Rupee News

Rawalpindi Express Shoab Akhtar should not be banned!

Share

Dr. Nasim should be banned from Cricket

The Rawalpindi Express is a huge asset for Pakistan. Imran Khan says, that we shoudl cherish and nurture our assetts. The Rawalpindi Express should not be banned. This is ridiculous. Shoab Akhtar is a bit wild, but so was Imran Khan. The nation should cherish its assets and use them to build other bowlers.The PCB itself should be disbanded and all the officers fired for banning Shoad Akhtar for five years. Dr. Nasim Akhtar should be send back to Medical practice and Shoab Akhtar should be restored before Pakistan loses him for good.
Pakistan cricket board bans fast bowler Akhtar for five years

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan – Pakistan’s cricket board banned fast bowler Shoaib Akhtar from international and domestic cricket for five years for repeated breaches of discipline.

Akhtar’s comments and actions were harming the team and had even “affected the image of the country,” board chairman Nasim Ashraf said after announcing the ban Tuesday.

“He was given lot of chances but he was involved repeatedly in habitual offences,” Ashraf told a news conference. “We will never tolerate indiscipline.”

Ashraf said Akhtar can appeal the decision and noted that the bowler would also be free to play in the Indian Premier League, where he can earn US$425,000 a season playing for Calcutta in the Twenty20 competition.

However, if the ban is upheld, it could spell the end of the 32-year-old Akhtar’s international career.

Akhtar, who at his peak was the fastest bowler in cricket, appeared earlier Tuesday before a disciplinary committee after he criticized the PCB for omitting him from its roster of the top 15 contracted players. He refused to sign a lesser contract.

Akhtar was already on probation after the PCB fined him about S$52,000, ordered him to undergo psychiatric counselling and imposed a 13-match international ban last year for hitting fellow bowler Mohammad Asif with a bat before the Twenty20 world championship in South Africa.

Akhtar last played a test match against India in December before he was sidelined due to back problem.

He declared himself fit to play in a five-match one-day series against Zimbabwe in February but was left out. Selectors also overlooked him for the 16-member squad to play two one-day internationals against Bangladesh next week.

Dubbed the “Rawalpindi Express” for his express pace, Akhtar’s career was restricted by injuries to 46 Tests after making his debut against the West Indies in 1997 and tarnished by a doping allegation.

Akhtar tested positive for steroids in 2006 in a PCB-conducted, out of competition test, but had his two-year ban overturned by a Pakistani appeals committee.

He has 178 test wickets at an average of 25.69 and 219 wickets at 23.2 in 138 limited-overs internationals.

Rawalpindi Express Shoab Akhtar should not be banned!

Share

Angry Russia throws mercy line to desperate NATO in Afghanistan

Share

NATO’s defeat in Afghanistan is akin to the defeat at Maiwind for the British forces in 1880. Maiwind cleared the way for the ultimate departure of all British forces from Afghanistan in the “Back to the Indus” policy. Russia has had a very limited role in Afghanistan after the defeat of the USSR in Afghanistan in the 90s. Now Russia wants to get back into the game. The Russians want to resurrect a kind of “Yalta Conference” to address the future of Pakistan. To pressure Pakistan into agreeing to the demands, the Russians have indicated that they could provide a safe passage to goods and supplies through Afghanistan, for a price. This means that Pakistan would lose about $5 Billion per annum in transit fees and logistical support and Russia would make that amount for herself.Please see the article published in Rupee News on “Inviting Russia Back: The Impact”

Karl Indurfurth is right. No American or NATO plans for Afghanistan will succeed without taking into account the Pakistani interests in Afghanistan. Afghanistan is in the Paksitani sphere of influence and no anti-Pakistani government in Kabul can hope to succeed without the blessings of Islamabad.

‘Circle of freedom’

In a keynote speech hours before the two-day summit of the 26-nation alliance, Mr Bush said: “As [French] President Sarkozy put it in London last week, we cannot afford to lose Afghanistan.

If we do not defeat the terrorists in Afghanistan, we will face them on our soil

President Bush

Ashdown’s Afghanistan warning

“Whatever the cost, however difficult, we cannot afford it, we must win.

“If we do not defeat the terrorists in Afghanistan, we will face them on our soil.”

His attempts to rally new troops came as Lord Ashdown, the former UN envoy to Bosnia who was blocked from being UN envoy to Afghanistan by President Hamid Karzai, warned the Nato-led alliance was “getting pretty close” to losing control of the country.

Mr Bush arrived in the Romanian capital, Bucharest, late on Tuesday. He has since left to meet Romania’s President Traian Basescu in the Black Sea resort of Constanta.

On the eve of his last Nato summit, Bush set out his agenda in a wide-ranging, half-hour speech.

In addition to asking for more troops, he also pushed for Nato’s eastern expansion and appealed to Russia to drop opposition to US plans to establish missile defence installations in Nato members Poland and the Czech Republic.

President Bush said the “circle of freedom”, as he put it, must be extended to include new Nato members from the Balkans.

He said invitations would be issued to Albania, Croatia and Macedonia to join Nato.

Russian bid to replace Pakistan as supply route: War in Afghanistan By Anwar Iqbal
WASHINGTON, April 1: At the Nato summit, which begins in Bucharest on Wednesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin is expected to offer an alternative route for supplying US and Nato troops in Afghanistan.

The proposal, if accepted, will change the course of the war in Afghanistan and will also have far-reaching consequences for Pakistan as Nato’s 43,000 troops in Afghanistan rely heavily on supplies transported via Pakistan.
Diplomatic sources in Washington told Dawn that Russian and Nato diplomats have already held a series of “productive and successful” talks on a plan that would allow non-military material – such as clothing, food and petrol – to cross Russia by land.

The plan, however, could later be expanded to include ammunition and light weapons as well, the sources said.
Russia’s new ambassador to Nato Dmitri Rogozin played a key role in selling this plan to the members of this US-led alliance, telling them that this will be a reliable alternative route free of violence and political troubles.
While America’s European allies have shown great interest in the proposal, the Americans are still reluctant as they do not want to bring Russia back to a region from where it was forcibly ousted in 1989, after battling Afghan freedom fighters (now Al Qaeda and Taliban militants) for almost 10 years.

Despite Washington’s reluctance, the Nato has held intensive talks with Russian officials on the precise routes to be used and hopes to reach agreement at this week’s summit in Bucharest.

If approved by the summit, the supplies can begin as soon as Nato wants as the Russians already have a functioning route passing through Russia, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan.

Under the proposed agreement, Russia and the Collective Security Treaty Organisation, a military alliance of former Soviet republics, will jointly guarantee an interrupted supply of essential goods to the Nato forces.
Western diplomatic sources in Washington told Dawn that Nato sees the proposed route as a good alternative for supplies going through Pakistan which faces political uncertainty and may not be a reliable route for long.

The Pakistan route, according to these sources, passes through the Taliban-infested tribal zone and has become increasingly dangerous. Last Sunday, militants blew up a convoy of 36 oil tankers meant for US forces in Afghanistan.
Russian diplomats promoting their proposal also have underlined a so-called “crisis of trust” between the United States and Pakistan, where the new government plans to engage militants in a dialogue opposed by Washington.
They also argue that Russia has always had a strong interest in seeing the Nato mission in Afghanistan succeed because Moscow wants to prevent Muslim extremists enter the former Soviet republics.

But there are others in Washington who warn that an attempt to disassociate Pakistan from any plan for Afghanistan may have dangerous consequences.

In an article published on the eve of the Nato summit, Karl F. Inderfurth, a former US assistant secretary of state for South and Central Asian affairs, describes Pakistan as “one country that can make or break (Nato’s) mission” in Afghanistan.

He notes that Nato’s Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer has promised to visit Islamabad as soon as the new Pakistan government is in place.

“After Bucharest there is no better destination to reinforce Nato’s Afghan mission,” says Mr Inderfurth while backing the proposed visit.

Mr Inderfurth urges Nato leaders to work on a “new compact” that addresses Afghanistan and Pakistan’s political, economic and security concerns and seeks to neutralise regional and great power rivalries.

To attain this, he proposed an UN-sponsored, a high-level conference of all Afghanistan’s neighbours and concerned major powers for talks on a multilateral accord that addresses Pakistan’s concerns about developments in Afghanistan.
The proposed accord should recognise Afghanistan’s borders with Pakistan, pledge non-interference in Afghanistan’s internal affairs, recognise Afghanistan as a permanently neutral state and establish a comprehensive international regime to remove obstacles to the flow of trade across Afghanistan.
Mr Inderfurth also warns that any large-scale outside military intervention in Pakistan’s tribal areas would be disastrous for the Pakistani state and US interests.

Instead, he urges working with Pakistan’s new leadership to integrate the tribal region into the Pakistani political system and provide substantial assistance to build up their economy and social infrastructure.

Angry Russia throws mercy line to desperate NATO in Afghanistan

Share

Destabilisation game by Ahmad Quraishi

Share

The last “Mayor of Kabul”. Mr. Karzai.“You can call me a US puppet ”

Failure and defeat in Afghanistan. Payback for Pakistan

Pakistani Cheese for Western “whine”. Invoices for services rendered.

http://rupeenews.com/2008/01/28/pakistani-cheese-for-western-whine-countering-do-more-mantra-selling-pakistan-too-cheap-tit-4-tat-diplomacy-countering-requests-with-formal-invoices-and-charging-market-prices-for-service/

The trail of terror from Delhi to Dushambe to Indian consulates in Afghanistan to Dera Ghazi

The Indian consulates are dens of evil in Afghanitan

Another brilliant article by Ahmad Qureshi. You can reach him at ahmaquraishi.com or the email address at the bottom of this article

Destabilisation game Tuesday, February 12, 2008, Ahmed Quraishi

“The Pakistanis,” said former US president Richard Nixon, “are straightforward and sometimes extremely stupid. The Indians are more devious, sometimes so smart that we fall for their line.”

In their desperation to salvage their near-failure in Afghanistan, the Americans are certainly falling for the latest line the Indians and their Afghan proxies in Kabul have been feeding them for months now: If you want to reign in the Taliban in Afghanistan, go after the Pashtuns in Pakistan.

So while the US military chief, Admiral Mike Mullen, spent time in Islamabad over the weekend, an unnamed American official in Washington singled out Pakistan’s Pashtuns as the source of all evil, highlighting the “very clear Pashtun tribal links” connecting the Afghan insurgency to Pakistan. He also alleged that Mullah Omar and Al Qaeda leaders were hiding in Quetta.

Weakening the Pashtuns fits in well with the current Afghan power holders in Kabul and their Indian friends, who insist on keeping Afghanistan’s traditional rulers away from power after the bitter experience of the 1990s.

But there is more to this anti-Pashtun tirade than meets the eye. There are signs that, after the attempt to spark an ethnic war in Balochistan in 2005 a situation is being created on the ground for a Pashtun rebellion in Pakistan. And in both cases, support, weapons and finances are pouring in from unnamed and unknown actors based in Afghanistan. The already inflamed Pashtun passions received another setback last week when scores of Pashtun-dominated ANP activists were killed in a suicide attack only days after the assassination of a senior ANP leader in mysterious circumstances in Karachi.

It is ironic that in this dangerous mix, Pakistani politics appear to have no room now for nationalist Pakistanis who believe in a strong, rising Pakistan. Given the chance, every one of these parties is willing to descend into ethnic and linguistic politics. And none of them have a realistic agenda reflecting the strengths of the nation. All of these political parties are conveniently hiding their ineptitude behind a one-point, anti-Musharraf campaign.

The Indians, now comfortably based in Afghanistan under the American watch, have historically shown a special interest in nurturing ethnic insurgencies inside Pakistan. The game plan now is to try to convince Pakistani Pashtun nationalists to join hands with religious parties to fan unrest after next week’s elections.

It would be wise for most Pakistanis to view the role of the United States in this whole situation with a healthy dose of skepticism and suspicion. US officials have been trying to convince Islamabad that the Afghan Taliban and the Al Qaeda are shifting their attention from Afghanistan to Pakistan. Interestingly, the Afghan Taliban are wearing to the Pakistanis that they have nothing to do with the insurgencies of Baitullah Mehsud and the couple of other shadowy religious groups that have sprung up in parts of NWFP.

To underscore this point, Mullah Omar has publicly disowned Mr Mehsud, isolating this warlord and raising serious doubts about the sources of his weapons and funding. Seeing these terrorists isolated and exposed, Pakistani authorities swooped in on Mehsud and the rest of his allies and crippled them militarily.

Our American friends continue to use the good-cop-bad-cop routine on their Pakistani ally. After successfully raising a false global alarm over the security of Pakistani nukes, they sent their top military chief to tell the world from Islamabad that our nukes are safe. While US officials tell their Pakistani counterparts how much they value the relationship, it is a disturbing fact that the US media and the think-tank circuit continue to depict Pakistan as the next Iraq and churn out endless scenarios about the breakup of the country.

In this environment, it is expected that the Americans will exploit the shaky foundations of a flawed and weak Pakistani political system to interfere and exert political pressure on Islamabad. We as Pakistanis have no option but to reform this political system by creating a strong and stable civilian political setup closely backed by the military institution, without whom this process of strengthening the system cannot succeed.

The writer is a host of a foreign policy talk show. Email: aq@ahmedquraishi.com

Destabilisation game by Ahmad Quraishi

Share

Army democracy logic: Rebuttal to Mr. Akbar of the Khaleej Times

Share

Dear Editor Khaleej Tiimes and Mr. AkbarAAKhaleej times for whatever reason in the world allows 250 character to form a response!!!!! Why is Mr. Akbar employed? To disgrace Pakistan and challenge its existance? Soon the Khaleej times will be printed from Karachi. Do you think that people in Karachi will put up with the writing of this person–Mr. Akbar? we know you will not print this, so we will post the response on http://RupeeNews.com and on http://www.PakPunch.com

You have the opportunity to build bridges and create a vision, you harp beating down Pakistan is every column of yours.

You seem to be in a fish bowl and the world is moving ahead faster than you can analyze the bits and pieces that you have access to.

It is amazing that all your articles start by disparaging Pakistan and its existence (Army Democracy logic,Fullstop etc) . We have heard your inane views and understand your befuddled animus against Pakistan. But does each and every insipid article have to start with a prophecy of doom for Pakistan? (Rhetorical question, you don’t have to answer it!we know your answer!). Is your ridicule of Pakistan meant for your Indian audience and you are trying to prove that your are more Catholic than the Pope?

Your arrogance on this so called dynastic “democracy” in India is laughable….come down a few notches. No one buys it! Read what the New York Times is saying about China and Europe…India has missed the boat totally!http://rupeenews.com/2008/01/26/waving-goodbye-to-hegemony-by-parag-khanna-dawn-of-a-multipolar-world-with-china-and-europe-and-maybe-russiaindia-embroiled-in-penury-is-absent/While you relish your so called “democracy” China, Singapore, Taiwan, Korea, Malaysia are laughing their way to the bank. India’s competition is China…and India is found absconding….with 89 insurgencies…and the lowest per capita on GNP in the Subcontinent….we wonder how you can ever talk about Pakistan
http://rupeenews.com/2008/01/26/waving-goodbye-to-hegemony-by-parag-khanna-dawn-of-a-multipolar-world-with-china-and-europe-and-maybe-russiaindia-embroiled-in-penury-is-absent/About your assumption that the violence in Pakistan is not sponsored by India. Read plenty of information posted on http://www.RupeeNews.com. Even the Peoples Daily and the Tehran Times listed triangulation on Pakistan as prolifically described by M.K. Bhadrawar in http://www.atimes.comON CHINESE THREAT TO INDIA: http://rupeenews.com/2008/01/28/china-to-cia-raw-and-mossad-no-more-turmoil-in-pakistan-is-permissible-china-agains-comes-to-help-of-pakistan-in-its-hour-of-need-she-she/

ON THE CIA INDOLENT IN THE ASSASSINATION OF BHUTTO: http://rupeenews.com/2008/01/06/the-cia-connection%e2%80%a6-benazir-bhutto%e2%80%99s-assassination-was-pre-planned-the-zia-model-with-a-twistthe-continued-cia-involvement-in-pakistan-the-great-game-continues-when-the-elephants-d/

ON THE HISTORIC REALIGNMENT: http://rupeenews.com/2008/01/30/pakistan-an-historic-realignment-china-pakistan-russia/

ON NATO ATROCITIES IN AFGHANISTAN: http://rupeenews.com/2008/01/30/is-nato-committing-genocide-in-afghanistan-byliaqat-ali-khan/

we have no expectations of you. We know you cannot change your stripes. Your hatred costs lives and people continue fighting because of the things that you write.Pakistan was born on the 27^th of Ramadhan and hordes of mercenaries sent across the border cannot destroy it. We are used to your prophecies of doom, they started in 1947.In your hubris you seem to think that your opinions are fact. In fact your opinions on the Two Nation Theory, the creation of Pakistan, the events of 1971 and Indian aggression against Pakistan are just opinions. In my mind your opinions are worth about 2 cents which won’t even buy me a cup of coffee here in New Jersey.In Islamabad 2 cents may buy you a kilo of flour though!God Bless you and take care. Was Salaam 

Army democracy logic: Rebuttal to Mr. Akbar of the Khaleej Times

Share

Decoding Pakistani Venus Jalebee answers and USA Mars pretzel questions

Share

Trying to decipher the thought processes in a pictorial format. What the diplomats are saying publicly, what the Thinktanks are thinking, what the Intelligence Agencies are assessing, and what external factors are influencing the decision making process. How Americans see themselves and see others. How Pakistanis see themselves and see others are factors that influence actions.

There is a disconnect. How do  Pakistanis from Venus talk to Americans from Mars and make them understand? How do we decode the pretzels questions and the “jalebi” answers?

THE PRETZEL VS. THE JALEBI (Mars and Venus stated positions) 

American interests are simple, why don’t the Pakistanis get it? The US intentions can be described in one sentence listed below (A).

A) Pretzel-USA-Mars policies: Eliminate terrorism so that American presidents and Congresspersons can keep their jobs.

Pakistani interest are simple, who don’t the Americans get it? The Pakistani interests can be described in the sentence below (aliph).

Aliph) Build Pakistani infrastructure, have  peace and a stable economy to eliminate existential threats to Pakistan.

At the highest level the objectives (Aliph and A)seem to be congruent. Because these are the stated positions, the diplomats agree 100% on these. However Pakistani from Venus have serious translation issues with Americans from Mars in unstated positions:

THE PRETZEL VS. THE JALEBI (Mars and Venus un-stated positions). The US unstated position is the Plan for a New American Century (PNAC) type of future plans for the USA. This can be described in one sentence (B).

B) Pretzel-USA-Mars policies: Create buffers against China and secure the Central Aisan Oil reserves. This is a simple objective of the US–to encircle China.

The Pakistani position (Bay) can be described in one sentence.

Bay) Jalebi-Pakistan-Venus: Secure a pro-Pakistani government in Kabul, not be used as a buffer against China and build herself up to avoid Indian agression against Pakistan

Pakistani from Venus have serious translation issues with Americans from Mars: There is an inherent clash between the two objectives (Bay and B). That is why the questions and “diktats” are coded and now look like pretzels to Pakistan. Pakistan does not want to be a buffer against China because it sees China as its lifeline. Therefore Pakistanis from Venus give pretzel answers to Americans from Mars. 

THE PRETZEL VS. THE JALEBI (Mars and Venus un-stated positions) American Thinktanks influenced by Indian and Neocon writings.

C)  Pretzel-USA-Mars: Based on what we hear from the Indian and Indian puppets in Afghanistan, there are serious issues and half-truths.

Pay) Jalebi-Pakistan-Venus: Based on our own experiences, and double-talk, we are confused.

THE PRETZEL VS. THE JALEBI (Mars and Venus un-stated positions). Media on both sides are quaralling at this level.

D) We don’t trust the Pakistanis

Tay)  We don’t trust the Americans.

THE PRETZEL VS. THE JALEBI (Mars and Venus un-vocalized thinking)

E) White man’s burden to civilize these tribes. Darn these Muslims. Take out the nukes and create Baluchistan!

Say) “White man speaks with forked tongue”. Another Crusade.

So how do we get out of this quagmire?How do we straighten the spaghetti after it has been boiled?

Can it be done?

Ahmad Qureshi, an influential Pakistani journalist of international repute discusses US-Pakistan relations.

…Time for some blunt speak from Islamabad. Truth is, ever since our American friends seized Afghanistan in 2001, that country has gradually turned into a staging ground for destabilization in neighboring Pakistan. If Washington is focused on terrorists crossing our mountainous border into Afghanistan, Islamabad is more concerned at how Afghanistan has become a haven for an assortment of underground forces that consider Pakistan the enemy. These forces remain hostage to a Cold War mindset, and draw support from players beyond Afghanistan’s borders.To paraphrase Ambassador Paterson’s words, terrorist attacks on us from the Afghan soil have already become catastrophic for Pak-U.S. relations, fueling doubts about U.S. intentions.”

• Pakistani Cheese for Western “whine”. Invoices for services rendered.
• Wish list of Pakistani people
• Invoice for Defeating terror, Securing Pakistani Nukes $150 Billion per annum
• Kissinger and other Americans threatened Pakistan
• The Taliban was a construct of the CIA. Rohrbarker

Decoding Pakistani Venus Jalebee answers and USA Mars pretzel questions

Share

That time hasn't come, has it? Translated by Rais Ahmad Khan from Urdu into English.

Share

http://www.brecorder.com/index.php?id=685900&currPageNo=1&query=&search=&term=&supDate

Business Recorder, Tuesday January 29, 2008
Pakistan’s First Business Financial Daily

That time hasn’t come, has it?KARACHI (January 29 2008): The following is an unconfirmed and unverified account of a person who wishes to remain anonymous. The account is the narration of experiences of a senior foreign ministry official who, according to the writer, was privy to ZA Bhutto-Henry Kissinger talk and later witness to General Ziaul Haq’s outburst of anger against US in front of its ambassador.

The question of veracity of this write-up remains unanswered and the identity and whereabouts of the official and the author of this story are yet to be ascertained, it makes for interesting reading, nevertheless:

It was the year 1976 and the US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger was on a visit to Pakistan, to meet the Prime Minister of Pakistan, Zulkiqar Ali Bhutto. The Americans wanted Pakistan to give up their nuclear project, and Henry Kissinger was on a mission to deliver the US President’s message to Bhutto. Mr Bhutto listened to Kissinger very patiently and then addressed him, “you are my friend, please advise me what I should do.” Kissinger smiled a bit, and said softly, “Mr Prime Minister! In the game of diplomacy and power, nobody is any one else’s friend. I am only a messenger at this time. You should consult one of your own advisors”. Bhutto smiled and replied in a beautiful tone, “I still consider you my friend despite that and so request your advice.” Henry Kissinger laughed heartily, and looking at Bhutto, said, “you are really a chess master.” Bhutto stared at him silently.

Kissinger waited for a while, and said in a cultured tone, “Basically I have come not to advise, but to warn you. USA has numerous reservations about Pakistan’s atomic programme; therefore you have no way out, except agreeing to what I say”. Bhutto smiled and asked, “suppose I refuse, then what?” Henry Kissinger became dead serious.

He locked his eyes on Bhutto’s and spewed out deliberately, “Then we will make a horrible example of you!” Bhutto’s face flushed. He stood up, extended his hand towards Kissinger and said, “Pakistan can live without the US President. Now your people will have to find some other ally in this region.” Bhutto then turned and went out.

This story was related to me by a senior foreign ministry official, who became quite friendly with General Ziaul Haq after Bhutto, and gradually rose in rank to join the General’s elite close circle. In 1987 Russian forces started evacuating Afghanistan, and President General Ziaul Haq was left isolated all of a sudden.

It was a great blow to his ego, and he started berating the CIA officers and US Embassy officials present in Pakistan at the time. Once, during that time, the President accidentally came face to face with the US Ambassador in a function, and in the presence of dozens of other people, admonished the Ambassador.

The General addressing him directly told him, “You people think that we cannot live without your help. Remember that Pakistan is a strong and powerful country, and if we can make Russia run away from Afghanistan, then we can also cope with USA.” The US Ambassador kept silent. General Ziaul Haq caught the ambassador by the chin, and pushing his face up, said, “Tell your government that you have no option except our friendship.”

The Ambassador shook his head left and right. The Foreign Ministry official who narrated the story, was personally present at that function, and was an eye-witness to this incident.

This officer went to see General Ziaul Haq the next day, and pleaded with him very humbly, “Sir, ten or eleven years ago I was working with Mr Bhutto. Sir, I saw and heard the dialogue between Henry Kissinger and Mr Zulfikar Ali Bhutto myself personally. Mr Bhutto looked very confident after this conversation, but Kissinger looked grim. Mr Bhutto had later started challenging the USA even in his public utterances.

However, Sir, a time came when you dethroned Bhutto and delivered him to the Judiciary. The courts sentenced him to gallows, and thus Mr Bhutto really became an example of retribution for the world!” General Ziaul Haq looked at him furiously. The official was flustered, but continued, “Sir, when you were berating the US Ambassador publicly, to me he looked very much like Henry Kissinger at the time.

Sir, based on my experience, I know that a time comes during friendship with America, when it becomes difficult for US friends to maintain that friendship, and the amity pinches like a thorn in the shoe”. The general kept quite. The official persisted “Sir, during our return in the car I had tried to advise Mr Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto also, but he stopped the car and had asked me to get out. Mr Bhutto believed that he knew the Americans better than the Americans knew themselves.

Sir, I know that you also will not be pleased with what I have to say, and perhaps this time also I may meet the same treatment, but Sir, in this delicate hour, I consider it my duty to advise you. Please don’t get entangled with the Americans at this time.

They are a generation of ‘disposable’ culture. In their view, faithfulness and constancy are meaningless words.” General Ziaul Haq lost his patience. He stood up and extended his hand (in dismissal). That official also rose and immediately left the General’s office, and for a long time thereafter, did not re-enter that room.

I met that officer countless times, and whenever the talk turned to Mr Bhutto and General Ziaul Haq, he would say, “Both of my bosses did not accept my advise; therefore both of them met a tragic end.” I asked him what was the reason for that. He had this stock reply: “This is American nature. In reality, they cannot maintain companionship with any one for a long time. Only if you have a love/hate relationship with the US, you can keep their company for a long period.

Like Europeans, Australians and Latin Americans, you should listen to them occasionally, and defy them some other time, then you will have good time. We can also give here an example of Japan and China. Both these countries are friends and foes at the same time. They trade with the USA, but also confront them, so Americans have no issue with them.

On the contrary, we are always obedient to the US and go out of our way in our love for USA, to the extent of altering our own constitution and laws even. After that, we start getting demands from USA to “do more”, and then a time comes when it becomes impossible for Pakistan’s authorities to accept American demands.

When a Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto or a General Ziaul Haq explains to the Americans his legal or constitutional constraints, they do not believe him. Americans think that every thing is ‘possible’ in Pakistan, and that their “friend” is now deceiving them.

Therefore, the Americans change their attitude, after which the Pakistani ruler reminds them of all the services rendered by Pakistan to the USA. He recalls, with big gusto, all his acts of good faith performed in the service of the USA but the Americans shrug their shoulders and reply, “In return we had given you the opportunity to govern Pakistan.”

Answering them the Pakistani ruler starts to threaten the US government, and then, whether it is Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto or General Ziaul Haq, Both of them meet a dreadful, exemplary end.” The official then became silent.

For the last two days, I am sensing changes in President Musharraf and US relations. President Pervez Musharraf granted an interview on January 11 to the Singapore daily “Straits Times’, and in that interview challenged America, “If US forces intruded into our tribal territory, we will deem it as an invasion of Pakistan, which will be an affront to our sovereignty, and I challenge USA to dare come to our hills.

They will rue the day.” The President also gave an interview to the French daily, ‘Figaro’, and in that interview also he announced “if Americans do not help us in the war against terror, then they should search for some other ally for themselves”.

I don’t know why, ever since I read reports of both these interviews of the President, I keep remembering that old diplomat, and I think again and again, that God forbid, if the time has not come once again in Pak-American relations who Condi comes to Pakistan and sitting in our Chamber of authority announces, “you have no other option”.

My spirit shivers when I think of this.

Translated by Rais Ahmad Khan from Urdu into English.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2008

That time hasn't come, has it? Translated by Rais Ahmad Khan from Urdu into English.

Share

Is NATO Committing Genocide in Afghanistan? by Liaqat Ali Khan

Share

during the House Committee on Foreign Affairs discussion recently. Republican congressman Dana Rohrabacher named the Clinton administration, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia for creating the Taliban. “Let me repeat that: The Clinton administration, along with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, created the Taliban,” Rohrabacher
The CIA was a construct of the CIA. Rohrbarker

Sloganeers, propagandists and politicians often use the word “genocide” in ways that the law does not permit. But rarely is the crime of genocide invoked when Western militaries murder Muslim groups. This essay argues that the internationally recognized crime of genocide applies to the intentional killings that NATO troops commit on a weekly basis in the poor villages and mute mountains of Afghanistan to destroy the Taliban, a puritanical Islamic group. NATO combat troops bombard and kill people in Taliban enclaves and meeting places. They also murder defenseless Afghan civilians. The dehumanized label of “Taliban” is used to cloak the nameless victims of NATO operations. Some political opposition to this practice is building in NATO countries, such as Canada, where calls are heard to withdraw troops from Afghanistan or divert them to non-combat tasks.
Dehumanization

In almost all NATO nations, the Taliban have been completely dehumanized – a historically-tested signal that perpetrators of the crime of genocide carry unmitigated intentions to eradicate the dehumanized group. Politicians, the armed forces, the media, and even the general public associate in the West the Taliban with irrational fanatics, intolerant fundamentalists, brutal assassins, beheaders of women, bearded extremists, and terrorists. This luminescent negativity paves the way for aggression, military operations, and genocide. Promoting the predatory doctrine of collective self-defense, killing the Taliban is celebrated as a legal virtue. To leave the Taliban in control of Afghanistan, says NATO, is to leave a haven for terrorism.

A similar dehumanization took place in the 16th and 17th centuries when NATO precursors occupied the Americas to purloin land and resources. The killings of native inhabitants were extensive and heartless. Thomas Jefferson, the noble author of the Declaration of Independence, labeled Indians as “merciless savages.” President Andrew Jackson pontificated: “What good man would prefer a country covered with forests and ranged by a few thousand savages to our extensive Republic, studded with cities, towns, and prosperous farms.” Promoting the predatory doctrine of discovery, the United States Supreme Court later ratified the pilgrims’ crimes, holding that “discovery gave an exclusive right to extinguish the Indian title (to land). ([T]he Indians were fierce savages…To leave them in possession of their country was to leave the country a wilderness.”

The predators have not changed their stripes a bit. They come, they demonize, they obliterate. They do all this in the name of superior civilization.

The Facts

The NATO website lists its killings in Afghanistan. These killings are also reported in the world media, often with a shameless tone of gratitude as if NATO forces are engaged in wiping out cannibals. In 2007 alone, NATO helicopters and precision guided munitions bombed and killed over six thousand “Taliban.” Read the following recent attacks, which the NATO itself reports, and smell the scent of genocide:

On January 19, 2008, NATO launched a preemptive strike relying on “credible intelligence” that the Taliban were planning to mass on a NATO base. The attack killed two dozen “insurgents” in the Watapoor District of Kunar Province, though the exact number of casualties could not be confirmed because of the rough mountainous region. The world media reported that numerous civilians were killed and 25 bodies were buried in just one mass grave.

On January 12, 2008, NATO forces conducted what it calls a “precise strike” on a compound in Kapsia Province targeting Taliban leaders. NATO claimed that the civilians were cleared from the compound before the attack. The claim is absurd because any removal of civilians from the compound would have alerted the battle-hardened Taliban that an enemy attack was imminent.

On September 20, 2007, NATO forces launched “Operation Palk Wahel” to kill and remove the Taliban from an area in the Upper Gereshk Valley. Numerous civilians were killed. The evidence of the genocide was so obvious that NATO admitted that it “was unaware of civilians in the vicinity of the target and unfortunately it appears that a number of non-combatants were caught in the attack and killed.”

The Law

The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (entered into force, 1951) is binding on all states including the 26 member states of NATO. The Genocide Convention is jus cogens, the law from which no derogation is allowed. It provides no exceptions for any nation or any organization of nations, such as the United Nations or NATO, to commit genocide. Nor does the Convention allow any exceptions to genocide “whether committed in time of peace or in time of war.” Even traditional self-defense – let alone preemptive self-defense, a deceptive name for aggression ­ cannot be invoked to justify or excuse the crime of genocide.

In murdering the Taliban, NATO armed forces systematically practice on a continual basis the crime of genocide that consists of three constituent elements – act, intent to destroy, and religious group. The crime, as defined in the Convention, is analyzed below:

1. Act. The Convention lists five acts, each of which qualifies as genocide. NATO forces in Afghanistan are committing three of the five acts. They are killing members of the Taliban. They are causing serious bodily harm to members of the Taliban. They are deliberately inflicting on the Taliban conditions of life calculated to bring about their physical destruction in whole or in part. Any of these three acts committed one time constitutes the crime of genocide. NATO combat troops have been committing, and continue to commit, these acts through multiple means and weapons.

2. Intent to Destroy. The crime of genocide is a crime of intent. It must be shown that NATO combat troops and the high command ordering these troops carry the requisite intent to destroy the Taliban. Mere negligent killings do not qualify as genocide. The statements of NATO’s Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer and those of NATO spokesmen leave no doubt that the NATO conducts military operations to “hunt and destroy” the Taliban. Preemptive strikes to kill the Taliban are sufficient proof that NATO troops and commanding generals have specific intent to destroy as many Taliban members as they can find. The weekly murderous planning and intelligence gathering to locate and eliminate the Taliban leaders and members further demonstrate that the killings in Afghanistan are not negligent, accidental, or by mistake. For all legal purposes, NATO’s incessant and deliberate killings of the Taliban are powered with the specific intent to destroy a religious group.

3. Religious Group. The Genocide Convention is far from universal in that it does not protect all groups from genocide. Its protection covers only four groups: national, ethnic, racial and religious. (Political groups are not protected). The Convention does not require the complete eradication of a protected group as a necessary condition for the crime of genocide. Even part destruction of a protected group constitutes the crime. It is no secret that the Taliban are a religious group. (They may also qualify as a national (Afghan) or ethnic (Pushtun) group). The Taliban advocate and practice a puritanical version of Islam. The Convention does not demand that the protected group advocate and practice a form of religion acceptable to the West or the world. The questionable beliefs and practices of a religious group are no reasons to destroy the group. That the Taliban are armed or support terrorism or oppress women are unlawful excuses to commit genocide. (All reasons that Hitler had to murder Jews would be simply irrelevant under the Convention).

The Holding

It may, therefore, be safely concluded that NATO combat troops and NATO commanders are engaged in murdering the Taliban, a protected group under the Genocide Convention, with the specific intent to physically and mentally destroythe group in whole or in part. This is the crime of genocide.

Ali Khan is professor of law at Washburn University in Topeka, Kansas. He can be reached at: ali.khan@washburn.edu

Is NATO Committing Genocide in Afghanistan? by Liaqat Ali Khan

Share

US Aid to Pakistan: Pakistan's 7 Invoices from the Stone Age! New Pakistani Government: New $150 Billion per annum bill for USA. Old aid was signed under duress!

Share

Pakistan’s Seven Points from the Stone Age. 

We thought that Armiatege said, if you don’t sign the deal you will be bombed to the stone age. Pakistan did sign the deal, but the bombing continues. Since Pakistan has been bombed to the Stone Age, the deal has to be renegotiated.

The new Democratic Government should present the seven points right now. All parties should get consensus on this.

1) No renditions. No incarceration without trial of Pakistani citizens. Return of all Pakistani citizens.

2) No US troops in Pakistan and no bombing of Pakistani territory. No covert actions in Pakistan.

3) Elimination of anti-Pakistan rhetoric from Mr. Karazi or his proposed successor Mr. Khalizad. Pakistani’s “Monroe Doctrine” dictates that no anti-Pakistani government will be tolerated in Kabul. Immediate closure of Indian consulates and Information centers in Afghanistan and closure of Indian base in Tajikistan.

4) No foreign sabotage and meddling in Pakistani affairs.

5) $150 Billion for services rendered per annum. Back invoices and infrastructure built. Retire the debt. FTA with US and the EU. See details of needs: Invoice for Defeating terror, Securing Pakistani Nukes $150 Billion per annum

6) Elimination of Indian forces in Kashmir, Siachen, Junagarh and Manavadar 

7) Elimination of daily diatribes and anti-Pakistan rhetoric in the US media.

The deal in 2001 was signed “under the gun” with Armitage’s threats of “we will bomb you back to the stone ages” (source: Pervez Musharraf-”In the Line of Fire”). Each time Pakistan hears a “whine”, Pakistan should offer home grown cheese with an invoice. See article above (Pakistani Cheese for Western “whine”. Market Value real Invoices for services rendered.). Pakistan was given seven points. President Musharraf agreed to all seven. Now the Government of Pakistan should hand back seven points to the US government and its allies also.

Pakistani Cheese for Western “whine”. Market Value real Invoices for services rendered.

Invoice for Defeating terror, Securing Pakistani Nukes $150 Billion per annum

Renegotiating the US-Pakistani alliance and the correcting the price tag for services in the ”Global War on Terror” (GWOT) should be the highest priority of the new government. Pakistan lost billions per annum because of war. Pakistan got 1.3 Billion Dollars during he Zia regime. That was pennies. Back dated invoices should be sent for the first Afghan war also. The world owes Pakistan a debt for destroying the USSR.

The Foreign relations Committee of the Senate of Pakistan which is a permanent body should be holding hearings and hiring economist to place a current number that needs to be billed to the USA. 

The Turks turned down the American $38 Billion debt retirement package to allow American forces access to Turkish airspace to bomb Iraq. The Israelis get about $60 Billion a year. The US has given Pakistan $500 million per year for the past 8 years for perpetual mimetic warfare. the other $5 billion is for logistical services for which invoices are sent and scrutinized by bean counters in Washington.

Is this a joke?

Slave labor was banned centuries ago.

The Pakistanis are not as white as the Turks, but a different shade of brown.  All Israelis are not white either? Sephardic Jews are just like us. So if its not a religious or racial issues, why doesn’t Pakistan get its fair share?

Pakistanis have lost more than a thousand men. About 100,000 Pakistani soldiers are used to fight this inane and insane war. Blackwater gets 150,000 per soldier per annum. Pakistan gets nothing! The poor soldiers die without a reasonable pension.

The US and the world has been pushing Pakistan for democracy. The first order of business for the new government is not to ask the UN for anything. That is rubbish. The first order of business for the Paksitani economists is to put realistic price tags on Pakistan’s involvement in the “Global War on Terror” . The limits should be set on what can be done and what cannot be done.

US Aid to Pakistan: Pakistan's 7 Invoices from the Stone Age! New Pakistani Government: New $150 Billion per annum bill for USA. Old aid was signed under duress!

Share

Renegotiating the US-Pakistani alliance.Correcting the GWOT price tag . Seven counterpoints to USA

Share

Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | ??????? ????? | ????  | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ???????  | Notizie di Rupia |  PAKISTAN LEDGER | ???????? ?????  | Moin Ansari | ???? ??????? | DefensebriefsIntellibriefs  Translate to:   RSS feed: | RUPEE NEWS  | January 30th, 2008 | Moin Ansari |  ???? ??????? | ????? ????? |

• Pakistani Cheese for Western “whine”. Market Value real Invoices for services rendered.
• Invoice for Defeating terror, Securing Pakistani Nukes $150 Billion per annum

Renegotiating the US-Pakistani alliance and the correcting the price tag for services in the ”Global War on Terror” (GWOT) should be the highest priority of the new government. The deal in 2001 was signed “under the gun” with Armitage’s threats of “we will bomb you back to the stone ages” (source: Pervez Musharraf-”In the Line of Fire”). Each time Pakistan hears a “whine”, Pakistan should offer home grown cheese with an invoice. See article above (Pakistani Cheese for Western “whine”. Market Value real Invoices for services rendered.). Pakistan was given seven points. President Musharraf agreed to all seven. Now the Government of Pakistan should hand back seven points to the US government and its allies also.

Pakistan lost billions per annum because of war. Pakistan got 1.3 Billion Dollars during he Zia regime. That was pennies. Back dated invoices should be sent for the first Afghan war also. The world owes Pakistan a debt for destroying the USSR.

The Foreign relations Committee of the Senate of Pakistan which is a permanent body should be holding hearings and hiring economist to place a current number that needs to be billed to the USA. 

The Turks turned down the American $38 Billion debt retirement package to allow American forces access to Turkish airspace to bomb Iraq. The Israelis get about $60 Billion a year. The US has given Pakistan $500 million per year for the past 8 years for perpetual mimetic warfare. the other $5 billion is for logistical services for which invoices are sent and scrutinized by bean counters in Washington.

Is this a joke?

Slave labor was banned centuries ago.

The Pakistanis are not as white as the Turks, but a different shade of brown.  All Israelis are not white either? Sephardic Jews are just like us. So if its not a religious or racial issues, why doesn’t Pakistan get its fair share?

Pakistanis have lost more than a thousand men. About 100,000 Pakistani soldiers are used to fight this inane and insane war. Blackwater gets 150,000 per soldier per annum. Pakistan gets nothing! The poor soldiers die without a reasonable pension.

The US and the world has been pushing Pakistan for democracy. The first order of business for the new government is not to ask the UN for anything. That is rubbish. The first order of business for the Paksitani economists is to put realistic price tags on Pakistan’s involvement in the “Global War on Terror” . The limits should be set on what can be done and what cannot be done.

1) No renditions. No incarceration without trial of Pakistani citizens. Return of all Pakistani citizens.

2) No US troops in Pakistan and no bombing of Pakistani territory. No covert actions in Pakistan.

3) Elimination of anti-Pakistan rhetoric from Mr. Karazi or his proposed successor Mr. Khalizad. Pakistani’s “Monroe Doctrine” dictates that no anti-Pakistani government will be tolerated in Kabul. Immediate closure of Indian consulates and Information centers in Afghanistan and closure of Indian base in Tajikistan.

4) No foreign sabotage and meddling in Pakistani affairs.

5) $150 Billion for services rendered per annum. Back invoices and infrastructure built. Retire the debt. FTA with US and the EU. See details of needs: Invoice for Defeating terror, Securing Pakistani Nukes $150 Billion per annum

6) Elimination of Indian forces in Kashmir, Siachen, Junagarh and Manavadar 

7) Elimination of daily diatribes and anti-Pakistan rhetoric in the US media.

Renegotiating the US-Pakistani alliance.Correcting the GWOT price tag . Seven counterpoints to USA

Share

The ‘Democracy’ scheme destroyed the Ottoman Empire, eliminated Muslim power in India, partitioned Iraq, bifurcated Pakistan in 1971, and pushed Afghanistan into perpetual war.

Share

Image via Wikipedia

The “Democracy” scheme invented by the British destroyed the Ottoman Empire, eliminated Muslim power in India, partitioned Iraq, bifurcated Pakistan in 1971, and pushed Afghanistan into perpetual war. It is not activated in Palestine, Kashmir and Afghan Pashtuns.0) The states growing the fastest in the world are China, Singapore, Malaysia, Taiwan, and Thailand. All do not have “democracy”. India ahs 89 insurgencies in more than 1000 districts of India where there is no Government control. At less than $900 per capita GNP (not GDP) “India” is the only island of poverty in Asia, poorer than Pakistan and worse off than the Sub Saharan Africa. Everything lese about India is marketing baloney. The USA was created as a Republic NOT a Democracy. UK has House of Lords and no representation of colonies. If democracy was so good why were the American colonies and the “Indian colonies not represented in the “House of Commons”?

Pakistan’s role model is China not India.

1) This assault against the Army is actually is a treasonous insurrection which deteriorates into an ethnic and provincial incitement. We have to reject it immediately. It is not about Musharraf or Kiyani, it is about the corp commanders, the Brigdeers, and the jawans who are defending the borders right now!

2) “Why are you crying like a woman when you did not fight like a man”. The mother said to the son. In 1492, Abdul Rehman was forced to abdicate and leave Cordoba because the majority of the country was Christian. All Muslims and Jews were subsequently expelled from Christian Spain. This defeat was a thousand times worse than any other defeat anywhere.

3) Lawrence of Arabia was fighting for the democratic rights of the Arabs. Right before the disintegration of the Ottoman empire, 500,000 Arab soldiers dropped their arms and defected to Lawrence of Arabia so that they could shed their Turkish domination and get their democratic rights. The Ottoman Empire was destroyed and the Arabs got the Emirs, the Kings, and the emperors. Majority rule!!!! The destruction of the Ottoman Empire was the worst moment in Islamic history.

4) India was mainly ruled by Muslims before the British came. In the 1940s most of Indian states were ruled by Muslims. It was not one country but more than 571 states. It wasn’t just the rulers, it was the entire intellegencia and the professional class of attorneys, accountants, and intellectuals who were Muslims. The states of Awadh, Hydrabad, Phopal, Manvanagar, Junagarh, and many others. “Democracy” was imposed on these states and they were forced to join the Dominion of India in the name of “democracy”. Immediately afterwards Nehru imposed the Land “reforms” and snatched away all Muslim lands from the Muslims reducing them to destitute status. All in the name of democracy. Additionally the Devanagri script was imposed on them and overnight they became illiterate.

5) In 1947 Pakistan did not get any arms from India as part of the 1947 Act of Independence. The new Pakistan Army with the Pathans with knives and sticks liberated one third of Kashmir now called Azad Kashmir and all of Northern Areas. Else the Indian boundary would be at Kashmir point in Murree, 35 miles from Islamabad.

6) In 1947, Pakistan lost Hydrabad, Junagarh, Manvanagar, Bhopal, Assam because democracy was imposed on the Muslim rulers.

7) In 1968 Pakistan was doing so well that Korean teams used to come to Pakistan to see what is going on. Pakistan was strong and peaceful. Ayub Khan kicked the Americans out of Badabare Airforce base. A psy-op campaign very similar to the one with shortages of goods, sugar and wheat was started a nationwide “movement” forced him to quit office. These champions of democracy derailed Ayub Khan and within 3 years we lost East Pakistan. The army was there to blame it all on!

8) East Pakistan: West Pakistan had surrendered East Pakistan when the One Unit was formed in West Pakistan and parity was declared with East Pakistan. All founding members of the Muslim League who were Bengali were purged from the Muslim League. All in the name of democracy, a loser traitor Shaikh Mujib was allowed to run in the election on the secessionist 6 points. The six points would have created six states in Pakistan. The army was sent in after Badar and other terror organizations were already raping women in East Pakistan. The number of soldiers in East Pakistan was 45,000. The rest were civilians.

9) Mujibs true colors showed in Bangaldesh within a year when he was in power. He declared a one party state and made the statement “my wish since 1947″ has come true. He was killed and his body was left on the streets. Bangladesh that wanted “liberation” and democracy is still run by the army.

10) East Pakistan: East Pakistan was lost because of bigotry not a surrender in Dhaka. Setting the record straight. In 1900 the British government decided to impose the Devanagri script in all government offices. The Bengalis were incensed. They immediately started rioting for the restoration of Urdu and the Farsi script. Muslim West Bengal wanted a separate province for the Muslims where Urdu could be taught and read. In response the British acquiesced to the partition of Bengal along Hindu and Muslim lines. However Hindu counter demonstrations annulled the partition of Bengal and the Devanagri script was imposed on all of Bengal. Bengali was a very recent and new language of Calcutta formed in the 1800s anyway. All Muslims in Bengal spoke and wrote Urdu and did not accept the Calcutta language. Nawab Waqar ul Mulk and others formed the Muslim League and agitated for a separate homeland and the Lahore declaration was signed in 1940.

11) In 1989 Bhutto was doing well. The champions of democracy led a externally funded campaign and deposed Bhutto. Bhutto and the PNA had reached an agreement but the powers to be did not like it. We had to fight a war in Afghanistan for 10 years under a foreign imposed dictator.

12) The “for life presidents” of all major political parties do not auger well for “democracy”. How can a 19 year old be chairman of a political party? A person who has no clue, a person who does not speak Punjabi, or Baluchi, or Kashmiri, or Hindkoh, or Sindhi or Urdu!

13) During the democratic reign of BB and Nawazoo, parliament met for 20 days in a year. Most of the time the cabinet was not consulted and Abba jee made the decision for the Muslim League. BB did no pass any major legislation and did not over rule the hadood ordinances even though she had a majority in the parliament.

14) India took over Siachin while these champions of democracy were keeping Bhutto embroiled in this so called PNA agitation. The Pakistan Army took over Kargill and 300 peaks, but Nawaz Sharif surrendered it back in Washington.

15) Military Inc. was written in India for Indians and depicts a very wrong picture of Pakistan. The Military control a section fo the economy, but controls some of the largest defence programs which include the Nuclear, Missile ad Space programs. The Pakistani Military Industrial complex, like all military complexes in the world is run by the Government and the Armed Forces. The US Area 54, and DoD run the NASA and other programs and sometimes use trusted civilian contractors. The Russian, Israeli and Indian programs are very similar in nature. No civilian contractor in Pakistan could run the Kamra project to develop and build the JF-17 Thunder aircraft that copied the F-16s. no civilian contractor could make the Al-Khalid tank based on Easter European models. No civilian contractor could make the Pakistani Nuclear Bomb and Missile program.

16) The For Life presidents of the Muslim League and the PPP took the budget deficit of $12 Billion and took it to $38 Billion in a four years. Result Surray Palance etc.

17) There is a concerted campaign to destabilize Pakistan run by many Indians, and supporters. The Iranians and the Chinese have warned external forces and asked Pakistanis to see the danger from abroad. Read about it on www.RupeeNews.com or click here.

18) the only thing working against Pakistan is external forces and bigotry and prejudice. These politicians want to create more hatred among Pakistanis. Whenever you hear something based on bigotry or hatred or prejudice, dump it, ignore it and speak up against it. Only Indian agents are against Pakistan. We are all Pakistanis. Pakistan Zindabad. Pakistan Paindabad.

Related articles

• 1971 impossibility (rupeenews.com)
• ‘Dead Reckoning’ redefines history of 1971 (rupeenews.com)
• 1971: Why the surrender? (rupeenews.com)
• Proof that Siachin belongs to Pakistan (rupeenews.com)
• Are we expecting too much from Imran Khan? (rupeenews.com)
• Moving beyond South Asia. Divorcing the Subcontinent (rupeenews.com)
• Babar’s Pakistan and Uzbekistan (rupeenews.com)
• 1971 in the light of new research by Sarmila Bose (rupeenews.com)
• Leftist Fringe media in India tries to mould Pakistan in its own image (rupeenews.com)
• The Natural Silk Route flows from China to the rest of the world via Pakistan (rupeenews.com)

The ‘Democracy’ scheme destroyed the Ottoman Empire, eliminated Muslim power in India, partitioned Iraq, bifurcated Pakistan in 1971, and pushed Afghanistan into perpetual war.

Share