like to do that ourselves,” Musharraf told a news conference.

Musharraf’s comments came days ahead of the publication by New York-based Free Press of his memoir “In the Line of Fire.” Advance copies of the memoir have not been released to the media for review before its Sept. 25 publication.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

<span style='color:red'>F-16 deal off </span>

Pakistan has put off signing the letter of acceptance (LOA) for purchase of 36 F-16 fighters from the US after complaints from its air force that the planes were "bereft" of vital electronic warfare systems.

After the complaints, Pakistan's Ministry of Defence asked the US Secretary of Air Force International Affairs, which is the coordinator and supervisor for the project, to extend the signing of LOA until December 31, reports The Friday Times, a Pakistani weekly.

The last extension was sought on July 31 this year.

The deal was apparently deferred partly due to <span style='color:red'>conditions imposed by the US on the operations of F-16s and the "absence" of vital electronic capabilities from these platforms.</span> Musharraf was expected to take up these issues when he meets President George W Bush in Washington today.

"So the signing deal is off. Perhaps President Musharraf will try to extract some concessions during his meeting with Bush. But the entire deal is likely to spark much more debate and change before finalisation," the weekly quoted a Pakistani official as saying.

According to the report, the F-16s were being offered without some Electronic Warfare programme capabilities for their radar warning receiver (RWR). "This means that they will have pre-installed threat library and its RWR will only be able to identify Non-NATO aircraft," it quoted an expert as saying.

"Any NATO aircraft attacking these F-16s using Beyond Visual Range capability could take them out easily simply because these F-16s would not know when they would be locked in sight of the attacking adversary and hence would be unable to take evasive measure," he said.

However, PAF Chief Air Marshal Tanvir Ahmed denied reports that there was any bar on operational deployment of F-16s being purchased at the cost of about five billion dollars from the US.

Ahmed said US authorities have not imposed any conditions on operational capability. "We will be fully empowered to use our platforms whenever we want and however we want," he told The News.

He said the Pakistan Air Force would use the F-16s for all sorts of offensive and defensive sorties carrying conventional weapons. Earlier reports said <span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>US has excluded the equipment necessary to carry nuclear weapons from the package being offered to Pakistan. </span>

The US does not want to transfer technology to any other country, specially countries with which Pakistan had defence cooperation, he said without directly referring to China.

The Friday Times report said that US was concerned about transfer of technology to China as Beijing is considered to be an expert in reverse engineering. Pakistan and China are currently developing JF-17 Thunder aircraft.

http://ia.rediff.com/news/2006/sep/22pak...&file=.htm

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->With Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf standing at his side, President Bush President said Friday he was “taken aback” by Musharraf's allegation that Washington threatened to bomb Pakistan back to the Stone Age if it did not cooperate in the fight against terrorism after the Sept. 11 attacks.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I remember reading this 'bombing Pakistan back to stone age' comment atleast 2 or 3 years ago - not sure as to where.
The question really is to why's Mushy making it a issue this time around? Could it be that lately Powell (Armitage is supposed to be close to Powell) is not viewed favorably at White House and Mushy knows this. Imagine Mushy making it an issue if Powell, Armitage was still operating from USD.

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The question really is to why's Mushy making it a issue this time around? <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
He is trying to sell book.
They sent Armitage (6ft 5inch and heavy built) with stoneage message two days after 9/11 to scare Paki ISI head.
Powell and Mushy are military guys and they were always in contact with each other and always had good relation.

[Naresh]

Tauba! Tauba!! A severe blow to Pakistan’s Honour and dignity - Bush has Ms Rice <b>De-brief</b> Mush!!!

<b>Musharraf briefs Rice on Singh meeting</b>

NEW YORK: President Gen Pervez Musharraf has met with US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and briefed her on his meeting with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in Havana. Sources said Ms Rice welcomed the development, and added that the US is keen to help solve disputes between Pakistan and India. Ms Rice also praised Gen Musharraf’s leadership qualities, the sources said. The two met at the Roosevelt Hotel and also discussed the war against terrorism, Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran’s nuclear programme. Online

Cheers <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo-->

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Realisation dawns on HRW </b>
Pioneer.com
Hari Om
The US-based Human Rights Watch (HRW) acknowledged that there is "considerable evidence that Islamabad has provided Kashmiri militants with training, weapons, funds and sanctuary". Its 156-page report, which was released in Srinagar on September 12, says: "Officially, Pakistan denies ever arming and training militants. Under pressure from the US after the attacks of September 11, 2001, Pakistan banned several militant groups in January 2002, including Jaish-e-Mohammad and Lashkar-e-Tayyeba. But these groups have continued to operate after changing their names."

The HRW has also exposed the Valley-based terrorists. Its report says that they have "targeted civilians, including women and children whom they consider to be traitors to the cause or for expressing views contrary to theirs', murdered nearly 600 Kashmiri politicians since the conflict began (in 1989) and killed or tortured officials conducting polls". It has, in addition, held the terrorists responsible for attacking "religious minorities in Kashmir such as Hindus and Sikhs, as well as the (ethnically different and tribal) Gujjars (read Sunni Muslims), whom militants attack because they believe them to be Government informers".

What, however, is more striking is its comment that "numerous massacres, bombings, killings and attacks on schools, attributed to the militants, are often intentionally downplayed by supporters of Kashmir independence or its accession to Pakistan". More significant perhaps is its candid observation that "a conflict over Kashmiri identity and independence has slowly but visibly mutated into a fight under the banner of religion".

Whatever the HRW has reported is what dispassionate Kashmir-watchers have been saying since 1990. Its report has only vindicated their stand, though partially. Partially because the HRW has failed to realise the gravity of the situation as it exists today - one that warrants a full-scale confrontation with those who have been taking recourse to violence to get the State segregated from the Union of India. No wonder it has asked India to repeal section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the J&K Disturbed Areas Act, the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, etc.

Extraordinary situations demand special powers and laws. And it must never be forgotten that Jammu & Kashmir is facing similar circumstances.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Tauba! Tauba!! A severe blow to Pakistan’s Honour and dignity - Bush has Ms Rice De-brief Mush!!!
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--emo&:roll--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ROTFL.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='ROTFL.gif' /><!--endemo-->

[Guest]

<b>U.S.-Pakistan Relationship Getting Shaky</b>
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->ISLAMABAD, Pakistan -- Threats of U.S. military action inside Pakistan to counter al-Qaida militants have highlighted the shaky relationship between these two key players in the war on terror and could escalate anti-American sentiments in this Islamic nation.

President Bush said this week that he would "absolutely" order military operations inside Pakistan if Osama bin Laden or other top terrorists were found to be hiding here
...................<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->US has excluded the equipment necessary to carry nuclear weapons from the package being offered to Pakistan. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why Paki need these equipment, do they have Gems with them??? <!--emo&tupid--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/pakee.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='pakee.gif' /><!--endemo-->

[Naresh]

<!--QuoteBegin-Mudy+Sep 23 2006, 03:20 AM-->QUOTE(Mudy @ Sep 23 2006, 03:20 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Why Paki need these equipment, do they have Gems with them???  <!--emo&tupid--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/pakee.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='pakee.gif' /><!--endemo-->
[right][snapback]57764[/snapback][/right]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<b>Mudy Ji :</b>

The answer to your question lies in this lengthy Article :

[center]<b><span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>Aziz proposes SA nuclear restraint regime</span></b>[/center]

ISLAMABAD - Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz Thursday proposed a nuclear restraint regime for South Asia to lower the regional temperature.

“Time has come for a nuclear restraint regime in South Asia,” Aziz said while responding to a questioner at the inauguration of a two-day seminar on Emerging Political Map of Asia by the Institute of Strategic Studies, and Hanns Seidel Foundation.

Asked to elaborate the proposal of restraint regime in SA, he said, “it is not a concrete proposal so far, but it could be discussed and included declaring war heads, restricting warheads and sharing information in order to lower the temperature at a particular time. However, I think it is quite premature at this stage and we could deliberate on its nature and scope when the time would come,” he added.

According to the prime minister, Pakistan civilian nuclear programme is complete under the safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEC).

Earlier during speech Aziz said, “As a growing economy our energy needs are increasing rapidly and we seek access to nuclear energy as part of our overall energy policy.”

“Pakistan is totally self reliant in 100 per cent homegrown nuclear missile technology,” he added. “Our case is totally different from the scenario of Iran’s matter,” he further added.

To another question regarding Indo-US nuclear cooperation agreement, the prime minister said, “It clearly has caused concerns in most of the countries in the world and Pakistan as well. He was of the view that no country should get paranoid of any bilateral agreement, “But our concern is that it could lead to production of more fissile material by India,” he added.

Regarding other countries inclusion in this agreement such as Bangladesh and Pakistan, he said, I have already stated in my speech, “We are seeking world cooperation for meeting our energy need through nuclear power.”

Earlier, during his speech he pointed out challenges faced by Asians and outlined a four-point agenda to meet these challenges. The prime minister’s four point agenda includes; Ensuring security and stability by resolving conflicts and disputes through dialogue and compromise, as well as ensuring exit strategies from conflict situations, while avoiding an arms race in strategic and conventional weapons; Pursuing a holistic approach to the problem of terrorism by addressing its root causes and ensuring inter-religious harmony; Sharing of resources and technologies within Asia to eradicate poverty and enhancing human and material resources of developing countries; and Promoting intra-Asian cooperation for sharing of best practices as well as ensuing a level-playing field for market access and fair trading.

“The time has now come for an Asian renaissance. It is not without reason that the 21st century is considered to day to be the Asian century. The human resources of Asia are its greatest assets and the promise of its future,” he observed.

He was of the view that permanent solution to the root causes of terrorism could ensure peace, cooperation, stability and prosperity in the world. Pakistan, he said, has also been at the forefront of international war against terrorism and is committed to defeat this scourge to ensure safer world and civilization.
He said sharing of best practices as well as ensuring a level-playing field for market access imperatives for a brighter, prosperous, stable and vibrant Asia.

The prime minister said despite innumerable assets and positive future trends, the world still faces a number of challenges including unresolved issues of Kashmir and Palestine, Iraq, Lebanon and Afghanistan, which need to be resolved on priority and on the basis of principles of justice for a durable peace in Asia and the world over.

He said there are seven fundamental challenges being confronted by Asia which include insecurity and instability, terrorism, poverty, inadequate resources, good governance, globalization, environment and natural resources which need holistic approach to move forward towards a prosperous Asia.

Sharing Pakistan’s efforts to contribute towards peace, progress and prosperity in Asia, Shaukat Aziz said the government last year took concrete and visible measures to reform political, economic and social sectors besides ensuring complete freedom to media.

He said Pakistan being located at the crossroads of South, Central and Western Asia could provide a viable link to the entire region through its ports to the rest of the world.

The prime minister said Pakistan can provide a multiple corridor for cooperation in the energy, transportation and trade areas, which would help create mutual dependencies within the region and ensure a win-win situation for all.

On Pakistan’s foreign policy, the prime minister said Pakistan was interested in peace, stability and prosperity in Afghanistan, as strong and stable Afghanistan is also good for the entire region.
He said Pakistan is consistently pursuing composite dialogue process with India to resolve all the disputes including the core issue of Jammu and Kashmir.

“The recent meeting between President Pervez Musharraf and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in Havana, to resume dialogue process is a vindication of our position,” he added.

Pakistan stands for an amicable resolution of the Kashmir issue acceptable to all three parties - Pakistan, India and the Kashmiris, he added.

Commenting on Pak-China relations, he said, “Our strategic partnership with China is not only mutually beneficial but it is also a factor for peace, stability and prosperity of the region and it is a model relationship based on mutual respect and sovereign equality.”

About Iran’s nuclear issue, the prime minister said Pakistan recognizes Iran’s right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes under appropriate international safeguards.

He however said the Iranian nuclear issue must be resolved through dialogue and use of force should be avoided.

Shaukat Aziz said a clear manifestation of Pakistan’s commitment to promote intra-Asian cooperation is its “Vision East Asia Policy” which is aimed at promoting ties with the Asian countries for a rapid economic growth in the region.

Aziz said Pakistan has also proposed strategic restrained regime in South Asia to build trust between Pakistan and India.

“We believe in the level-playing field and non-discriminatory approach to the use of nuclear technology for peaceful purposes under the appropriate international safeguards.”

Earlier, in his welcome address Chairman of the Institute of Strategic Studies Inamul Haq and Resident Representative of Hans Seidel Foundation of Germany Richard Asbeck highlighted the objectives of the conference.

<b>Mudy Ji :</b> You will note that Pakistan has been regularly begging for “A Nuclear Weapon Free south Asia” as well as “Nuclear Restraint”

Why would a Nuclear Armed Nation start begging for “Nuclear Restraint”?

It is just a case of being deprived of their Nukes i.e. <b>Pakistan is Nuke Nude</b>

Cheers <!--emo&:beer--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cheers.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='cheers.gif' /><!--endemo-->

[Guest]

With ref to Nareshji's comments above, I would like to confirm that I entirely agree that Pakistan and Bangladesh should be allowed to remain as they are and no Union with India should ever be dreamed by any sensible Indian. There is no point to add so many hungry mouths to feed and in the process destroy whatever we have been able to achieve during the last sixty years.
With regard to the comment that peace between India and Pakistan is not possible, I feel that one should always have hope as we should always look for progress to have at least our own mental satisfaction till we take leave of this world.