Pakistan's Afghan Policy

Re: # 475 Zeemax
``
So who`s opinion counts more than Kofi`s?``
The UN General Assembly and the Security Council (in descending order)
Now go read more books before coming to me for a free education.

#474 by PewResearch

It is quite pitiful the way you toss and turn to wriggle out of an indefensible position. Now you say ``Kofi Annan is entitled to his opinion ``.

Interesting your dismissing the opinion of a person who is the head of the international body about which you at the same time say ``The fact that the UN is the sponsor of most of international law today .. ``

So who`s opinion counts more than Kofi`s? Yours? Of-course you think so thereby my original contention that the last of the three of my asumptions is correct.

As for bringing that vote stuff, Kofi`s ass had always been the most sought-after by USA after its invasions precisely because Kofi saying things like that, so much so that they tried to embroil him in corruption scandals and oil-for-food and all that suff, as well as his son.

Re: # 473 Zeemax
I don`t know why you changed the subject from Afghanistan to Iraq, and that is why I ignored you.
Kofi Annan is entitled to his opinion (as are you and Dost). What matters is if George Bush committed an international crime (i.e. war of aggression in Iraq) as perhaps Annan suggests,. The legal way (since you two are such believers in the law) is for Annan to successfully carry through a vote under the Nuremberg Principles in the General Assembly charging Bush with specific violations. That is not going to happen (and Annan knows that - he did not even bother when he was the Secretary General) especially because the very same assembly passed resolutions authorizing sanctions on Iraq.

You are entitled to your opinions, but not the facts! CIAO

Re: #467 by zeemax

No response from Mr. Pewresearch so I assume the answer must be the last of the three i.e. Kofi didn`t know his International law.

Cheers :-)

(contd..got disturbed by the trickotreating kids)

that is the situation today re to immigrant muslims but original over 1.5% from Punjab is a well known fact..most of them in Malerkotla area. I lived in Ludhiana for many years, there were some in Ludhiana city and surrounding villages also. (2 from that area were my classmates there).
but that was not the case in say villages in Amritsar District..I never knew any there except one person of Dalit community from my village who was always called by his muslim name...his mother was kidnapped by this dalit guy and he was born right after partition..his mother named him Rehmat....he also had his full name as Karmjit singh and is a sikh with full beard and turban etc and does GGS recitals in the local gurdwara.
Other than that I did not know any musims in Amritsar area but when I moved to Amritsar city(sadr city area) after high school we used to go for evening walk in the main bazar Hall bazar and I discovered that there a masjid which had some muslims sitting outside or door open and people inside the masjid chatting I almost forgot about this masjid until february this year while ladies were shopping I was strolling in Hall bazaar alone and all of a sudden I encountred may be over hundred men with skull caps ...I realized I was just few steps away from the Masjid and these guys had come out after the evening prayer..many of them work in shops in the inner city...many of them are actually Kashmiris. Now this was not a special festival or anything but a regular scene in the heart of Amritsar.

BUT all this does not take away the fact that muslims were butchered mercilessly in east punjab during partition and almost all driven away from the area except few hundred thousands in Malerkotla and Qaadian.
But it is good to see the remaining ones are not strangers in Punjab today and can live normal lives as any other members of the society.

#464 Manto:
According to 2001 census there are around 386,000 muslims in East Punjab. That is about 1.6% of the population. Majority of them are Punjabi muslims (majority in Ludhiana, Sangrur, , Qadian areas). That does not include Chandigarh(as chandigarh is union terroritory). There is also a large number of Muslim immigrants in last 10 years from UP and Bihar that used to come to Punjab seasonaly but lately the trend is to stay, bring families and permanently move to East Punjab. I met one such guy past february in Amritsar whom we hired for decoration at my niece`s wedding. He had about 15 local and immigrant workers working for him in this business. His name I think was Imran and he lives in Amritsar now with his family. Trend of Muslim Bhaiyas(as some people refered to them in Punjab) is very latest. One of my friends in Punjab when asked why so. told me that they are certainly safer here than Bihar and have better economic opportunities.

#464 by Mantolives


[Looks like you are pulling these figures out of your rear end... metaphorically speaking ofcourse. I have met Pakistani Punjabi Sikhs and Pakistani Punjabi Hindus... and lots of Pakistani Sindhi Hindus ... but I have never met an Indian Punjabi Muslim (unless you want to count Delhi as part of Punjab which it is not)... ]

If that is the kind of argument you are going to use in your career as an attorney, I feel sorry for your clients.

Let`s see...

[Islamabad is not a city of 1 million...]

Here`s the information as posted in http://www.islamabad.net/info.htm:

Current population: 901137




[Rawalpindi is not a city of 1.4 million... ]

Here`s the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rawalpindi


[and you`ve quoted no figure for this 20 families and 40 families ...]

This is from a Paki newspaper, no Hindutva mouthpiece: http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/print.asp?page=2006%5C10%5C21%5Cstory_21-10-2006_pg11_7


[I know Islamabad has a low figure of Hindus ... like around a thousand or so... but that is because Rawalpindi has a larger population ... 2000+ ... ]

Wow. 3000+ in a total population of 1.4 + 0.9 = 2.3 million!

Wow! You Muslims MUST be doing something right!

Oops! Sorry! Officially (according to the Pakis) you are NOT a Muslim.


[Similarly I can`t take your word for Chandigarh`s population figures either,]

Here`s the population of Chandigarh as per the last census as posted in http://www.censusindia.net/profiles/chd.html:

Population as of 2001 : 900,914

Number of Muslims: 35,548 (as per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_India)


[ because nothing you`ve written has given us any real faith in you.]

Yasser, my dear boy. Unlike you Muslims who have to pull lie after lie out of your rear ends to rationalize your prophet`s physical lust towards a little baby when he had grey pubic hair, to his butchering 700 unarmed civilians to his selling their helpless and innocent women and children into slavery, to his million misdeeds, to the million crimes committed by Muslims in India and everywhere else, we Hindus do not have to rationalize anything. We are not trying convince or convert anyone. If we have problems, they are INTERNAL, we do not go out and kill others (unless, of course, you Muslims burn alive many dozens of Hindu men, women and children TO BEGIN WITH).


[Furthermore... just because there are a few Muslims living in Chandigarh (that is if they are) doesn`t mean that they are necessarily Punjabi Muslims.]

Dear boy, give some source of your information, rather than extract it from your rear end. Also, they might all be Tamil Muslims, but they are Muslims nonetheless.


[There are in total close to 3.5- 4 million Pakistani Hindus... if a better census is done.. we`ll discover that there are many more... ]

3.5-4 million out of how many?

Yasser, my dear boy. You better give up on this one as well.

Re: # 468 Dost Mittar
``...an obscure article of UN...``

You call an article from the Charter that established the UN `an obscure article` and put it in the same category as `speed limit signs`? The fact that the UN is the sponsor of most of international law today is not important? Enough said on this matter with someone claiming to seek succour under the `law` in a `court` with `incontrovertible` evidence.

``I think that there will be chaos is this world if every nation unilaterally decided that an attack on it has taken place when, for instance, a countrly grants asylum to another country`s enemy.``

I love my mother too! But that has nothing to do with the law. Ciao.

PewResearch:

It`s a cliche that ignorance of law is no excuse but not all of us know all the laws in the world and you would perhaps grant me that an obscure article of UN is not exactly the same as the laws regarding speed limits.

I think that there will be chaos is this world if every nation unilaterally decided that an attack on it has taken place when, for instance, a countrly grants asylum to another country`s enemy.

#465 by PewResearch

Interesting observations you make re article 51.

Anyway, never mind, can you comment on what Kofi Annan publicly admitted in media that the US invasion of Iraq was not in conformity with International law.

Meaning that US was in breach of your favourite Article 51 in exercising its` ``inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations.

Or was Iraq a different situation? Or was US acting under a wrong interpretation of your Principle VI of Nuremberg? Or Kofi didn`t know his International law as well as you do?

Which one was it?

#465 by PewResearch on October 31, 2006 4:18am PT

forgive him...it`s the kool-aid...he still thinks the taliban turned down the well meaning advise of the ISI....

Bin Laden`s `prints` seen on ruins of Bamiyan Buddhas
Selim Saheb Ettaba
AFP
October 23, 2006

BAMIYAN, Afghanistan -- In a huge cavity dug into the side of a cliff, workers search through the rubble to exhume the remains of the giant Buddhas of Bamiyan.

At the scene of the crime carried out in 2001 all evidence points to Osama Bin Laden as the mastermind. ``This is the terrorism of the Taliban,`` says Rahim, an official at the work site in front of the empty niche of the biggest of the two statues, one of which stood 55 meters (182 feet) tall and the other 38 meters.

He says that there were Arabs, Pakistanis, and Chechens among the Taliban fanatics who oversaw the demolition of the ancient relics - until then the largest standing Buddhist statues in the world - carried out on the orders of the head of the Taliban regime because they were deemed idolatrous.

One of his colleagues, Abdul Ali, adds: ``The Taliban were the executors, but the masterminds were the Arabs and the Pakistanis.``

Re: # 453 Dost-Mittar

``Okay, I was not aware of Article 51.``

Okay, next time you find yourself in front of a judge, do not plead innocence on accout of ignorance of the law! It wont work.

``But whether or not WTC attack can be considered to be an attack by Afghanistan (because it had sheltered Al Qaida elements) seems to be somewhat debatable. I would have agreed with you if the attack on WTC was debated in the UN and Afghanistan culpability established; the US attack would then have the added strength of the UN support.``

That`s because ignormauses like you want to debate ad nauseum till the cows come home. Article 51 recognizes that such ignormasuses will also occassionally become members of the Security Council, and that `debate` to `strenghten a case (as you put it)` could be used as a cover to shield the aggressor and prevent the victim nation from exercising their right of self-defense all in the name of `debate`. That is why Article 51 explicitly states (by the way, did you even read it?), `Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, UNTIL (emphasis added) the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security`. In other words, if an attack occurs, the debates can go in the Security Council ad nauseum, but the aggrieved party can take matters into their own hands.

You may not sympathize with the Taleban or their Pakistani handlers, but your ignorance certainly has the effect of providing comfort to them.

Krishna,

Looks like you are pulling these figures out of your rear end... metaphorically speaking ofcourse. I have met Pakistani Punjabi Sikhs and Pakistani Punjabi Hindus... and lots of Pakistani Sindhi Hindus ... but I have never met an Indian Punjabi Muslim (unless you want to count Delhi as part of Punjab which it is not)...

Islamabad is not a city of 1 million... Rawalpindi is not a city of 1.4 million... and you`ve quoted no figure for this 20 families and 40 families ... I know Islamabad has a low figure of Hindus ... like around a thousand or so... but that is because Rawalpindi has a larger population ... 2000+ ...

Similarly I can`t take your word for Chandigarh`s population figures either, because nothing you`ve written has given us any real faith in you. Furthermore... just because there are a few Muslims living in Chandigarh (that is if they are) doesn`t mean that they are necessarily Punjabi Muslims. There are in total close to 3.5- 4 million Pakistani Hindus... if a better census is done.. we`ll discover that there are many more...

#458 by Mantolives

I`ve said this before, and I`ll repeat it here. The reason you will lose any argument of this nature with me is not because you are not smart - it is because you are trying to defend the indefensible.

Here goes...

[Because ... Islamabad is a city of recent origin... ]

Chandigarh is a city of recent origin as well. Out of a population of 900,00 (roughly the same as Islamabad), there are 25 THOUSAND muslims.

Get the difference?

[and because a great number of the people who work and live in Islamabad commute from the nearby Rawalpindi.... which has a larger Hindu population... and few temples.]

Yes. only 40 Hindu families. Out of a population of 1.4 million!

[However... it is well known that Punjabis killed each other silly during 1947.... hence there are hardly any Muslims in East Punjab ... and unlike us, you actually claim to be Secular... why is that? ]

Read the above. Chandigarh IS in East Punjab. See the difference? THAT`s why.

[Now if you were to go to Karachi or interior Sindh... you would find that the Hindus are a prosperous community there, consisting doctors, businessmen, fashion designers and influential feudals. ]

The Hindu population of Karachi is 0.83%. Now why is that?

#450 by DrDr re #414

So whats ur point? What does this interview with a trailerpark woman prove 2 u?

I thought the point would have been obvious. Muhammad Atta flush with money throwing it around ```left and right``, high on booze and drugs most of the time as were his pals, with an ``unending`` supply of cocaine, with a live-in American girlfriend (not the trailer park trash type either ... mind you).

Not exactly the profile of a Jihadi type about to die in the name of Allah!

For a detailed view... you might wanna read... Charlie Wilson`s War

Hollywood is even doing a movie on it.... Tom Hanks, Julia Roberts and Om Puri.