Mercy beau-coup?

Am not familiar with the full body of evidence against the man (whoever he is), but if it is basically a confession made to the police, and/or some recently withdrawn allegations # 167, then it would be a serious miscarriage of justice to hang the man.

Beyond that, there are enough innocent people languishing in the jails of both countries.

Regarding the `latest developments`, there could have been other ways to prove Sarabjit`s innocence. I am not convinced about this Shaukat Ali. He gave these interviews to a news channel. He said he had fainted when the bomb blasts took place and did not see the perpetrator of the crime. So, why has he woken up now? And how are we imagining that by confessing to lie in court he is not putting hmself at risk with the law?

Unless of course this too is an arrangement. President Musharraf needs neutral witnesses to exonerate Sarabjit because he will be in trouble either way.

Star News got another witness. Not news channels are finding witnesses in a foreign country to speak against their own government. Wonderful...

Farzana Versey is a commi from Stalinist Russia .I think She has a major attitude problem
or perhaps she gets a kick in taking a stance which is diametrically opposite popular perception.
Whatever the case I would like to bring out two points ,which are(atleast thats what I think)
more relevant to the case of Sarabjit Singh.

1. The confession made by the accused could have been made in duress.

2. The identity of the accused could be easily acertained by a DNA test (from a sample taken from his family members)so that we can all know whether the accused is Sarabjit Singh or Manjeet Singh.

so Farzana dont jump to your guns ,take up some other cause ,after all its a matter of a human life ,a person who has been languising in a paki jail for 15 years
just leave Sarabjit and his family alone!!!


Regards
Nandan

re:#167 by dost-mittar
Ha, ha,ha.
Tahmed is hiding in his closet. Mullah Romair is busy speculating on the cause of Katrina in another forum.
As i said, the guy is innocent. The newer developments have proved some of us right!
Sridhar

Sarabjit is innocent: Prime witness

September 04, 2005 21:31 IST

tahmed32, Romair:

Are you still around? The prime witness against Sarabjit Singh - a Pakistani - has also retracted his statement.

``The prime witness who had testified against Sarabjit Singh, sentenced to death on charges of orchestrating bomb blasts in Pakistan, on Sunday said he had never seen the accused.``

Reports said the witness Shaukat Ali said his entire testimony was dictated by the public prosecutor.

Sarabjit Singh, whose family claims had ventured into Pakistan border and was captured, has been languishing in Pakistan`s prisons for 15 years.``

Farzana,

``On what basis is India defending Sarabjit Singh who has been convicted by the Supreme Court of Pakistan for terrorist activities?``

Is this the same ``Supreme`` Court of Pakistan that was purged, hand-picked, and one that even swore allegiance to Musharaff (a person Vs. a country).

The question isn`t whether India is asking about a citizen whom it knows little. It`s about the conviction (lynching probably more apt) of someone whom the Pakistani government knows even less.

Guilty as charged (or as confessed).

Qu`aviez-vous fumé?

Satire

Romair#162:

There is a difference between ``knowing`` (certainty) and ``thinking`` (speculation). If someone is an Indian spy, the Indian govt. should know about it.

Veeresh was taking a risk in violating his visa condition and if he were to be arrested, he should have been prepared for it (but he probably knew enough people in Pakistan to be confident that this wouldn`t happen to him). But if he were to be arrested, beaten the crap out of him until he confessed that he was an Indian spy who planted the bomb that tried to kill Musharraf, and faced hanging despite retracting his confession, then it would be like the scenario in which the Indian govt. should retaliate.

And as I said earlier, my statement was merely rhetorical. Indian judiciary is fiercely independent (though ubelievably inefficient and even corrupt at lower levels!) and would not pronounce a guilty verdict even for ordinary theft based on a retracted confession, let alone award capital punishment, which is practically abolished.

...and IJC has absolutely no jurisdiction is such matters.

#162 by Romair on September 2, 2005 11:57pm PT


the Pakistani govt. doesn`t think he is a spy, they can pick up Vereesh when he is watching the Test match in Pindi, when he only has a visa for Lahore........Regardless of what the Indian govt. thinks.......


Good...i`m all for that...that should put an end to visits to pakiland by these dumbass ``Pakis don`t support jihadi terrorism`` Indian liberals...no more medical facilities in India for paki kids either.(wtf is the deal with that? pakiland doesn`t have medical facilities or docs too busy treating instruments of political and diplomatic support?)


Because that will end up in cases in Kashmir going to the ICJ. Since India considers any militancy in Kashmir to be terrorism and not a freedom struggle, and it independently wants to adjudicate on that


hytothetical scenario:

ICJ to India: Struggle in Kashmir is a freedom struggle like the pakis say it is. You must vacate Kashmir.
India to ICJ: bite us.

ICJ to India: Baglihar dam is illegal. stop building it
India to ICJ: bite us.

ICJ to India: leave kashmir and stop the baglihar dam now or we`ll make you do it..
India to ICJ: mmkay...you and what army?




get the idea?

1. I hope the Indian government never adopts the covert or overt state policy of knowingly, deliberately, with specific intent, harming innocent Pakistanis. That covert or overt state policy would make the Indian government an international terrorist organization.

2. All hairsplitting, religious fudging, political double-speak notwithstanding, Jihad is nothing but an Arabic term for terrorism against non Muslims. ALL Jihadis, specially the ``sweet`` ones like Temporal, firmly back and support international terrorism.

3. Supporters of terrorism are NOT innocent. A terrorist is a soul-less automaton that kills and is destroyed. Supporters of terrorism are the ones who put these machines together, and launch them upon innocent others.

Without killing these supporters of terrorism, we MUST make their cost of supporting terrorism unbearably, painfully, high for them - no matter where they are located.

1. I hope the Indian government never adopts the covert or overt state policy of knowingly, deliberately, with specific intent, harming innocent Pakistanis. That covert or overt state policy would make the Indian government an international terrorist organization.

2. All hairsplitting, religious fudging, political double-speak notwithstanding, Jihad is nothing but an Arabic term for terrorism against non Muslims. ALL Jihadis, specially the ``sweet`` ones like Temporal, firmly back and support international terrorism.

3. Supporters of terrorism are NOT innocent. A terrorist is a soul-less automaton that kills and is destroyed. Supporters of terrorism are the ones who put these machines together, and launch them upon innocent others.

Without killing these supporters of terrorism, we MUST make their cost of supporting terrorism unbearably, painfully, high for them - no matter where they are located.

Dost-mittar #150: ``But if - and there is a big if - the Indian government knows that Sarabjit is not a spy then they should do something similar to a Pakistani.``

Could you explain exactly how the Indian govt. would prove whether he is a spy or not? Why would a govt. ever admit that someone was a spy? They would obviously say he wasn`t. Spying being an illegal act. In this case, he is charged with carrying out explosions, which killed 14 people. Which is even more illegal.

Also, do you think this should be a rule used by all govts. For example, if the Indian govt. catches a Pakistani under the charge of terrorism, should the Pakistani govt. then have the right to declare that if (big if or small if, take your pick) the Pakistani govt. doesn`t think he is a spy, they can pick up Vereesh when he is watching the Test match in Pindi, when he only has a visa for Lahore........Regardless of what the Indian govt. thinks.......

What should happen is that all such cases should go to the International Court of Justice. Both countries should make their case, in front of neutral int`l judges and those judges should decide. That way, it won`t be, ``he said, she said.``

The problem is that India never agrees to that. Because that will end up in cases in Kashmir going to the ICJ. Since India considers any militancy in Kashmir to be terrorism and not a freedom struggle, and it independently wants to adjudicate on that..........without any involvement from ICJ, UNO etc............Which is probably why India itself would not want to take this case to any int`l organization.........

The last thing both countries need is to start picking up each others citizens who have entered into the country. Pretty soon the few tourists that do visit the other country will stop visiting............

arjun-m, harish-hyd:

tahmed has been here since before 9/11. Truth be told, he was more Pro-India in his earlier days at chowk.

#158 by dost-mittar

[Frankly, I do not remember tahmed supporting Pakistani terrorists.]

Dost Sahib, Please note the following sentence:

``One must draw the line somewhere between right and wrong - and attacking innocent people is where one draws the line.``

tahmed32 is all for drawing lines when innocent Paki civilians are at the receiving end, but show me one condemnation of his of Pakistan`s state policy of encouraging Jihadis to slaughter innocent Indians.

#158 by dost-mittar on September 2, 2005 6:34am PT


Frankly, I do not remember tahmed supporting Pakistani terrorists.


Frankly, post 9/11, I don`t remember any paki admitting they supported jihadi terrorism...Didn`t you read the article I posted by the DG of the PISS..That was before 9/11...now paki love for the jihad has gone back into the closet...It`s a dramatic turnaround...almost as dramatic as Elton John giving up pink suits and showing up for a concert in blue jeans and a t-shirt....

harish-hyd#157:

``Wonder where the so-called ``line`` was when Paki terrorists were merrily killing innocent civilians, whether in J&K, or in the Parliament attack, or at Akshardham in Gujarat. Post 9/11 and 7/7, every Paki seems to have turned a dove and even better, civilized.``

Frankly, I do not remember tahmed supporting Pakistani terrorists. The debate I had with him was regarding a tit-for-tat behaviour. To me, if the Indian govt. thinks that one of its citizens is to be hanged after a sham trial for a crime he did not commit, it is okay for it to do something similar in India for the purpose of making an exchange with Pakistan. He perhaps does not realise that if the Indians picked up an illegal Pakistani, charged him with one of the many terrorist acts taking place in India, had the police extract a confession from him, then that citizen would be in exactly the same position as Sarabjit Singh is, presuming he is not a spy, in which case this tit-for-tat does not apply.

#151 by tahmed32

[One must draw the line somewhere between right and wrong - and attacking innocent people is where one draws the line. That is what separates a civilized society from a primitive one.]

Wonder where the so-called ``line`` was when Paki terrorists were merrily killing innocent civilians, whether in J&K, or in the Parliament attack, or at Akshardham in Gujarat. Post 9/11 and 7/7, every Paki seems to have turned a dove and even better, civilized.

re:#134 by tahmed32
Wokay, wokay (in my typical southern accent!). Whatever u say.
Now-a-days, i have taken up a new vocation. Bhains key aagey been bajana (playing flute in front of the water-buffalo). I am finding that it actually appreciates music!
Sridhar

re:#128 by arjun_m
Oops!
That dame (Shireen Mazari) looks positively menacing in that article. Is this the face of the proverbial Paki beauty that is much talked about in Chowk?
And the guts to write such article!! Much has changed since. Now-a-days, the Director of PISS (Pak Institute of Strategic Studies) is, i am told, sh*tting in her pants (or is it salwar?).
Sridhar

re:#127 by tahmed32
Tahmed Sahib,
You are obfuscating the issue. Much like your dictator. You should have been a politician!
When Mushy was asked (by a foreign journalist) why OBL is popular in Pak, he said that was not the case and that Pak is a moderate country because he (Mushy) was popular there!
You write:
(While Qadeer`s sharing of nuclear technology with various nations is morally reprehensible, the fact as I understand it is that there were no laws that he broke.)
That is not the issue here.
The issue is: whether it was legal for Mushy to have pardoned A.Q.Khan. Clearly, he was within his rights as he was the military dictator, hence superceding even the judiciary. See, what i mean? Verdict of guilt was passed on him by the dictator without any court proceedings and in minutes, the same person was pardoned. Some joke!
Now, u are saying A.Q.Khan was not a hero to Pakis. I do not agree with that statement. I can paste a lot of newspaper articles from the past hailing him as a national hero. I just do not have the time. Besides, i can`t change minds of most Pakis who like to believe what their dictator tells them, without using some god-given common sense.
Sridhar

I think ``temporal`` had questioned recently as to why India did not capture Jihadi`s and produce them before media.

Here is one recent instance (there have been others in the past):

http://www.hindu.com/2005/09/02/stories/2005090206331300.htm

``There are more than 5000 boys being trained in Pakistan occupied Kashmir camps still being run to foment jehad on this side of the Line of Control.``

#150 dost mittar: you write ``But if - and there is a big if - the Indian government knows that Sarabjit is not a spy then they should do something similar to a Pakistani. How can I make this any clearer? ``

You have made this very clear from the beginning. That still does not mean it is right. It only means you are wrong even more clearly by any norms of civilized standards.

What I have tried to make clear is that this ``big if`` still leaves you condoning a criminal act. Coming from a lowlife like arjun that wasnt too much of a surprise, but coming from you it is appalling. At best, all you are saying is that the ends justify the means. I am saying the opposite: the ends do not justify the means. One must draw the line somewhere between right and wrong - and attacking innocent people is where one draws the line. That is what separates a civilized society from a primitive one.

So, we can end this discussion very clearly disagreeing on this fundamental issue of drawing the line on taking an innocent visitor to your country as hostage for some political end (however meritworthy you consider the purpose to be).

(and btw, the man is charged with blowing bombs in pakistan, not mere ``spying``, regardless of the careless use of the term ``spy`` by the pakistani press.).

tahmed32#149:

I dont think that you read my post carefully, and, if you did, then there is something lacking in my writing skills.

As I have clarified more than once, I do not support holding an innocent Pakistani by Indians or Canadians, for that matter. But if - and there is a big if - the Indian government knows that Sarabjit is not a spy then they should do something similar to a Pakistani. How can I make this any clearer? If Sarabjit is indeed a spy, of which you are certain on the basis of a retracted confession, even that qualified clause loses its relevance.

I do not know what my visit to Pakistan has to do with this issue. I was not an Indian intruding into Pakistan but a Canadian on a valid tourist visa. And I was done no favour by the Pakistani government; they treated me the same as they would any other foreign tourist boosting their economy with her or his dollar spending. I indeed did more than an ordinary foreign tourist by also portraying a generally favourable image of the country in my writings. And the hospitality I enjoyed was that of my friends who happened to be Pakistanis (and I do the same to those who call me during their visit to my city).

I have nothing more to say on this subject.

#dost mittar #148 I have read your post carefully. Nowhere do I see you retracting your support for the criminal act of kidnapping an innocent pakistani visitor to India. Nothing else you say changes that.

As for the ``tit-for-tat`` response you talk about, the fact is that Pakistanis (including government servants) have been invariably hospitable to Indian visitors in Pakistan (as has always been true in the past, and as was re-affirmed by the thousands of Indian visitors visiting Pakistan the past couple of years). Clearly they have not been on chowk and understood that the same Mr. Dost Mittar who enjoyed Pakistani hospitality last year is now happy to provide a ``tit-for-tat`` for the courtesies extended to him by kidnapping some innocent Pakistani visiting their country.

And do you seriously think the Pakistan government just kidnapped an innocent Indian visitor without any cause?? Why would it seek the death penalty for a simple farmer (as is claimed) when there are hundreds of Indians crossing illegally into pakistan (fishermen, smugglers) as well as legally ?? It obviously had reason to believe that this man was responsible for the bombings.

As for the merits of the death penalty as a mode of punishment, that is a separate topic. I happen to believe there should be no death penalty (given that even in the US, DNA evidence has shown that innocent people can end up on death row). But I am not interested in discussing these broader issues. That is not the issue I raised (this twisted ``Indian logic`` that is evident on this board that i pointed early on in #14).

Anyway, I am sorry you have chosen not to acknowledge the simple point I was making, and to stick to your stand that it is OK to kidnap innocent people as hostage. I hope you will reflect on this later, even though you may not like my pointing this out to you.

Tahmed32:

[Long post. You have earned it! Please read it in full, twice, before responding.]

“I am sorry to say, but you clearly are. When you second the call for holding some innocent Pakistani visitor to India hostage (and never mind the excuses), you are clearly condoning what would normally be considered a criminal, terrorist act. I suggest you do the honorable thing and retract that statement and admit you were not thinking when you wrote that.”


I have written several posts on this thread. You seem to have gone through them with a fine tooth comb to find a single sentence referring to someone else’s post to pronounce your fatwa of “condoning terrorism’. If I condoned terrorism, why would I write the following post (#47)?

There is one other element of this story that everyone seems to ignore. Did Manjeet Singh, whether or not he was Sarabjit, indeed blow up bombs and killed innocent people? Was he an agent of the Indian government? If this is true, this is very disturbing. The govt. of India is supposed to be governed by some rules of civilised behaviour; if it was sending people to cause terror in Pakistan, under what law was it doing so and how does it make it any different from cross-border terrorism from Pakistan?


My interest in this story is purely humanist. I do not want a person to go the gallows for a crime that he may not have committed . I do not know the details of this case. It is clear from your posts that neither do you. The difference between you and I is that you have assumed that the Punjab Police consists of angels and a guilty verdict obtained on the basis of a confession extracted by it, which is subsequently retracted, is sufficient to send a man who has already spent 15 years in prison, to the gallows [this is the opinion of someone who, unlike you and I, has actually followed the case]. I make no such assumption about extracted confessions, hence the post which seems to have bothered you so much.

Now, let us revisit my post which is the basis of your fatwa:

Indian authorities must know whether or not Sarabjit Singh is a RAW agent. If he is, they should use quiet diplomacy to arrange for an exchange with an ISI agent. If he is not a real agent, they should follow arjun-m`s advice in his post#7.

I am clearly entertaining the possibility that the man is a spy and, if he is, the govt. of India, as its employer, must know and should use diplomatic channels to swap him with one of the Pakistani agents in India and save its own agent’s life.

But what if he is not a spy? The Indian govt. then must know that one of its citizens is being hanged on false pretexts. It should therefore follow arjun-m’s advice of a tit-for-tit to secure his release. Remember that in saying that they should follow his advice, I did not repeat his exact words and when you asked I clarified in #129 that “I was supporting the spirit, not the letter of his statement.” One cannot support the letter of his statement because Sarabjit is definitely not an innocent visitor. At the very least, he is guilty of entering Pakistan illegally, so if there is to be a tit-for-tat, they would have to do it to someone who entered India illegally. And the purpose will be not to hang the unfortunate illegal intruder but to save someone else’s life.

So, I am not condoning terrorism, nor am I assuming that Sarabjit is a terrorist. I am simply saying that the Indian govt. owes it to Sarabjit to save his life, whether or not he is its agent.

Any further question?

Kudos to Ferzana for an interesting title, but the pun seems to have been lost on all chowkies. For the benefit of all, French for ``thank you very much`` is ``merci beaucoup``. Ferzana has made clever use of ``merci`` to read it as ``mercy``, what is what every body seems to be seeking for Sarabjeet. Of course whether she will be thankful if mercy is granted or if it is not is anybody`s guess.

What can you expect from a country which has a criminal law-breaker as a president
and a terrorist who has abated/sheltered/encouraged killers of innocents in Kashmir
as a cabinet minister and where incompetent unscrupulous army generals have ruled
the roost?

Till decent and level-headed pakistanis percolate up to important positions, many Sarabjits would happen.

Faruk: I of course agree that we should all do more, going beyond the things I mentioned. Do you have any suggestions?

Re: tahmed32 #126
“Pakistan was too sophisticated a country to deserve anything other than a democracy, which also is in line what I wrote.”

I am interested in what Pakistani’s did for democracy. I am not a believer in what peoples or countries deserve.


Regards,

Faruk

dm #139 you write ``Who is condoning terrorism?``

I am sorry to say, but you clearly are. When you second the call for holding some innocent Pakistani visitor to India hostage (and never mind the excuses), you are clearly condoning what would normally be considered a criminal, terrorist act. I suggest you do the honorable thing and retract that statement and admit you were not thinking when you wrote that.

#136 You lengthy post is totally irrelevant to the quote you provide from me.

What is relevant is what I said in that quote - and show me one post from a Pakistani that calls for a similar criminal action that seems to be OK even with Dost Mittar, then come talk to me.

dost-mittar #139

{{India has executed only one person in the last ten years, as opposed to 40-50 annually in Pakistan; this would work out to over 3000 on a population adjusted basis as against 1 in India.}}

India has executed a shade less than 58 people in 58 years as an independent nation, i.e. just about one a year on average. Death sentences are typically carried out only in cases of high-profile political murders or others that attracted extreme notoriety (e.g. Billa and Ranga, Dhananjay). I recall that the Supreme Court has ruled that the death penalty can be applied only in the ‘rarest of rare’ cases.

For a comparison, China, the world leader, is supposed to execute about 10,000 people per year. The US currently executes on the order of a hundred.

However a fair picture of the state of affairs in India will have to include the widespread and routine use by the police of extra-judicial executions - known as ‘encounters’; mostly (we hope) to eliminate known violent offenders with extensive criminal records. If these are included, I surmise they would push the execution rate up by a factor of at least a hundred.

Then again, there are dozens of politically prominent history-sheeters with one or more murders to their credit, who roam free. Some of the more prominent ones have been elected to Parliament as candidates of parties comprising or allied to the ruling coalition.

Such is the paradoxical state of the administration of criminal justice in India today.

#137 is not mine.

tahmed32#134:

``There is no excuse for terrorism - which is exactly what you condoned when you agreed with the idea only some lowlife could come up with, namely to hold a innocent person as hostage.``

Who is condoning terrorism? This hue and cry is about a man being hanged on the basis of a confession extracted by Punjabi pulisiye, as per the Dawn article by someone who has pursued this case. If it was a lesser penalty, probably nobody would have noticed. [btw, how come we never heard about his terrorist acts before either in newspapers or on chowk?]

India and Pakistan are not equal-equal in every respect - Pakistan has much better roads and buses, India much better judiciary, at least superior courts. Pakistani judiciary has shown again and again that it dances to the tune of its rulers, otherwise they would not have been able to treat your constitution as a football. As far as Bhagwan Das punishing an admiral, I bet you he would not have done so if Musharraf did not want it.

``as for what is ``impossible in india``, that is the high and mighty stance that you people seem to be experts in adopting.``

I am not in the habit of making high and mighty statements. India and Pakistan are miles apart in this respect. India has executed only one person in the last ten years, as opposed to 40-50 annually in Pakistan; this would work out to over 3000 on a population adjusted basis as against 1 in India. Here is an excerpt from the same Dawn article that I quoted yesterday:

``Pakistan has some of the highest figures of prisoners sitting in solitary confinement on death row — as has been the fate of Sarabjit Singh for the last 15 years. In 2003, there were 25 women and 5,790 men on death row in Punjab alone, out of a total of around 6,500. For the last five years, 40 to 50 prisoners are hanged annually.``

Re: # 133 Closet Mullah32

What else do you want me to do? You prop up some bulsh!t about ``pakis don`t stoop to low levels`` - where as you pakis have been killing thousands of indians in jihad for last 20 years... I mean, for that kind of statement, you deserve a hard kick on the your self-righteous rear, don`t you think?

That`s all I did - I just gave you kick because you deserved one. Don`t hate me for that :)

Zahra,

re: your question

How?

tahmed32 #125

{{No Pakistani - not even usrtruly in his most unthinking moments - ever stooped to this low level of actually calling for the kidnapping of innocent visitors to pakistan for use in exchange for some individual being tried in indian courts.}}

This is vintage tahmed – nauseatingly sanctimonious while displaying total ignorance or complete amnesia of what his country’s government – and/or unaccountable elements allied to it - have actually done.

On December 24th 1999, Pakistan contrived to have 5 of its operatives hijack a scheduled Indian Airlines flight from Kathmandu to Delhi with about 160 souls on board. The aircraft was made to land at Amritsar, the Lahore, then in the UAE, and finally in Kandahar. One passenger was stabbed to death in the course of the hijacking. The aircraft sweltered on the tarmac in Taliban-run Kandahar for a week until the Indian government was made to disgorge three terrrorists of Pakistani origin being held in Indian jails. The three promptly disappeared over the border into Pakistan.

Two of the three released terrorists – Ahmed Omar Syed Shaikh and Maulana Masood Azhar – went on to perform even more celebrated feats. Omar Shaikh contrived the murder of WSJ reporter Daniel Pearl; while Masood Azhar founded the Jaish-e-Mohammed, which is one of the major tanzeems active in Pakistan’s Kashmir jihad. So the hijacking was all in a good cause and for the greater glory of Pakistan.

prohet tahmed: you`ve posted the ``I`m not reading your posts`` thing a 100 times now...

Now that you`ve been exposed for what you really are, a self-righteous fool with no credibility, slither back under the rock you crawled out from under....

rsridhar: one more thing. while i tried to answer your specific question the best i could, i should note that your question does not contradict anything i said earlier - i.e., i never said that the pakistani judicial system is perfect, and i said that 15 years is (contrary to what you were saying) not an unduly long period between sentencing and execution for death penalty cases. and the only point i wish to stress is what i made originally in #14. Subsequent posts from indians on chowk have merely confirmed what i then wrote.

mohar: you seem to have nothing better to do than monitor chowk posts real-time, and pop up parrotting your usual lines. anyway, i am flattered to have such a loyal campfollower who keeps writing knowing that i long ago stopped taking you seriously.

dm #129 There is no excuse for terrorism - which is exactly what you condoned when you agreed with the idea only some lowlife could come up with, namely to hold a innocent person as hostage.

you add ``In any case, my statement was rhetorical as such a thing would be impossible in India.`` that is the lamest excuse i can think of. why dont you just come clean and say you werent thinking when you agreed to support this criminal idea? as for what is ``impossible in india``, that is the high and mighty stance that you people seem to be experts in adopting.

if even an mature and sensible person like you gets onto this platform of how everything is perfect in india, then i wonder exactly what kind of bs you people are taught growing up in india.

Re: # 125 closet mullah32
//....No Pakistani - not even usrtruly in his most unthinking moments - ever stooped to this low level of actually calling for the kidnapping ...//

Yep - Pakis are filled with milk of human kindness towards hinuds... So what are the jihad donation boxes [ that generate US$ 1 bn a year for jihad] doing in street corners?....

arjun: dont write posts to me please. thank you. (I didnt read what you wrote - even i dont have unlimited time, particularly for individuals like you).

tahmed32:

``That is, in post #13 you wrote ``If he is not a real agent, they should follow arjun-m`s advice in his post#7.`` And what is arjun-m`s advice? This: ``India should hold one of the pakis coming to India for medical treatment and charge them with being a spy...sham trial..death sentence...spy exchange...problem solved...`` In other words, to kidnap an innocent visitor from pakistan, to use in exchange for sarbjeet.``

The key part of the statement is if he is not a real agent. Also, I was supporting the spirit, not the letter of his statement. I believe there are, at any given time, a number of Pakistanis in Indian jails on charges of spying. One of them would have been a suitable candidate.

In any case, my statement was rhetorical as such a thing would be impossible in India. Capital punishment is awarded in India in very rare cases, such as that involving attack on Indian Parliament, and is usually commuted before it is implemented. I think that the last one hanged was Dhannanjay Chatterjee more than a year ago, who was involed in a gruesome rape-murder of a minor.

#125 by tahmed32 on August 31, 2005 1:08pm PT



No Pakistani - not even usrtruly in his most unthinking moments - ever stooped to this low level of actually calling for the kidnapping of innocent visitors to pakistan for use in exchange for some individual being tried in indian courts.


Prophet tahmed(peace be unto your self-righteous posterior)...You must think we were born yesterday...Before 9/11, before paki love for jihad hadn`t gone into the closet, prominent pakis were calling for the jihadis to attack civilians...

Have you heard of Dr Shireen Mazari? She`s the DG of the Pakistan institute of strategic studies...A paki Dr...she was calling for the jihadis to attack ``targets in the south``..if you have an ounce of intellectual honesty in you, and I don`t think you do, you know that means an attack on civilians in the IT centers in the south...

Don`t believe me? click here

These are the cruel realities of military struggles and so the Kashmir war must be taken to the Indian mainland, especially South India to make the ordinary Indian realise the costs of his government`s occupation policy in Kashmir. If freedom is to be won through the barrel of a gun then niceties cannot prevail and efficiency and effectiveness should be the primary considerations.

That moral high-horse you thought you were on: It`s actually an ass...

rsridhar #116 you ask ``So, my question to tahmed and his ilk: where is the judiciary here?`` While Qadeer`s sharing of nuclear technology with various nations is morally reprehensible, the fact as I understand it is that there were no laws that he broke.

you also write ``Abdul Qadeer Khan was a hero not so long ago. `` Not true. Qadeer was a hero only to the religious nuts in Pakistan. Most Pakistanis are smarter than them, and no one is making a fuss about his being put in house arrest, thus ending his career as nuclear secret seller. While Pakistanis owe him a debt for helping ensure that India`s military reach would stop where the Pakistani border starts, he negated that by undermining this very nuclear defense by sharing nuclear secrets with other countries for personal gain. And also put an end to Advanis screeching in 1998 after blowing 5 bombs at our borders in an attempt to intimidate Pakistanis. However, Qadeer was never even project manager for the nuclear bomb project - that was the job of the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission, which basically sub-contracted one of 17 steps involved in the production of the bomb to Qadeer (and important step, that of making the centrifuges to separate out bomb quality material, but nevertheless just one step). (I was told this by one of the scientists in that organization). The real unsung heroes are people like Dr. Usmani and Abdus Salam, and above all Dr. Munir who oversaw the nuclear bomb project.

Faruk #103 Your questions are excellent ones, and no doubt the role of the professional classes in resisting and defanging dictatorships in Pakistan (of which I mentioned a few from the top of my head) deserves to be properly recognized. For now, the words of habib jalib represent the attitude of these classes to the ``men who would be kings``:

Jo shakhs tum sey pehlay yahan takht nasheen tha
usko bhi khuda honai peh itna hee yaqeen tha

Also, as I remember, during Zia`s time there was an editorial in the Washington Post that said Pakistan was too sophisticated a country to deserve anything other than a democracy, which also is in line what I wrote.

dm: My post #14 said nothing about his guilt of innocence. My point there, and in subsequent posts, had to do with the reaction of indian posters on this board to this. And those indian posters include you, i am really sorry to see.

That is, in post #13 you wrote ``If he is not a real agent, they should follow arjun-m`s advice in his post#7.`` And what is arjun-m`s advice? This: ``India should hold one of the pakis coming to India for medical treatment and charge them with being a spy...sham trial..death sentence...spy exchange...problem solved...`` In other words, to kidnap an innocent visitor from pakistan, to use in exchange for sarbjeet.

Arjun`s saying this is not a problem - his spiteful, petty mindset is well known on chowk. However, your agreeing with him is appalling.

No Pakistani - not even usrtruly in his most unthinking moments - ever stooped to this low level of actually calling for the kidnapping of innocent visitors to pakistan for use in exchange for some individual being tried in indian courts.

With my earlier statement, i meant if sikh sardars and Ranjit Singh wiped out Rangars and other Nawabs and all their cohorts who had committed crimes against sikhs and Hindus, and forcefully or otherwise converted muslims back (as muslims had converted hindus), muslims would not have been a majority in Punjab and no Pakisatan - at least not in Punjab.

During his rule and conquests, he was generous to the fallen and their children. This is not how muslim conquerors and invaders behaved. There is not a single ancient temple that survives in all of N India.

He was secular to muslims in Punjab and they enjoyed a respected life. That graciousness was forgoten instantly in 47. From a sikh`s point of view, his good treatment of muslims was futile and bore bitter fruit.

#122
Kauray,

``Ranjit Singh kept other sikhs sardars at distance and filled his confidants with Dogras, Poorbias, and Muslims - which ultimately destroyed his kingdom and Punjab.``

You have a very strong point there. This is an intersting topic to investigate.

haideri

121,

Haideri,

True - partially. Ranjit Singh copied from the British and Mughals to counterbalance the powers. Though he did not use the schemes wisely and led to the wiping out of his progeny. Sikh egalitarian and free spirit though tamed by Ranjit Singh was never crushed. sikh sardars did not wait long to murder his sons after his death to settle old scores.

Ranjit Singh kept other sikhs sardars at distance and filled his confidants with Dogras, Poorbias, and Muslims - which ultimately destroyed his kingdom and Punjab. the sole reason for him having non sikh leaders was to keep other sikh sardars in check.

Do Note - Sikhs conquered and ruled Punjab wihout Hindu or Muslim help before him (Hindu Rajas had helped Mughals against sikhs). And their numbers were even far less when this happened.

#100
Kauray,

``What did Sikhs and Ranjit Singh gain by having secular Punjab? If Ranjit Singh had treated muslims in Punjab the same way they treated non muslims before, there would have been no Pakistan``

Seems like you have not read the history. There were only 19% Sikhs, 26% Hindus and the rest were Muslims in the Punjab when it was ruled by the Ranjit Singh. I am a great admirer of Ranjit Singh and I think he was a genious (even though he could not read and write) Punjab back then was under constant threat from the outside invaders i.e Muslims from Afghanistan. The only way he could have survived was through Punjabi Muslim support. Also places like Kasur and Peshawar e.t.c were ruled by the Muslim governers and Ranjit Singh received anual Nazrana from those guys governers.

regards,

haideri

Re: # 117
//...Maybe we need writers like Farzana. Writers who do not tell us nice things that we want to hear. Writers who do not write the way we think...//

There is another person who does that - Bal thackray. He doesn`t tell us what we want to hear - he never tells nice things to us. He is always off on a tangent blaming this community and that community. He is always whining about something or the other...

Do you need him too? I don`t.

Re: # 117 subroto
//....The number of NRIs that I have met who whinge about India to others. Who lack the self respect ...//

Which NRIs do you meet? The new school NRIs that I have met are so gung ho about India that sometimes it`s embarassing. These folks donot lack any self-respect, let me tell you that. And for good reason - they are a dominant force in the industry they work - computer software.

I am sure there are a bunch of ancient fuddie-duddies who keep whining. Forget those old goats - the future is already here.

Re: # 115 DM
//..she does not write to please anyone....//

How do you know that? Every writer has an audience - sometimes the entire audience is the writer him/herelf - people often write just to please themselves.......Apart from pleasing herself, I am sure FV is writing to please the ``anti-establishment`` audience [since that`s the label you put on her ``writings``]...Also, I often see pakis moan with pleasure anytime she opens up her mouth. So I am sure, she is mindfull of of the paki pleasure when she writes....

But the Point is - does her ``writings`` make sense? No, It doesn`t....Just like what this ``ranjit`` dude writes. Going by your logic - Mr Ranjit is probably not writing to please anyone.... And yet, his writings don`t make sense.

Garbage is garbage. Just because somebody has viewpoint which appears not to be pleasing anyone - doesn`t mean that viewpoint has any merit.

Maybe we need writers like Farzana. Writers who do not tell us nice things that we want to hear. Writers who do not write the way we think. Maybe its good that our head hurts reading what she writes. The number of NRIs that I have met who whinge about India to others. Who lack the self respect to even praise their country. Who will tell you how they will never go back and then whinge about, whats that ``M``word again? These hypocrites who will lecture you on how much superior their culture and values are and how they treat women with respect and then talk about the ``bitches`` without even missing a beat.

Its only when we ask questions will we know the true story or maybe not but at least someone asked.

re: Political justice in Pak: a dream?
Tahmed made much out of judiciary`s role in Pak. I do not want to pick his brain for too long. Even he has his limits and is a patriotic Paki. But the truth is something he and his ilk can`t digest. There is no power vested in the Supreme Court. The ultimate power in Pak rests with the military dictator. Rest is all a facade.

Abdul Qadeer Khan was a hero not so long ago. Now he is a zero. I also learnt from some news clips that the man who was proud once and threatened to reduce all cities in India to ashes, is now a raving lunatic under house arrest. Pak`s military dictator heaped insults on him in public and, on a recent visit to Japan, agreed that he was responsible for transfer of nuclear technology to North Korea. It is still fresh in my memory how this very dictator pardoned A.Q. Khan publicly after accusing him of wrongdoing. So, my question to tahmed and his ilk: where is the judiciary here? Is it not the function of judiciary to punish or exonerate the accused? Mushy became the laughing stock of the entire civilized world when he pardoned the culprit in public. To this date, he resists extraditing him to US for questioning. Nobody, i mean nobody in the western world, believes Mushy did not know what A.Q.Khan was doing.
Pak says Dawood is not in the country. US says no it is not true. So, a jehadi nation is trying hard to shield a criminal and a murderer. Why is it doing so? What does it fear?
http://www.sulekha.com/news/nhc.aspx?cid=433062
Sridhar

ranjit#109:

Like most hindians, I too would be happier if Farzana displays a little more apan-pun in her articles. But she does not write to please anyone. She has a viewpoint which is hard to put a label on except, perhaps, anti-establishmentarian. For example, she got support for this article from the least likely source, Ranger urf Gujju. She does not want to win any popularity contest and you have every right to criticise her views. But when you ask people in Mumbai to seek and go after her, it is not only hatred against an individual, you are actually advocating mob violence against her. No civilised society should tolerate this.

re: Farzanabibi`s various posts
My question to Bibi is this: have u gone to the residence of the accused, talked to their parents, nearby people and tried to get nearer reality. It is all easy to cut and paste columns. Who made u a journalist anyway?
One article Bibi posted (by some A-hole Arun Rajnath, no doubt a commie or worse a Paki lover who regularly writes in TFT) has this gem:
``Experts say it is a common practice of Indian agencies to hire common folk to become undercover agents. The idea is to hit and run on the motto: “Chal gaya to chal gaya. Mar gaya to mar gaya.” (If he succeeds, well and good. If he is dies, so what)``
Experts? Which experts? Why does the author not quote the source? Simple. There is no truth in the above statement. If this A-hole knows something more than u and me, he will be flagging it off proudly. He too has to earn his bread and butter and feed his family, so he writes what Pakis will like to read.
Now, if it were true that undercover agents are sent to Pak with view ``chal gaya to chal gaya``, then nobody will bother to speak for Serabjit. This time, ``chal gaya`` concept failed, so why bother to protect him?
The fact that PM downwards, many important personalities are trying to intervent makes me feel the guy is innocent. He is being made a scapegoat for something political. If Pak wanted to hang him, it could have done so quietly without much fuss.
As always, bibi has no common sense.
Sridhar

re:#109 by ranjit
(Can you imagine if a hindu woman had the guts to live in Lahore and attack muslims and Pakistan?)
No, i can`t. That is why India still enjoys the reputation of being a free society, even though there are many problems to surmount.
That is why people like Farzana bibi should count themselves as lucky. As M.J. Akbar rightly pointed out in one of his articles, IMs are perhaps the only muslim community in the world (outside of the Western hemisphere) to have enjoyed uninterrrupted democrazy for 50 years and more.
Sridhar

(The political opportunism and time to examine how the governments are being trapped in their own games...)

Asian Age.com, Aug 31
Sarabjit crucial for Indo-Pak relations

New Delhi, Aug. 30: The forward movement in Indo-Pak ties now hinge on the Sarabjit Singh issue. Singh’s family members said his freedom would help further improve relations between the two countries on a day when two Indian diplomats met Sarabjit at the Lahore jail.

Even as home secretaries of the two countries were working out the details regarding the release by September 12 of fishermen and civilian prisons who have completed their sentence from each others’ jails, India did not raise the Sarabjit issue formally during talks that concluded in New Delhi on Tuesday.

The government’s move has not gone down well with Sarabjit’s sister Dulbir Kaur who announced in Chandigarh that she was joining the BJP to take up the cause of her brother.

The target of her attack was the Congress leadership in Punjab and the Centre for not doing enough for her brother.

Sarabjit, who Pakistan claims is Manjit Singh and a RAW agent, has been convicted for carrying out bomb explosions in Lahore, Kasur and Faisalabad in 1990. The Pakistan Supreme Court upheld his death sentence earlier this month.

(PTI reported that Sarabjit, 41, gave personal details, circumstances under which he was arrested, tried and convicted to two Indian high commission officials who met him at the high-security Kot Lakpath jail near Lahore. He is in good health and gave details of his parents, children and family members during an hour-long meeting with consular visa Deepak Kaul and attache visa S.C. Sharma. He also gave a message to be sent to his family. The tall, lanky Sarabjit appeared very intelligent and fairly knowledgeable and spoke both English and Hindi well, Mr Kaul said.)

The Pakistani delegation led by its interior secretary Sayed Kamal Shah on Tuesday went to the high security Tihar Jail here to meet some Pak nationals lodged there. ``We are going to meet the prisoners who have been assembled in Jail No. 3 at Tihar,`` Mr Shah told reporters after conclusion of two-days of home secretary-level talks between the two countries.

Meanwhile, India and Pakistan on Tuesday decided to release all fishermen and civilian prisoners who have completed their sentence by September 12. In a joint statement issued after two days of intensive parleys, both sides agreed to give necessary instructions to begin the exercise to set free the fishermen and civilian prisoners whose national status was confirmed.

Flanked by his Pakistani counterpart Syed Kamal Shah, union home secretary V.K. Duggal told a joint press conference that the two countries would provide immediate notification of the arrests made by either side and give consular access to all persons within three months of their being taken into custody as agreed by the foreign secretaries in December last year.

Reading out the seven-point joint statement, Duggal said the two sides also agreed that prisoners would be released by New Delhi and Islamabad immediately on completion of their sentence and nationality verification.

``We have also agreed to release on September 12, 2005, all fishermen and civilian prisoners who have completed their sentence and whose national status has been confirmed,`` Duggal said describing the talks as ``frank and forthright.`` On the issue of terrorism, the home secretary said both sides committed themselves ``to combat terrorism and re-emphasised the need for effective steps for complete elimination of this menace.``

On drug trafficking, Duggal said the two sides agreed to finalise and sign shortly a memorandum of understanding between their narcotic control agencies to have a ``regular institutional mechanism`` in place to intensify mutual co-operation and liaison on drug control matters.

The directors-general of the Narcotics Control Bureau of India and Pakistan would be meeting next month to ink the accord, drafts of which have been exchanged. Both sides also noted with satisfaction the continuing co-operation and exchange of information between narcotics control agencies.

They underlined the need for co-operation between India’s Central Bureau of Investigation and the Federal Investigation Agency of Pakistan as part of the composite dialogue process.

``It was also agreed that experts from the two countries would meet at a mutually convenient date in the near future to work out modalities for implementation of the arrangement for co-operation between the two agencies agreed earlier,`` the home secretary said. Observing that both India and Pakistan showed ``utmost understanding`` during the talks, Mr Duggal and Mr Shah said the home secretary-level talks would continue within the framework of the composite dialogue process.

``We have made fairly substantive moves forward on various issues and the Pakistan interior secretary has promised to look into concerns we have mentioned once he goes back to Islamabad,`` Mr Duggal said.

(The unholy precedent and demands that I talked about)

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1212732.cms
Afzal first Sarabjit later

PTI[ MONDAY, AUGUST 29, 2005 07:25:32 AM ]

ISLAMABAD: A PoK-based conglomerate of militant outfits has asked the Pakistan government to seek clemency for Mohammed Afzal, sentenced to death in India in the Parliament attack case, before granting pardon to Sarabjit Singh awarded the death penalty here.

``Pakistan should first seek clemency for Kashmiri youth Mohammed Afzal before India seeks release of Sarabjit Singh, whose death penalty has been upheld by the Pakistani Supreme Court for his involvement in bomb blasts in Pakistan,`` Hizbul Mujahideen leader and Chief of the United Jehad Council (UJC) Syed Salahuddin said in a statement.

``President Musharraf should first seek clemency for Mohammad Afzal before he accepts Indian request for Sarabjit`s release,`` the UJC chief said

``It the responsibility of the Pakistani government to respect the sentiments of Kashmiris and try to convince India to accept demand for Afzal`s release,`` Salahuddin said.

Afzal`s death sentence was upheld by the Indian Supreme Court earlier this month for his involvement in the December 2001 attack on the Indian parliament.

Assuming that most of the interactors (and Shahrukh Khan and members of the PMO and MEA) have been to Bhikhiwind instead of googling, the questions still remain:

1. It is a known fact that governments use such `events` to divert attention from domestic issues -- what is so surprising?
2. There have been several occasions for ``symbolic meanings``, but were never exercised; I keep mentioning the PoW issue where famous people should have come forward.(And they are not separate, since most of the PoW end up being imprisoned as spies.)
3. Nobody seems to have paid heed to the fact that I mentioned in the article that this would be an opportunity for terrorists to start bargaining.
4. I already stated that there should be an independent enquiry, so where is the question about my bitterness?

PS: Personal `attacks` about my nationality etc, as I have always stated, reveal more about the people holding forth than about me. To do MY country proud you need not toe the official line of thinking, or even agree with the views expressed by an individual, but you need to learn to conduct yourself with some propriety.

I will be posting three pieces voicing a few more points raised in my piece. They are articles that I read, not googled for.(And they are not even from an Arab portal, from where some people are seeking legitimacy and a pat on the back...)

http://www.satribune.com/archives/200508/P1_arun3.htm

Condemned Indian Spy Creates a Dilemma for General Musharraf

By Arun Rajnath

NEW DELHI, August 30: As senior Indian and Pakistani officials held formal talks in New Delhi on the fate of Sarabjeet Singh (Left), the RAW agent sentenced to death in Pakistan, Pakistani and Indian analysts admitted that General Musharraf was faced with a very tricky situation as he had already started hanging men accused of attempts on his life, although proper legal recourse had not been provided to these Pakistani citizens.

“Sarabjeet’s case has taken an important dimension as the entire Indian Establishment has put its diplomatic and political foot down to seek his release but Musharraf will face a lot of flak at home because he has quickly hanged one person and has lined up five others to go to the gallows for trying to kill him. How can he let an Indian agent go in such a situation,” an analyst writing for Pakistani newspapers from New Delhi asked.

Sarabjeet’s case is in the Supreme Court of Pakistan which confirmed his death sentence, but the five accused facing death are not even allowed to appeal in any court and the legal process they have gone through is very dubious. It is just like “Emperor” Musharraf ordering someone to be beheaded because he did something which the Emperor did not like, the analyst said.

Singh has been languishing in Kot Lakhpat jail in Pakistan for more than a decade and now is facing gallows but the question is still not clearly answered whether he actually has been a RAW agent? What would be his fate had the Indian media and some Pakistani organizations not raised this issue?

Sarabjeet may well be a RAW agent because RAW chief PK Hormese Tharakan, Intelligence Bureau Chief ESL Narsimhan and Home Secretary VK Duggal met at the Home Ministry on August 25, 2005 to discuss the matter and to report the ‘facts’ to the Prime Minister

Home Ministry sources say that whenever such an agent is arrested in an enemy territory, the home country quickly disowns him. One such case was of Rooplal who spent 26 years in a Pakistani jail. He did not have media support like Sarabjeet. But then he was released and returned to India. Now he has become disenchanted with the system. Recently he visited New Delhi and talked to the South Asia Tribune.

Rooplal told this correspondent that the Government of India did not come forward to rescue him from the Pakistani jail. The authorities urged him to keep mum instead. Rooplal was an Indian agent and was caught thrice for espionage. He has also been a commando and Indian authorities sent him to Pakistan for the last time after plastic surgery

He told SAT: “When I returned to India after serving in Pakistani jail, Indian authorities urged me not to utter a word as it would not be in the national interest I kept mum for a time, but nobody came forward to help me out and provide financial assistance to me.”

“Thereafter, I filed a case in the court and the court ordered the Government of India to pay me Rs750,000 in compensation. The Government also promised me to grant a petrol pump and a piece of land. I have got the money but nothing else,” he complained.

Another case is of Vinjaram, who has been languishing in Pakistani jail in Hyderabad for eight years on the charges of espionage. Vinjaram belongs to Barmer district of Rajasthan. He crossed the border and was arrested by the Pakistani Rangers. A Pakistani court sentenced him to seven years. After five years of his punishment, his relatives received a post card in the year 2005.

On receiving the letter, his relatives came to know about his whereabouts. Initially they thought he had gone somewhere for some unknown reasons. They never knew that he was in a Pakistani jail.

Vinjaram’s wife Raju Devi told the South Asia Tribune: “I have been trying to get my husband released, but no Indian official has paid any heed to my requests so far. Since the Government of India is trying to get Sarabjeet released, I have become hopeful that my husband will also come back.”

Sources say two Indian armed forces personnel are also languishing in Pakistani jails besides many others. They belong to Indian State of Himachal Pradesh and are identified as Flight Lieutenant Sudhir Goswami and Captain Dalgeer Singh Jambaal. No Indian official is ready to talk about them.

About Sarabjeet, a co-prisoner with him in the same Pakistani jail, Gajjan Singh of Village Chak Allah of the Atari Sector, who was released and returned to India, told South Asia Tribune Sarabjeet was known as Manjit Singh. He said: “I do not know about his identity but he told me that he has been sentenced on fabricated charges and was compelled to confess that he was an Indian spy.”

Experts say it is a common practice of Indian agencies to hire common folk to become undercover agents. The idea is to hit and run on the motto: “Chal gaya to chal gaya. Mar gaya to mar gaya.” (If he succeeds, well and good. If he is dies, so what)

Such people are usually recruited by the G-Branch, an intelligence unit of the Border Security Force. The BSF compel villagers and smugglers to work for it, and after initial training they are pushed into the enemy territory. Later, they are recruited by the RAW and IB

The Pakistani secret agency ISI also does the same thing. It also hires poor Pakistanis who live along the border. After giving them initial training, they are pushed into India.

The question is how much time it would take to dispel the clouds of doubt between the two countries? There are several Sarabjeets in Pakistani and Indian jails who have been made pawns by the secret agencies of the two countries.

Re:dost-mittar#62

``If this is not hate speech, what is?``

Ferzana Versey has been consistently writing anti-India and anti-hindu articles. Her articles drip with hatred and venom against hindus. She routinely and mercilessly attacks Kashmiri pundits even though they are hapless victims of jihad in Kashmir. She does all that while sitting in India and enjoying all it has to offer. The sheer hypocrisy is unbelievable. If she hates the place, why doesnt she leave? Can you imagine if a hindu woman had the guts to live in Lahore and attack muslims and Pakistan?

Attacking a person like that is not hate speech. There are limits to tolerance and we hindus have gone to the extreme in this regard. But enough is enough!! How long must we act like hijras while muslims like Ferzana treat us like garbage? That too living in our land. The first responsibility of a citizen is to be loyal to their own country. If they are not, I am sorry, but they have no right to live there.

kaura/98 and dm/various . . . on Sikhs voting for Congress . . . think again.

Political Parties in India are traditionally available for the services of the higher bidders.

Can you see who are holding the keys to the till in the Congress lately, then?

Why vote when you can buy and control?

re:#100 by tahmed32
Thanks for the post. If what u say is true, i stand corrected.
Sridhar

Re: tahmed32#102
I would like to add to my post # 103

You mentioned in your post#100 that “of course pakistan has had the misfortune of having military interference in politics. and no doubt dictators have attempted to crush civil institutions in pakistan. But pakistanis - professionals as well as others - know how to stand their ground as well.”

I wanted to know why you think pakitani professionals have stood their ground.

Regards,

Faruk

There looks like a pattern here...

We are for treating everybody equl - Mr. Jinnah and Muslim League
(Only if we are the rulers)

We are for fighting Jihad in Kashmir - Pakistani Army generals
(My sons will study/live in the west and not fight that jihad)

I have healthy respect for institutions - President Musharraf
(But I can`t not be prosecuted for becoming CE/President by breaking the law)

tahmed32#99:

``i am not familiar with the details of the case, nor do i think it is as simple as you make it``

``I`` did not make it to be ``as simple``, it was an article in the Dawn, for which I posted a url for you.

I am also not familiar with the details of the case, this is why I read that article. In my first comment on this article (post#13) I made no assumption of guilt or innocence. But it seems that you have convinced yourself that the man deserves to die without knowing the details or even accepting the words of someone (Asma Jehangir) who followed the case and wrote that article.

Re: tahmed32#102
“Do you think I am wrong in anything I said in #100?”
Not at all. But I am interested in knowing about Pakistani’s who resisted oppression. Who were they ? what did they do? What happened to them ?

Regards,

Faruk

Faruk: Do you think I am wrong in anything I said in #100? If you do, kindly point that out.

Re: tahmed32 #100
Could you tell us more about the journalist and professionals who have resisted the Military and civilian dictators. I think I have asked you this question earlier back when you interacted as tahmed321.

Regards,

Faruk

rsridhar #93 The judiciary in pakistan in fact has a proud tradition of standing up to injustice and tyranny. Ayub`s fall was led, as I recall, by members of the bar associations in Pakistan. Chief Justice Cornelius wrote a stinging report on the actions of the Pakistan military in crimes committed in 1971, that military governments have tried their best to suppress from seeing the light of day. Lawyers were at the forefront of the resistance to Zia`s attempts to become absolute ruler of Pakistan by introducing taliban-type laws. Nawaz Shareef`s attempts at gathering arbitrary powers were resisted by the Supreme Court to the point where Sharif`s men physically attacked the Supreme Court - Chief Justice Shujaat went down fighting, and will no doubt join the pantheon of true pakistani heroes. The former naval commander-in-chief of Pakistan was tried and convicted and sentenced to prison for bribary charges by a...hindu judge (thus indicating the merit system for advancement within the judiciary).

And the legal profession is not the only one that has nothing to be ashamed of in Pakistan. When Zia tried to intimidate pakistanis by introducing what he conveniently called ``islamic punishment`` of cutting of the hands of convicted thieves - not one single doctor across the nation could be found to perform this evil deed. So he had to drop that idea. When Zia tried to intimidate and humiliate journalists by flogging them in public with microphones placed in front of them so the public could hear their cries of pain - those brave journalists instead would use the microphones to speak out against Zia!! So Zia had to drop that idea as well.

My point is: of course pakistan has had the misfortune of having military interference in politics. and no doubt dictators have attempted to crush civil institutions in pakistan. But pakistanis - professionals as well as others - know how to stand their ground as well. Musharaff has learnt much from the above-mentioned poor experience of his predecessors, and shows a healthy respect for pakistani institutions. While the constitutional system in Pakistan is obviously flawed due to military interference, that does not automatically mean that the criminal or civil court procedure systems in pakistan have been sucked in as well.

dostmittar #92 i am not familiar with the details of the case, nor do i think it is as simple as you make it (i.e., that it is based solely on a confession, subsequently retracted). If it had been so simple, indian officials and others would have made the merits of the case the issue - instead, they are all merely appealing to ``uncle musharaff to release uncle surabjit``, as the picture on this article shows. In other words ``please return our patriotic agent whom we sent to your country to kill people in market places with bomb blasts``. You may think otherwise, but the indian government officials who have no doubt studied this case in more detail dont see any legal basis for overturning the conviction. I even heard an indian attorney general say as much on delhi TV beemed to the US.

``..Why is Farzana so much against Indian people and Govt speaking for Sarabjeet...........``?

Dr Lok Raj,

You are aware of two sayings in Punjab ....they lie as much as sesame clings to an arm with oil........and jehdi thaal ch khaan, othay ch hee mutna......there was a reason our wise ancestors came up with the 2 akhans.


DM,

Muslims (today) are not responsible for what Ghazni did. that is not the point.........the point is they exhibit time and again the SAME traits thru out the history.

What did Sikhs and Ranjit Singh gain by having secular Punjab? If Ranjit Singh had treated muslims in Punjab the same way they treated non muslims before, there would have been no Pakistan. That is why Ranjit Singh is NOT my hero. The only reward sikhs secularity got was butchering worse than animals.
What did the Pandits get by saving Hazratbal mosque during Sikh rule?

Do you see a pattren here? Ignoring the pattren is what led to dissection of India and the humilliations.

Sikhs have not moved forward by voting for Congress. sikhs are making the same mistakes Hindus did - and they are going the Hindu way to stagnation and demise.

re:#92 by dost-mittar
very well said.
Sridhar

re:#89 by drlokraj
FV is FOS, if u know what i mean. She has no logic and little common sense. If she had, she would have seen what u and i see. That this is not about what GOP (or its corrupt judiciary) is saying who is guilty but whether the guy is really guilty.
Sridhar

re:#87 by Ajeya
The author is an Arab political commentator from Egypt. He seems to view a lot of happenings from civilizational and historical perspective. some of his articles are thought provoking. Here is one on : why chinese have not gone around bombing London?
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2005/756/op3.htm
Sridhar

re:#84 by arjun_m
You are right on dot there.
Oil is not going to last long. Then what? As i said once and am fond of saying again, Arabs (or at least some of them) will be back where they always belonged: on the back of a camel!
Intellectual capital has no limits. It is good India is tapping on this asset.
Sridhar

re:#86 by tahmed32
tahmed sahib,
Please bear with me. YOu are one of the few i respect on chowk and i do not intend to annoy u.
I am still trying to pick up the thread of your argument. You seem to say that Serabjeet did commit a crime but the judicial award came very late, as is normally the case in the subcontinent.
I just have trouble with believing that he got a fair trial. That is all. The same could happen in India too with a Pakistani. The difference is in the judiciary. The Police in India is mostly corrupt and would probably trump up a charge on the accused or get a conviction thr` third degree methods but then it has to be proved in court. Very often, court has sided against the police and the govt. Judicial courts in India are notoriously (or shall i say famously!) anti-establishment and are well aware of the corrupt practices of the Police and the Babus.

My contention was: even the judiciary in Pak is corrupt and easily prone to influence by the rulers. I gave instances from history in my last post when even the highest court did not protect (or even issue a statement of protest) when popular govts were dismissed by the Army.
Anyway, have a good day.
Sridhar