What's new

Pakistan FM refuses to call Osama bin Ladin a terrorist

S

saeedhk

Test Debutant
Joined
May 8, 2010
Runs
15,056
Last time, our PM called OBL a martyr on the floor of the parliament and this time FM Qureshi refuses to call OBL a terrorist.

When the leadership of a country consistently sympathises with an international terrorist that slaughtered hundreds of Pakistani, we should not complain when we are known as a terror safe haven and have our name in the FATF.
https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1055618271508657
 
The hell is wrong with him? He’s a terrorist, why is it so hard for him to say that openly? Things like these make life difficult for Pakistanis around the world
 
SangasCoverDrive said:
The hell is wrong with him? He’s a terrorist, why is it so hard for him to say that openly? Things like these make life difficult for Pakistanis around the world
Click to expand...

Obama and Bush have killed more civilians than OBL, do they get called terrorists or war criminals too?
 
This is why I call Imran an Islamist and PTI a far right Islamic party.
 
To be fair, the hypocrisy is quite huge here. Do they call Israel terrorist state? No, it is supported and armed instead.
 
Why are they asking Querishi to call him a terrorist in the first place? Would they ever ask the PM of UK is OBL a terrorist?

The question's implication is that Pakistan might support these groups, and we want reassurance that you dont.
 
Gharib Aadmi said:
Why are they asking Querishi to call him a terrorist in the first place? Would they ever ask the PM of UK is OBL a terrorist?

The question's implication is that Pakistan might support these groups, and we want reassurance that you dont.
Click to expand...

I dunno, just a random guess, but maybe, just maybe Imran calling OBL a martyr a few months back in the parliament had something to do with the question.
 
Ive watched the video and the post in the OP doesn't fit what SMQ was asked or said.

He was asked a question that had nothing really to do with Bin Laden but the interviewer wanted him to speak against tge PM.

He rightly refused.
 
Gharib Aadmi said:
Why are they asking Querishi to call him a terrorist in the first place? Would they ever ask the PM of UK is OBL a terrorist?

The question's implication is that Pakistan might support these groups, and we want reassurance that you dont.
Click to expand...

Well for starters OBL wasn’t found on UK soil. Also is the irony seriously lost on Pakistanis that a war was being fought to find this guy and Pakistan was apparently helping in the war but that guy is found in Pakistan near Pakistan Army HQ. May be I live in a bizarre world but am I the only one who finds this ironic?

Also don’t think UK PM especially the current guy would have any problem calling OBL what he was, I.e a terrorist.
 
saeedhk said:
Last time, our PM called OBL a martyr on the floor of the parliament and this time FM Qureshi refuses to call OBL a terrorist.

When the leadership of a country consistently sympathises with an international terrorist that slaughtered hundreds of Pakistani, we should not complain when we are known as a terror safe haven and have our name in the FATF.
https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1055618271508657
Click to expand...

The Americans gave him weapons to fight the Russians, was he a terrorist then?
 
Local.Dada said:
Well for starters OBL wasn’t found on UK soil. Also is the irony seriously lost on Pakistanis that a war was being fought to find this guy and Pakistan was apparently helping in the war but that guy is found in Pakistan near Pakistan Army HQ. May be I live in a bizarre world but am I the only one who finds this ironic?

Also don’t think UK PM especially the current guy would have any problem calling OBL what he was, I.e a terrorist.
Click to expand...

But the UK and the USA backed him against the Russians, was OK then?
 
DeadlyVenom said:
Ive watched the video and the post in the OP doesn't fit what SMQ was asked or said.

He was asked a question that had nothing really to do with Bin Laden but the interviewer wanted him to speak against tge PM.

He rightly refused.
Click to expand...

What IK said in the parliament was most probably a slip of the tongue. So, it was not out of context as SMQ said. Secondly, the FM was asked specifically whether he considers OBL a martyr or not. He should have categorically said that he was a terrorist as thousands of Pakistanis (forget about 9/11 and other attacks around the world) were killed due to Al-Qaeda. And he was also the FM of the country when suicide attacks from Al-Qaeda were on rise back then. So, really poor from SMQ whom I really admire.

On the other hand, Fawad Chaudhry was quick to clarify on explaining on who he considers a terrorist (clearly indicating that OBL was a terrorist) and he is also part of the cabinet. If you have missed it, here is his tweet:
https://twitter.com/fawadchaudhry/status/1406848622516490240

Infact, as information minister, he is the one who should be more careful of going against the PM.
 
Bewal Express said:
But the UK and the USA backed him against the Russians, was OK then?
Click to expand...

China gave the world coronavirus that even close friend Pakistan couldn’t escape suffering from as a result and tortures Muslims that Pakistan cares so much about and gave out some of the most predatory loans out there

China is still a great friend isn’t it ?

Timelines change.

Also while UK and USA backed him then they didn’t randomly wake up one day and decided to call him a terrorist. Do you know what happens on Sep 11 2001? Unbelievable this has to be explained and put into perspective to a guy living in the Uk
 
Local.Dada said:
China gave the world coronavirus that even close friend Pakistan couldn’t escape suffering from as a result and tortures Muslims that Pakistan cares so much about and gave out some of the most predatory loans out there

China is still a great friend isn’t it ?

Timelines change.

Also while UK and USA backed him then they didn’t randomly wake up one day and decided to call him a terrorist. Do you know what happens on Sep 11 2001? Unbelievable this has to be explained and put into perspective to a guy living in the Uk
Click to expand...

To add to this:

OBL's Al-Qaeda was responsible for thousands of Pakistanis' death. I can understand the hate for US but do not understand this defense for OBL when Pak army was themselves suffering at hands of Al-Qaeda.
 
Local.Dada said:
China gave the world coronavirus that even close friend Pakistan couldn’t escape suffering from as a result and tortures Muslims that Pakistan cares so much about and gave out some of the most predatory loans out there

China is still a great friend isn’t it ?

Timelines change.

Also while UK and USA backed him then they didn’t randomly wake up one day and decided to call him a terrorist. Do you know what happens on Sep 11 2001? Unbelievable this has to be explained and put into perspective to a guy living in the Uk
Click to expand...

So when he attacked Russian troops was he a terrorist or not? Or are you are a terrorist when you get attacked but whe he attacked others he was a Mujahadin.
 
Bewal Express said:
So when he attacked Russian troops was he a terrorist or not? Or are you are a terrorist when you get attacked but whe he attacked others he was a Mujahadin.
Click to expand...

Your logic makes no sense. If I am your acquaintance today and tomorrow I harm you badly, Are you supposed to not call me the bad guy? How dumb is this logic.
 
You still haven’t answered me. Is OBL a great martyr or a terrorist?

My answer: he was a terrorist. Now your turn.
Go.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Local.Dada said:
You still haven’t answered me. Is OBL a great martyr or a terrorist?

My answer: he was a terrorist. Now your turn.
Go.
Click to expand...

Any guy that kills innocent people, which he purpetedly did did, is a terrorist. So answer my point, why was he considered a terrorist when he was fulfilling American strategist interests?
 
Local.Dada said:
Your logic makes no sense. If I am your acquaintance today and tomorrow I harm you badly, Are you supposed to not call me the bad guy? How dumb is this logic.
Click to expand...

Your logic makes no sense, if I kill other people and you provide the weapons, I am still a killer. Why do I become a bad guy when I kill your own. Either both are wrong or neither, so which is it?
 
Bewal Express said:
Any guy that kills innocent people, which he purpetedly did did, is a terrorist. So answer my point, why was he considered a terrorist when he was fulfilling American strategist interests?
Click to expand...

Heartwarming to see your first answer.

Now 2nd part of your question

What was the time line of US being partners with OBL

What was the timeline of US calling him a terrorist and starting the war on terror? What do you think was the reason for that?

Don’t have to answer me, you can answer that to yourself and things will be clear. If you are still confused I will explain with whatever little understanding of the problem I have unless someone can articulate it better for you

Unless there is a piece of history I a missing when both timelines overlapped, your question makes no sense.
 
Bewal Express said:
Your logic makes no sense, if I kill other people and you provide the weapons, I am still a killer. Why do I become a bad guy when I kill your own. Either both are wrong or neither, so which is it?
Click to expand...

Do you understand what a mercenary is?

Ok America hired a mercenary like OBL to fight their war early on. You want me to say America is the bad guy here? I don’t think even USA will have any problem admitting they are self serving when it comes to their strategic interests. Most countries are. This Islamic brotherhood etc gimmick only works in Pakistan probably as most countries are self serving as they should be.

Does that answer your question?

Now this mercenary came back to bite USA and perpetuated one of the biggest terrorist acts in the 21st century.

So you are saying USA should not call him a terrorist because they had a relationship with him in the past and let it slide after he attacked and killed their own citizens.

I feel stupider just having this conversation right now. Whatever makes you feel better lol
 
Local.Dada said:
Heartwarming to see your first answer.

Now 2nd part of your question

What was the time line of US being partners with OBL

What was the timeline of US calling him a terrorist and starting the war on terror? What do you think was the reason for that?

Don’t have to answer me, you can answer that to yourself and things will be clear. If you are still confused I will explain with whatever little understanding of the problem I have unless someone can articulate it better for you

Unless there is a piece of history I a missing when both timelines overlapped, your question makes no sense.
Click to expand...

Any one that kills innocent people is a terrorist. It is literally the definition of a terrorist in my eyes.
I am amazes you came in with guns blazing but had no idea that OBL was there man when they wanted someone to fight the Russians but when he turned the guns on them he became a terrorist. You can't pick and chose when someone is a terrorist, which is what you guys do. Look at the state sponsored rapes and murder by Indian troops in Kashmir, isn't that terrorism and war crimes?
 
street cricketer said:
I dunno, just a random guess, but maybe, just maybe Imran calling OBL a martyr a few months back in the parliament had something to do with the question.
Click to expand...

The journalist asked about Imran Khan calling OBL a martyr. Querishi responded that he was quoted out of context, and the media played it up. Next question he is asking Querishi is he a martyr? do you disagree?

You can see the question at the 38:37 mark

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fYODqTY65o

This is an insult. One by asking do you disagree, he is ignoring Querishi response that IK was quoted out of context. He could have followed up on the out of context remark, instead of in essence calling Querishi a liar. Two in this interview Querishi has done nothing but express support for people of Afghanistan, so to ask him does he personally consider OBL a martyr is disgraceful.

Local.Dada said:
Also don’t think UK PM especially the current guy would have any problem calling OBL what he was, I.e a terrorist.
Click to expand...

Does anyone ask white politicians if they support white mass shooters? It is assumed that they dont. This is in essence what this clown asking Querishi.
 
natkhat-shahzada said:
What IK said in the parliament was most probably a slip of the tongue. So, it was not out of context as SMQ said. Secondly, the FM was asked specifically whether he considers OBL a martyr or not. He should have categorically said that he was a terrorist as thousands of Pakistanis (forget about 9/11 and other attacks around the world) were killed due to Al-Qaeda. And he was also the FM of the country when suicide attacks from Al-Qaeda were on rise back then. So, really poor from SMQ whom I really admire.
Click to expand...

Watch the context of the question. Go to 38:37

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fYODqTY65o

The way he asked it was wrong. You are being fooled by the media headlines.
 
Gharib Aadmi said:
Watch the context of the question. Go to 38:37

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fYODqTY65o

The way he asked it was wrong. You are being fooled by the media headlines.
Click to expand...

If I am being fooled by the media headlines then I am sure the information minister also got fooled by the media headlines and had to tweet the same night (or the next day). Quite an irony that the information minister got fooled by the media headlines.
 
Gharib Aadmi said:
Watch the context of the question. Go to 38:37

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fYODqTY65o

The way he asked it was wrong. You are being fooled by the media headlines.
Click to expand...

I watched the video from 38:37. What is the difference between the clip in OP and the YouTube at 38:37 that you asked me to watch?

Also, I did not get what was the wrong way of asking. He was not shouting nor did he persist on it. Even SMQ did not correct the explanation. It was not out of context as SMQ said but it was slip of tongue as implied in Shahbaz Gill's tweet when IK called OBL martyr last year:
https://twitter.com/SHABAZGIL/status/1276214755070337024

News on the same story: https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/678033-pm-s-slip-of-tongue-being-dramatised-sapm

I cannot believe why SMQ could not say the same that Shahbaz Gill had to say on this incident last year.
I have already explained this SMQ did poor job as can be seen in the video too (which you asked me to watch). I also shared with you Fawad Chaudhry's tweet that came after SMQ's poor response to the question asked by the host.

I did not read the media headlines and know the whole context on how it started, what was the govt spokesperson explanation then, what was question asked to SMQ, how SMQ deviated to respond to it and what Fawad Ch (information minister) had to say.

So, maybe you should do your homework first before accusing others by fooled by the media headlines.

And as I said, in the previous post, if I am being fooled by the media headlines then I am sure the information minister also got fooled by the media headlines and had to give some sort of explanation on this topic on the same night (or the next day). Quite an irony that the information minister got fooled by the media headlines.
 
natkhat-shahzada said:
I watched the video from 38:37. What is the difference between the clip in OP and the YouTube at 38:37 that you asked me to watch?
Click to expand...

Sorry the link in the OP was not working for me, and I assumed that was for everyone.

natkhat-shahzada said:
Also, I did not get what was the wrong way of asking. He was not shouting nor did he persist on it. Even SMQ did not correct the explanation. It was not out of context as SMQ said but it was slip of tongue as implied in Shahbaz Gill's tweet when IK called OBL martyr last year:
https://twitter.com/SHABAZGIL/status/1276214755070337024

News on the same story: https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/678033-pm-s-slip-of-tongue-being-dramatised-sapm

I cannot believe why SMQ could not say the same that Shahbaz Gill had to say on this incident last year.
I have already explained this SMQ did poor job as can be seen in the video too (which you asked me to watch). I also shared with you Fawad Chaudhry's tweet that came after SMQ's poor response to the question asked by the host.

I did not read the media headlines and know the whole context on how it started, what was the govt spokesperson explanation then, what was question asked to SMQ, how SMQ deviated to respond to it and what Fawad Ch (information minister) had to say.

So, maybe you should do your homework first before accusing others by fooled by the media headlines.

And as I said, in the previous post, if I am being fooled by the media headlines then I am sure the information minister also got fooled by the media headlines and had to give some sort of explanation on this topic on the same night (or the next day). Quite an irony that the information minister got fooled by the media headlines.
Click to expand...



If Querishi said that Imran Khan's response was taken out of context, the journalist could have asked him to elaborate. Instead he asked do you disagree? do you think that OBL is a martyr?

By saying do you disagree, he is implying that Imran Khan did in fact call OBL a martyr. So in essence Querishi is a liar and IK is a terrorist sympathizer.

Second to ask Querishi if he thinks OBL is a martyr he is implying that Querishi is a terrorist sympathizer also. Can you see why this is insulting?

Fawad Chaudry tweeted this

There is no confusion at any level re anyone who kills innocents. That is terrorism and the perpetrators are terrorists. We have suffered pain of terrorism in our own land and can understand pain of all who have lost their loved ones in these cowardly attacks. #Tollo
Click to expand...

When the media tries to portray PTI as a terrorist sympathizing party, then its the job of the Information Minister to have to make statements like this.
 
OBL was one of the leading resistance fighters against the Soviet Empire, Pakistanis have found it difficult to reconcile how he went from being a hero who had children named after him, to a world renowned 'terrorist' when the Soviets were no longer a threat. This is always likely to be a problem with using proxies to fight your wars halfway across the world.
 
Local.Dada said:
Do you understand what a mercenary is?

Ok America hired a mercenary like OBL to fight their war early on. You want me to say America is the bad guy here? I don’t think even USA will have any problem admitting they are self serving when it comes to their strategic interests. Most countries are. This Islamic brotherhood etc gimmick only works in Pakistan probably as most countries are self serving as they should be.

Does that answer your question?

Now this mercenary came back to bite USA and perpetuated one of the biggest terrorist acts in the 21st century.

So you are saying USA should not call him a terrorist because they had a relationship with him in the past and let it slide after he attacked and killed their own citizens.

I feel stupider just having this conversation right now. Whatever makes you feel better lol
Click to expand...

So hiring someone to kill others is OK but he becomes a terrorist when he turns on you. So what you are saying is that America is a terrorist abetter and you know what they say about people in glass houses and stones. It's like Inds commenting on rape cases
 
Its only an opnion.

A terrorist is someone who uses violence for political purposes.

Bush, Blair, Modi, Netanyahu are terrorists by this definition.

As for OBL there is no evidence he was behind any attack. 911 was an inside job, most intelligent people know this.
 
Bewal Express said:
So hiring someone to kill others is OK but he becomes a terrorist when he turns on you. So what you are saying is that America is a terrorist abetter and you know what they say about people in glass houses and stones. It's like Inds commenting on rape cases
Click to expand...

Also need to remember USA banned Modi from entering US territory based on his culpability in ethnic cleansing in India, then changed tack once he was elected leader of India. Realpolitk is a dirty business.
 
This gov. is the worse in pakistans history, especially in pakistans foreign policy and image, which they are making sure it lives up to its name as a terroist state.
 
It was a "slip of the tongue" when Prime Minister Imran Khan called slain al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden a martyr, clarified Federal Information Minister Fawad Chaudhry Saturday.

Chaudhry, speaking to anchor Saleem Safi on the Geo News show Jirga, said Pakistan considers Osama Bin Laden a militant and the al-Qaeda as a terrorist outfit.

“Pakistan has voted in the UN on the War on Terror [against militants], we are a voter on a [UN] list that declared Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda terrorists," he said.

"Pakistan has sacrificed the most in the war against terrorism,” Chaudhry added.

Last June, during an address to the National Assembly, the prime minister had recalled how the Americans had conducted an operation in Abbottabad and "killed Osama Bin Laden — martyred him".

Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi, most recently, in an interview with TOLO News journalist Lotfullah Najafizada, was asked to comment on the prime minister's remarks in parliament.

He said that the remarks were taken "out of context".

"He [PM Imran Khan] was quoted out of context. And, uh, you know, a particular section of the media played it up," he added.

"Is he a martyr? You disagree? Osama bin Laden?" asked Najafizada.

"I will let that pass," responded Qureshi, after a brief pause.

When asked to comment on why the foreign minister hesitated in answering a question on the premier's statement on bin Laden, the information minister said Qureshi may have wanted to put the issue behind him and move forward.

https://www.geo.tv/latest/357177-pm...martyr-a-slip-of-tongue-claims-fawad-chaudhry
 
the tricks that IK apologists use is,

When some controversies erupts, save him at any cost but sometimes it may not possible. So what should you do?

Take the target of the controversy and then compare it to another entity thus making the target validated (It still isn't validated but most of the opposition will get riled up and will derail from the main subject).

If Osama is the subject, bring USA. But they will never tell you whether they believe Osama as the martyr or terrorist because IK has declared him martyr. So they will avoid to answer.

A growing trend is China apologists among pak ppers after the statement of IK "China is our greatest friend."

These people, who have shouted about BJP bhakts day and night, have become bhakts of IK themselves.

Life is a cycle. Sometimes when you hate something so much that it grows inside you and you become the very entity that you hated.
 
This is an interview Imran Khan gave 9 years ago about how Osama Bin Laden killing.

Go to 1:53 minute mark

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfbhFkLf-Vk

To summarize what he said was the way OBL was killed made him a martyr to a certain number of people. He said like the Nazis were put him on trial in Nuremberg, the same should have happened to OBL. This is what civilized societies do. He does not believe in extra judicial justice. Everyone must go to the due process of law.


Its disgraceful that some people want to make Imran Khan sound like a terrorist sympathizer.
 
Gharib Aadmi said:
Sorry the link in the OP was not working for me, and I assumed that was for everyone.





If Querishi said that Imran Khan's response was taken out of context, the journalist could have asked him to elaborate. Instead he asked do you disagree? do you think that OBL is a martyr?

By saying do you disagree, he is implying that Imran Khan did in fact call OBL a martyr. So in essence Querishi is a liar and IK is a terrorist sympathizer.

Second to ask Querishi if he thinks OBL is a martyr he is implying that Querishi is a terrorist sympathizer also. Can you see why this is insulting?

Fawad Chaudry tweeted this



When the media tries to portray PTI as a terrorist sympathizing party, then its the job of the Information Minister to have to make statements like this.
Click to expand...

You are reading too much in the question asked. There is an easy counterargument that if there was no clear clarification from SMQ then the host should have asked that question. He was not some PTV employee but a journalist of a country with whom we do not enjoy good relations.

At the end of the day, SMQ did a poor job in clarifying that it was a mere slip of tongue so there is nothing to discuss rather than incorrectly stating out of context. Fawad Chaudhry had to jump in because of SMQ's poor response. That you have to accept.

Stop playing the victim card by accusing everything at media. SMQ had a very good opportunity to explain the party and government position & he failed badly. You do not expect that from a seasoned politician like him.

If you still believe that SMQ did a great job, sure no problem with that. I respect your opinion but I am done on this topic especially when Fawad Ch. clarified that it was a slip of tongue.
 
Bewal Express said:
Who has killed more innocent people the American govt or OBL?
Click to expand...

How do 2 wrongs make a right? I think you already said OBL was a terrorist **** bag.

Now since I believe you are saying US is equally bad or worse and makes them a terrorist as well

how does is still justify calling OBL a martyr or a great man?

I am not sure what exactly you are trying to say here lol.
 
Local.Dada said:
How do 2 wrongs make a right? I think you already said OBL was a terrorist **** bag.

Now since I believe you are saying US is equally bad or worse and makes them a terrorist as well

how does is still justify calling OBL a martyr or a great man?

I am not sure what exactly you are trying to say here lol.
Click to expand...

That's my point, they are all as bad as each other, so why are some terrorists considered worse than others. OBL is reported to have inspired the killing of innocent people and that in my eyes is wrong and evil, but the Americans have bombed and killed many more and that is also evil. Why is one considered to be good, whilst the other is bad, who decides and on what criteria.
 
Nelson Mandela was a full blown terrorist. That's why he was imprisoned, not for being black, but for being a terrorist.

Amazing what the media can do to sway public opinion. Just need time.
 
The Pakistani government did not think that Osama was a terrorist before he died. There is no reason for them to change that stance.
 
Buffet said:
The Pakistani government did not think that Osama was a terrorist before he died. There is no reason for them to change that stance.
Click to expand...

Was it not Bush who told Musharaf that if Pakistan weren't with America then they were against them and they would bomb them back to the Stone Age?
 
IMMY69 said:
Was it not Bush who told Musharaf that if Pakistan weren't with America then they were against them and they would bomb them back to the Stone Age?
Click to expand...

I don't think it was bush, but one of the officials in the Bush administration. It can be taken as words coming from Bush.
 
Osama Bin Laden is a terrorist, he is a criminal who destroyed so many innocent lives.

Statements like these from our media are perhaps the reason westerners associate our country with terrorism, an image that I know so many Pakistanis are fighting hard to remove.

Absolutely pathetic stuff.
 
Local.Dada said:
How do 2 wrongs make a right? I think you already said OBL was a terrorist **** bag.

Now since I believe you are saying US is equally bad or worse and makes them a terrorist as well

how does is still justify calling OBL a martyr or a great man?

I am not sure what exactly you are trying to say here lol.
Click to expand...

Its simple

when your leader says he is a terroist, he is a terrroist, when he says he is a hero, hes a hero.

When he says american is great, its great, why he says no bases, no bases, when he does U turn, he is great.
 
Bewal Express said:
The Americans gave him weapons to fight the Russians, was he a terrorist then?
Click to expand...

So the foreign minister should have said this then to the interviewer.

Its all easy to say all these things behind computer screen but Qureshi should have responded to the interviewer then and there that "Have you asked the same question to Americans who supplied arms to Bin Laden?". A true leader should always speak his mind...right or wrong people will judge.

But your FM gave an impression here that he got bowled over by that question and had no response. He looked totally blank as if this question came out of syllabus for which he was not prepared.
 
Rajdeep said:
So the foreign minister should have said this then to the interviewer.

Its all easy to say all these things behind computer screen but Qureshi should have responded to the interviewer then and there that "Have you asked the same question to Americans who supplied arms to Bin Laden?". A true leader should always speak his mind...right or wrong people will judge.

But your FM gave an impression here that he got bowled over by that question and had no response. He looked totally blank as if this question came out of syllabus for which he was not prepared.
Click to expand...

Tbh, the Americans are dishonest and hypocritical and have brought nothing to PK except misery and any break down in the current relationship with these thugs is a good thing. And if this was the straw the broke the camels back so be it. We have kow towed to them for too long and IA we have started on a new path. As IK said 10 years ago, the Americans should ask us for only one thing and that is our soil isn't used to attack America, and that is a fair demand but they want to control us and Kaptaan can't be controlled.
 
Rajdeep said:
So the foreign minister should have said this then to the interviewer.

Its all easy to say all these things behind computer screen but Qureshi should have responded to the interviewer then and there that "Have you asked the same question to Americans who supplied arms to Bin Laden?". A true leader should always speak his mind...right or wrong people will judge.

But your FM gave an impression here that he got bowled over by that question and had no response. He looked totally blank as if this question came out of syllabus for which he was not prepared.
Click to expand...

The foreign minister isn't a true leader. That's not his role.
 
The mental gymnastics on display here by PTI supporters is a testament that the party has become a cult.

There is absolutely no way to defend such statements.
 
RexRex said:
What is your verdict - Is Osama a terrorist or not ? We know that he killed 3000 civilians on 9/11.
Click to expand...

Is George Bush a terrorist or not? He said God told me to attack Iraq.
10’s of thousands civilian Iraqis including women n kids were killed by him.

And btw what makes obl a terrorist? Building 7 ?
 
Last edited:
saeedhk said:
The mental gymnastics on display here by PTI supporters is a testament that the party has is a cult.

There is absolutely no way to defend such statements.
Click to expand...

They will never answer the question.

Their conscience and what IK stated are two different aspects. it's a tricky situation for IK bhakts.

Hence it is more convenient to deflect the question than answering it.

Look at any PTI cheerleaders and none has answer that question.

"is OBL a terrorist?"
 
Often there is not an enough nuanced discussion between people on what makes a person a terrorist or a rebel. There is a tendency among people to brand every non state militant organisation as terrorist organisation, and this generally arises out of ignorance of various geopolitical turmoils across the world and almost everyone including muslims and non muslims are guilty of that. And it becomes even easier to brand the organisation as terrorist when there's a religious slant to the said organisation, like the Afghan Mujahedeen who were really rebels fighting the Soviet occupation during the 80s.

For me, the distinction is very simple. If the organisation is fighting a military arm of the state and armed soldiers, it's a rebel organisation. If it's fighting and killing unarmed innocent civilians to settle scores, it's a terrorist organisation. There's often only a thin line that separates the two. OBL might have started out as a rebel when he joined the Soviet Afghan war during the 80s. But when he decided to bomb the WTC twin towers and kill thousands of innocent civilians to settle scores with the US, he irrevocably crossed the line from being a rebel to a terrorist. I know then an inevitable question will arise on who Bush et al are. It is possible to criticise the negative effects that the western military industrial complex has brought upon the middle east and the numerous loss of lives it has cost as a part of "collateral damage" and at the same time denounce OBL as a terrorist with conviction

There are plenty of critics even in the west itself criticising the likes of Bush and Blair as war criminals for starting the Iraq war. Engaging in whataboutery and defending OBL will only serve to strengthen the already negative stereotypes that the west has on Pakistan and Pakistanis with regards to terrorism. And people here question why Pakistan hasn't done enough to generate enough soft power.
 
Ladin was an American hero back in the day as he was fighting the American war.
 
RexRex said:
What is your verdict - Is Osama a terrorist or not ? We know that he killed 3000 civilians on 9/11.
Click to expand...

My verdict is that I would never give an Indian the satisfaction of supplying an answer they are digging for when it's not needed. How do you like that? :qdkcheeky
 
Cpt. Rishwat said:
My verdict is that I would never give an Indian the satisfaction of supplying an answer they are digging for when it's not needed. How do you like that? :qdkcheeky
Click to expand...

You don’t have to make Indians happy by giving an answer. Absolutely agree and admirable. However hope you really believe what we hope for you to believe . Not because we consider that a small online victory but I am sure big brother monitors some of the content that people post and hope it is not misconstrued in various ways if you know what I mean.
 
Local.Dada said:
You don’t have to make Indians happy by giving an answer. Absolutely agree and admirable. However hope you really believe what we hope for you to believe . Not because we consider that a small online victory but I am sure big brother monitors some of the content that people post and hope it is not misconstrued in various ways if you know what I mean.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your concern, but as you can see it is unwarranted. If Big Brother is monitoring this he's probably having a good chuckle at frustrated Modi fans fishing for soundbites.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Bhaijaan
"Operation Sindoor is now India's new policy against terrorism, a new line has been drawn": Narendra Modi
5 6 7
Replies
550
Views
17K
Bhaijaan
Bhaijaan
hoshiarpurexpress
King of 22 yards falters on 6 yards: Babar Azam dials home to take the right call on sarees
Replies
7
Views
796
Cpt. Rishwat
Cpt. Rishwat
G
Indian government ordered killings in Pakistan, intelligence officials claim
2 3 4
Replies
295
Views
14K
The Bald Eagle
The Bald Eagle
MenInG
[PICTURES/VIDEOS] "Mentally and skill wise I have all it takes to play for Pakistan": Omair Bin Yousuf
2
Replies
119
Views
8K
amvbfm
A
Mamoon
Imran Khan calls Osama Bin Laden a “shaheed” in parliament
2 3
Replies
187
Views
14K
Bhaijaan
Bhaijaan
Back
Top