Zaid Hamid humiliated on TV

[KingKhanWC]

Leave it to them and India to decide then.

It would be a good option but sadly the Indian army is prone to raping women and kiling kids.

God bless your trolling though.

 

[cricketjoshila]

It was India who threatned to attack Pakistan (08)with 'surgical strikes' which would have been an act of war. Pakistan didn't threaten India at all. When you have a nation threatning war then you use all your military might as a deterrent including nuclear weapons, basic stuff really. As for your claim India being stable, a war with Pakistan would be more of a disastour for India when Pakistan has less to lose.

India can also use nuclear weapons and use them before Pakistan does.So Pakistan may not get the chance to use its weapons.

It's a majority Hindu nation, nothing wrong with classifying it as a Hindu nation.

There is everything wrong if you classify my nation which i secular and where religion has nothing to do with law and identity of the nation.

Business deals don't go above religous connections. If security is at risk Saudi, Turkey and other Muslim nations will seek alliance with Pakistan not India.

Turkey is a part of NATO.

Again please show where has Iran sort Pakistani help over India.You realise that Iran's top two investors are India and Russia.Who both are very staunch allies to each other.Religion has got nothing to do with geo politics.Most muslim nations toe Amricas line.Oman has signed a pact with India,and may be Qatar as well which virtually allows India to build army bases there.Same is the case with Kazakhastan.You can always dream about some religious Ummah unity etc,but it doesnt exist and never existed.

Kashmir was majority Muslim and should have been part of Paksitan. However we just want them to have rights and stop being raped and murdered now. Indian state terrorism won't be forgotten.

Balochistan is part of Pakistan that's why you don't see Pak soldiers raping women there which is what Indian Hindu soldiers are doing in Kashmir.

Kashmir was an independent nation.Had its own king.it was not part of British India.Read about the stand still agreement regarding independent princely states in the declaration of independence.You Qaid e Azam agreed to it.So Pakistan has no claim to Kashmir.

If Indian state terrorism is ther its between Kashmiris and Army.Both part of India,where does Pakistan come in from?

Bangladesh was also part of Pakistan.And after it became free from an oppresive rule after one of the worst genocides we saw what Pakistani army did to fellow Pakistanis.

Again you some how try to portray this as a Hindu muslim struggle.It isnt.Please dont paint every thing with your religious brush,while you are free to do so in your country and your people and your life you are not to do so regarding another country and its people.

 

[Tapori]

Cricketjoshila -

Re: Kashmir and Bangladesh - You can't have it both ways.

Allow the Kashmiris the right to choose in the election they should have had without the abuse the Indian Army inflicts upon them and then see.

If you don't want them to ally with Pakistan then let them be independent if they choose to.

Just as Bangladesh were... or does India only support those nations who wish to break away from Pakistan?

 

[Garuda]

The fact that you ask this question (if youre serious) is mind boggling; This could have easily been asked from a child in primary school.

Alright you adult man. Why are you taking 4 posts without answering the simple question. I guess you have finished your primary school.

If you agree that Pakistan doesn't have a stake, then why don't it stay away from it and let Kashmiri and Indians decide it.

Come on try it again.

 

[Garuda]

It would be a good option but sadly the Indian army is prone to raping women and kiling kids.

God bless your trolling though.

There are lot of rapes happening in all over world and in other parts of India too. Do you have a stake there too ?

What about tibet. Human right is violated there too and we can find many other region too.

 

[Garuda]

Cricketjoshila -

Re: Kashmir and Bangladesh - You can't have it both ways.

Allow the Kashmiris the right to choose in the election they should have had without the abuse the Indian Army inflicts upon them and then see.

If you don't want them to ally with Pakistan then let them be independent if they choose to.

Just as Bangladesh were... or does India only support those nations who wish to break away from Pakistan?

I agree with you there. Today India has its own share of problems because it didn't solve it from the start.

It shouldn't have got into Bangladesh problem at all.

However, in case of Kashmir, people saying that they are supporting Kashmir just for humanitarian case is unbelievable. Remember there were no Army in Kashmir valley till 1989. It was used for bollywood film shooting. Tourism was the main business of the valley. Who spoiled it? It's always easy to blame the army for humanitarian violation but in this world whereever any army been deployed, this is the outcome.

Again, I am no way supporting army oppression here at all. But isn't there no fault of those who started terrorism in the valley and brought in Army ?

This is one reason I do not support millitancy to solve any political issue. Cuz you loose more than what you get.

 

[KingKhanWC]

India can also use nuclear weapons and use them before Pakistan does.So Pakistan may not get the chance to use its weapons.

) It's not a race as to who can hit the button first. Even if one nation launches the nuke the other can still launch one back. You are a funny guy.

You ignored my point because you have no answer to.

There is everything wrong if you classify my nation which i secular and where religion has nothing to do with law and identity of the nation.

Go and have a good cry then because to me I classify a nation by the majority who are Hindu. The BJP could take power in the future as they have done in the past. This will make India run by Hindu nationalist fanatics which would be a fact.

Turkey is a part of NATO.

Wow you're a clever boy/girl.

Here educate yourself further. It's idiotic to deny the relations between the two.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has said that Pakistan, Turkey, Afghanistan, and Iran have a common future, and the security of each country is dependent on the security of the others, but the enemies are creating problems for the four countries.

http://old.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=228611

Again please show where has Iran sort Pakistani help over India.You realise that Iran's top two investors are India and Russia.Who both are very staunch allies to each other.Religion has got nothing to do with geo politics.Most muslim nations toe Amricas line.Oman has signed a pact with India,and may be Qatar as well which virtually allows India to build army bases there.Same is the case with Kazakhastan.You can always dream about some religious Ummah unity etc,but it doesnt exist and never existed.

Iran is getting closer to Pakistan as it realises both share common security interests. Business deals will continue with other nations, even Pak India have good trade deals but this doesn't mean when it comes to security they both are on the same page. You need to understand the difference.

Kashmir was an independent nation.Had its own king.it was not part of British India.Read about the stand still agreement regarding independent princely states in the declaration of independence.You Qaid e Azam agreed to it.So Pakistan has no claim to Kashmir.

If Indian state terrorism is ther its between Kashmiris and Army.Both part of India,where does Pakistan come in from?

Bangladesh was also part of Pakistan.And after it became free from an oppresive rule after one of the worst genocides we saw what Pakistani army did to fellow Pakistanis.

Again you some how try to portray this as a Hindu muslim struggle.It isnt.Please dont paint every thing with your religious brush,while you are free to do so in your country and your people and your life you are not to do so regarding another country and its people.

Thanks for the distorted history lesson. You forgot to add the UN resolution 47 which promised Kashmiri's right of self determination. It's still valid today. There is free Kashmir and there is Indian occupied Kashmir. You are deluded if you think Pakistani's will forget the Kashmiri's and not speak up against Indian state terrorism.

 

[KingKhanWC]

There are lot of rapes happening in all over world and in other parts of India too. Do you have a stake there too ?

What about tibet. Human right is violated there too and we can find many other region too.

Nice justification for rape. How many nations can you name which have soldiers who have raped women for decades and continue to do so now? Let's stick to the topic and not divert to Tibet, start a thread on it if you wish and I will give my two cents there.

 

[azhar329]

Alright you adult man. Why are you taking 4 posts without answering the simple question. I guess you have finished your primary school.

If you agree that Pakistan doesn't have a stake, then why don't it stay away from it and let Kashmiri and Indians decide it.

Come on try it again.

How many times have I stated that Kashmir is an Islamic issue which therefore includes the particpation/intervention of muslim countries including pakistan; take the occupation goggles off and you'll see that their freedom from hindu thugs is a just cause.

 

[Garuda]

Nice justification for rape. How many nations can you name which have soldiers who have raped women for decades and continue to do so now? Let's stick to the topic and not divert to Tibet, start a thread on it if you wish and I will give my two cents there.

This thread was not about Kashmir either. gotcha.

Now, does oppression is only defined as rape? Why not tibet oppressed?

Anyway, you said you do not want Kashmir now. They why bother. Let Kashmiri and Indian Army decide. Like Naxalites and RPF decide withyour your mediation.

 

[Tapori]

^ Agreed to an extent.

Can you though give me one example of when the Army/Military of the country accused of oppression, has successfully helped those feeling oppressed?

Great Britain had a torrid time dealing with the Irish issue using Military force. I hope you read up on that if you get the chance.

 

[Garuda]

How many times have I stated that Kashmir is an Islamic issue which therefore includes the particpation/intervention of muslim countries including pakistan; take the occupation goggles off and you'll see that their freedom from hindu thugs is a just cause.

What is an Islamic issue? Can you please explain then we can move ahead.

 

[Garuda]

^ Agreed to an extent.

Can you though give me one example of when the Army/Military of the country accused of oppression, has successfully helped those feeling oppressed?

Great Britain had a torrid time dealing with the Irish issue using Military force. I hope you read up on that if you get the chance.

Good point and I will. But mostly army deployment comes with it's own share of problem.

When Pakistani army takes action inside Pakistan, they feel the resistance too.

But thats not the point in discussion here and I feel its time now India should revoke the Army special power act from valley as the insurgency is reduced and hand over slowly to J & K police.

 

[Tapori]

When Pakistani army takes action inside Pakistan, they feel the resistance too.

Something and others like myself have tried to show again and again.

It just doesn't work.

What's the point in handing over to the J & K Police who will just start the cycle of oppression again?

Have the vote; but India won't because their policies have created such hatred, that Goebells and Karl Rove combined couldn't pursuade the Kashmiri majority to stay with India...

In Pakistan, The lal Mashid or say, Gang warfare in karachi, are incidents that are completely different and are situations where you can justify using force; Lal Masjid could have been handled better still.

 

[Garuda]

Something and others like myself have tried to show again and again.

It just doesn't work.

What's the point in handing over to the J & K Police who will just start the cycle of oppression again?

Have the vote; but India won't because their policies have created such hatred, that Goebells and Karl Rove combined couldn't pursuade the Kashmiri majority to stay with India...

In Pakistan, The lal Mashid or say, Gang warfare in karachi, are incidents that are completely different and are situations where you can justify using force; Lal Masjid could have been handled better still.

Not really. The army has a different power than police. Even they have different power than whereever they are outside J & K. They were given special powers from the center to keep things in control and this is where things go grey. Now who will decide that the special power will not be misused and unfortunately it gets.

Now police will not have them and they will be answerable to state home ministers. So the law and order will be back to civilian govt instead of the army.

If the situation stays atleast couple of years more like now, I think we can see some progress on that side. People have started talking on it too.

Voting, to be honest, I don't think it will ever happen . There are many complication to it too.

So as I see or seen till now, the Kashmir will settle down to some what a solution close to status quo. May be some changes here and there.

Yes, Lal Masjid was a similar case. We can not always blame Army as they are trained to work that way. So their use should be limited to border and not inside. An individual soldier is a human like us only.

 

[Tapori]

You are the minority, accept it.

If you accept you were wrong for saying I reject all Hadith and to do so by implying that my opinion on the matter of Zaid Hamid's reference to a particular Hadith was invalid for this reason.

Again you have failed to refute the point. Nukes can be used against Israel if required by either F-16's or missiles.

You have no point left to refute! They were Zaid's points about pre-emptive strikes which you've glossed over.

And no nukes cannot be used against Israel in the situations Zaid has described. not your own hypothetical ones, but I could argue yours on their individual merits.

Again, can you imagine what he would have done with his itchy trigger fingers when India signaled as you did, in 2008, to launch an attack?

Ghazwa-E-hind - Horses at the ready! Nukes Ready! Topees Ready!

Fire!

Israel could one day knock down the Al-Aqsa masjid which they are planning now, this would give reason for the Muslim world to go to war. Pakistan's nukes would come into play.

Now who 's going off on one. That was never the point and you know it.
That's not what Zaid the Lion said. He talked about direct missile attacks and with no mention of Al-Aqsa in sight.

Man what an imagination. The nations problems within have been around for a long time. All nation have problems, Pakistan's main ones being crime and corruption.

It's a shame you wondered off into the wilderness again but I have only ignored the imagination. Please answer the points directly .

If only it was just imagination. Those problems are real and until they are addressed Pakistan will not progress which is what the OP vid was about and what Zaid didn't discuss.
Zaid saab should speak on such issues more forcefully... rather than sit and try to play command and conquer on the beach.

Zaid routinely goes off on rants about the West in a very myopic fashion.

Still no comment on Saudi Imperialism either? Is that ok being the Saudi Monarchy's lapdogs and lab for more of their strain of Right-wing Religious propaganda...

You do know they support the US!

Forget the hadith. History proves it has happened and logic shows one day an Islamic Empire could once again take over India. This is common sense.

Could. Not Should; Which is what Zaid is advocating through the Hadith and thus the Hadith are relevant. Either it's already happened or we need the Lion Zaid to propagate it's implementation which he revels in...

Wrong the overall strategy is the same, the tactics to fulfill the strategy change, understand the difference. Drone attacks started under Bush and continue in strength under Obama.

The term is new in public but the policy is not new at all. Even when Afghanistan was invaded the attacks over the border in Pakistan started.

The Policy was actually revised. the US had no idea how backward Afghanistan was nor how resilient Afghani Taleban were. Plus they had no idea how clever the Pakistan Army was in terms of US-Pak co-operations...

The objectives too changed as the Pak Army managed to play the most elaborate double game of modern times - At the cost of 40,000 lives...

The Elephant in the room is the Pak Army... Which Zaid barley mentions unless it's to "Attack Attack Attack" like it's the 90th minute of a football match with the team down a goal.

Obama's poll ratings are what affected his strategy a great deal, as did the Economy, not to mention Russia, India and China and the big one that is Iran and Israel.

Not some intrinsic US Conspiracy.
Again would things be worse or better under the Republicans? if you can't see the difference between one of the nutjobs in the US Republicans taking over instead of Obama, than you are skewering the debate like Zaid to fit your interpretation of the US's foreign policy.

Personnel matters greatly even if the overall strategy is seemingly the same. They can alter Strategy and Tactics more than Zaid Hamid saab... I suggest you watch the documentaries in the documentary thread...

Do define where you think Zaid is right and we'll take it from there Re: US Policy and Pakistan's Situation.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Cricketjoshila -

Re: Kashmir and Bangladesh - You can't have it both ways.

Allow the Kashmiris the right to choose in the election they should have had without the abuse the Indian Army inflicts upon them and then see.

If you don't want them to ally with Pakistan then let them be independent if they choose to.

Just as Bangladesh were... or does India only support those nations who wish to break away from Pakistan?

If majority of Kashmiris supported independence like majority of Bangladeshis,Kashmir would have independent long back.You cannot suppress 50million people,no matter what.Pakistan has 1st hand experience of that in Bangladesh.

Kashmir and Plebicite.

The UN resolution asks PAkistan to withdraw from Kashmir,has Pakistan done it?NO.

What sort of plebicite it would be when more than 20% of othe population was made to flee the state?The demography has been changed forever.

Pakistan had no business in KAshmir in 1948 and have no business there even now,they have just messed up the place.

But if all conditions return to normal then a plebicite should be held.

 

[cricketjoshila]

) It's not a race as to who can hit the button first. Even if one nation launches the nuke the other can still launch one back. You are a funny guy.

You ignored my point because you have no answer to.

Oh its a race.If your nuclear capability is crippled by a pre emptive strike you cant hit back.

Go and have a good cry then because to me I classify a nation by the majority who are Hindu. The BJP could take power in the future as they have done in the past. This will make India run by Hindu nationalist fanatics which would be a fact.

Wow.Why should i cry?You classification isnt worth anything.LOL.
Who takes power in India is a matter for Indians not anyone else.

Iran is getting closer to Pakistan as it realises both share common security interests. Business deals will continue with other nations, even Pak India have good trade deals but this doesn't mean when it comes to security they both are on the same page. You need to understand the difference.

LOL.Iran doesnt have relations with half the world.Cant trade with most.Pakistan cant help them as it will mean no American aid.India maintains such huge business interests with Iran because of strategic options else it can buy oil from anywhere.Iran has been since the Islamic revolution a close ally of India.It has resisted almost every resolution in OIC that PAkistan brings againist India.

DO you know why the Chabahra Port,the Delaram highway and north south rail corridor being built by India in Iran.

Zaid Hamid

Thanks for the distorted history lesson. You forgot to add the UN resolution 47 which promised Kashmiri's right of self determination. It's still valid today. There is free Kashmir and there is Indian occupied Kashmir. You are deluded if you think Pakistani's will forget the Kashmiri's and not speak up against Indian state terrorism.

Why did Pakistan invade a free Kashmir in 1948?With what legal right?

Tell me why the Standstill agreement which was signed and agree upon broken?

UN resolution asks Pakistan to vacate Kashmir,has it done that?

Free Kashmir?You mean where people are governed by pakistani laws and hold Pakistani passports?

Why not let that Pakistani Kashmir be free.remove every Pakistani from there.Ask UN to send UN forces for protection.But no Pakistan has never done that

There is Pakistan occupied KAshmir and there is Jammu and KAshmir.

Pakistan can remember whatever it wants to,perhaps they will remember Bangladesh and not make the same mistake in Balochistan.

they have no legal right in 1948 have no legal right now.

 

[azhar329]

Why did Pakistan invade a free Kashmir in 1948?With what legal right?

UN resolution asks Pakistan to vacate Kashmir,has it done that?

Free Kashmir?You mean where people are governed by pakistani laws and hold Pakistani passports?

Why not let that Pakistani Kashmir be free.remove every Pakistani from there.Ask UN to send UN forces for protection.But no Pakistan has never done that

There is Pakistan occupied KAshmir and there is Jammu and KAshmir.

Pakistan can remember whatever it wants to,perhaps they will remember Bangladesh and not make the same mistake in Balochistan.

they have no legal right in 1948 have no legal right now.

No surprises re the above coming from a supporter of the occupation by hindu thugs and rapists. It wouldnt surprise me if nonsense like this came from the offices of the BJP.

I'd rather read the works related to kashmir by Professor William Baker who is impartial unlike yourself. He clearly outlines the crimes of that despicable individual hari singh, the murder of 200,000 kashmiris and the invasion of kashmir by indian forces in October 1947.

May Allah bless the kashmiris with freedom from their oppressors, ameen.

 

[cricketjoshila]

No surprises re the above coming from a supporter of the occupation by hindu thugs and rapists. It wouldnt surprise me if nonsense like this came from the offices of the BJP.

I'd rather read the works related to kashmir by Professor William Baker who is impartial unlike yourself. He clearly outlines the crimes of that despicable individual hari singh, the murder of 200,000 kashmiris and the invasion of kashmir by indian forces in October 1947.

May Allah bless the kashmiris with freedom from their oppressors, ameen.

Hari Singh and his administration was the matter of Kashmiris.he was the sovereign king and recognised as such in the declaration of independence.why did Pakistan poke his nose in there?

Rather than calling me names tell me what legal right Pakistan had in 1948 to be in KAshmir?

BJP.Well bit rich coming from Pakistan where international sanctioned terrorists like Hafeez Saeed roam around freely and adrdress jalsas.

 

[azhar329]

Hari Singh and his administration was the matter of Kashmiris.he was the sovereign king and recognised as such in the declaration of independence.why did Pakistan poke his nose in there?

Rather than calling me names tell me what legal right Pakistan had in 1948 to be in KAshmir?

BJP.Well bit rich coming from Pakistan where international sanctioned terrorists like Hafeez Saeed roam around freely and adrdress jalsas.

Read the works of Professor William Baker and you might learn something.

Im not calling you names, I said you were a supporter of the occupation which you are.

Youre indian thugs and rapists continue their state terrorism and have been doing so for more than 60 years; dont even go there.

 

[Tapori]

cricketjoshila

At the time of partition, how many Muslims were in Kashmir as a percentage of the states population?

Forget Pakistan's right now, back then they had every right if you imply that states, such as West and East Pakistani States, with a muslim majority population, were to join Pakistan.

Partition as an issue is another debate;

Do you at least agree that Kashmiris should have the right to vote for their future as either Independents, An Autnomous Indian State or as part of a Delhi-Administered India?

 

[cricketjoshila]

cricketjoshila

At the time of partition, how many Muslims were in Kashmir as a percentage of the states population?

60%

Kashmir was not part of partition as it was never directly goverened by the British and hence was a sovereign state.This status was agreed upon in the declaration of Independence and neither India nor Pakistan was to use force to get any such Princely state to acede to it.

So Kashmir was not for India or Pakistan to claim as it was independent hence the Population claim means nothing.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Read the works of Professor William Baker and you might learn something.

Im not calling you names, I said you were a supporter of the occupation which you are.

Youre indian thugs and rapists continue their state terrorism and have been doing so for more than 60 years; dont even go there.

Calm down.

 

[Garuda]

read the works of professor william baker and you might learn something.

Im not calling you names, i said you were a supporter of the occupation which you are.

Youre indian thugs and rapists continue their state terrorism and have been doing so for more than 60 years; dont even go there.

Can I go there ? Please?

 

[cricketjoshila]

cricketjoshila

At the time of partition, how many Muslims were in Kashmir as a percentage of the states population?

Forget Pakistan's right now, back then they had every right if you imply that states, such as West and East Pakistani States, with a muslim majority population, were to join Pakistan.

Partition as an issue is another debate;

Do you at least agree that Kashmiris should have the right to vote for their future as either Independents, An Autnomous Indian State or as part of a Delhi-Administered India?

State which were part of British India and not independent states like Kashmir.The Area of India and PAkistan was clearly demarcated and agreed upon and hence signed by both the sides.

Kashmir was never directly ruled by British and hence was neither Pakistan or India's to claim.Pakistan invaded a sovereign state in 1948.

Under ideal circumstances yes they have a right.

 

[azhar329]

Calm down.

Masha'Allah Im calm, it seems as if I hit a nerve (of truth) when referring to the crimes of the indian thugs and your support for them.

 

[Garuda]

cricketjoshila

At the time of partition, how many Muslims were in Kashmir as a percentage of the states population?

Forget Pakistan's right now, back then they had every right if you imply that states, such as West and East Pakistani States, with a muslim majority population, were to join Pakistan.

Yes, as a muslim majority state kashmir could have been a part of Pakistan.

Pakistan offered this to the king and so as India. Both were rejected.

Now, instead of diplomacy, Pakistan tried to force and attacked which forced the king to sign it in favor of India.

So where it went wrong ? Whom should you actually blame? May be Pakistan govt would have persuaded talks with Kashmir instead of attacking cuz India was not attacking anyway and was happy without Kashmir. Pakistan provided the window to India to push the king to accept India's offer.

Do you at least agree that Kashmiris should have the right to vote for their future as either Independents, An Autnomous Indian State or as part of a Delhi-Administered India?

As a personal view if you ask me, I don't think why they should not be allowed ? But in this 60 years a lots have happened.

India and pakistan had faced 4 wars and the distrust level is very very high. The ego issue has gone extreme. So it will be more of win and lose case in political arena.

Secondly, the demographics have changed in 60 years. So voting won't be same as 60 years back. So if voting has to happen it has to be in today's scenario with different options.

Honestly, I do not see that happening at all.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Yes, as a muslim majority state kashmir could have been a part of Pakistan.

Pakistan offered this to the king and so as India. Both were rejected.

Now, instead of diplomacy, Pakistan tried to force and attacked which forced the king to sign it in favor of India.

So where it went wrong ? Whom should you actually blame? May be Pakistan govt would have persuaded talks with Kashmir instead of attacking cuz India was not attacking anyway and was happy without Kashmir. Pakistan provided the window to India to push the king to accept India's offer.




As a personal view if you ask me, I don't think why they should not be allowed ? But in this 60 years a lots have happened.

India and pakistan had faced 4 wars and the distrust level is very very high. The ego issue has gone extreme. So it will be more of win and lose case in political arena.

Secondly, the demographics have changed in 60 years. So voting won't be same as 60 years back. So if voting has to happen it has to be in today's scenario with different options.

Honestly, I do not see that happening at all.

The King had the option of either joining India or Pakistan or remain independent,as it was not directly ruled by British,which he tried to remain.All these had already been agreed in the declaration which was signed by Pakistan.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Masha'Allah Im calm, it seems as if I hit a nerve (of truth) when referring to the crimes of the indian thugs and your support for them.

Then with same calm please understand your calling them a thug doesnt make them one.

 

[azhar329]

Then with same calm please understand your calling them a thug doesnt make them one.

You might have a point there, thug might not be appropriate. How about instrument of state terrorism, rapist, murderer, oppressor, occupier ?

I dont expect you to agree especially if you consult the "BJP manual" relating to the issue of kashmir.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Tapori.

You wrote Mossad trained the Mujahudeen in Afghanistan. Please don't run from this and provide some evidence.

If you accept you were wrong for saying I reject all Hadith and to do so by implying that my opinion on the matter of Zaid Hamid's reference to a particular Hadith was invalid for this reason.

So you accept some do you now? Why?

You have no point left to refute! They were Zaid's points about pre-emptive strikes which you've glossed over.

And no nukes cannot be used against Israel in the situations Zaid has described. not your own hypothetical ones, but I could argue yours on their individual merits.

Again, can you imagine what he would have done with his itchy trigger fingers when India signaled as you did, in 2008, to launch an attack?

Ghazwa-E-hind - Horses at the ready! Nukes Ready! Topees Ready!

Fire!



Now who 's going off on one. That was never the point and you know it.
That's not what Zaid the Lion said. He talked about direct missile attacks and with no mention of Al-Aqsa in sight.

It doesn't matter what he mentioned or not. I'm telling you what could occur thus making his thinking to be correct.

Here are some of facts for you.

1. Pakistan has the capability to target Israel with a nuclear strike.

2. Israel has been digging under the Al-Aqsa mosque for a while.

3. Jewish belief is the temple will one day be restored.

4. Jewish rabbi's and others have openly called for the destruction of the mosque and the building of the temple.

Now if or more likely when they do knock down the mosque the Muslim world will be very very angry causing a massive regional war. Pakistan's nukes come into play.

You can carry on with your daft imagination but this is the reality of the times we live in. ZH is correct in saying Pakistan's nukes are a threat to Israel. Israel knows this and has attempted in the past to strike within Pakistan.

Are you denying this reality?

Still no comment on Saudi Imperialism either? Is that ok being the Saudi Monarchy's lapdogs and lab for more of their strain of Right-wing Religious propaganda...

You do know they support the US!

Saudi are puppets of the west correct but it is also the place of Mecca and Medina which are protected by God. Even the puppet family cannot destroy Islam. The Saudi's know for the sake of their rule they have to uphold this aspect. The Arabs in general look for Pakistan for military and security support when required when it comes down to the holy sites. Pakistan will always do what it can if these sites are threatened by anyone. It was Pakistani soldiers who were called when terrorists entered Mecca and Pakistan was also ready to protect the sites at the first Gulf war.

Could. Not Should; Which is what Zaid is advocating through the Hadith and thus the Hadith are relevant. Either it's already happened or we need the Lion Zaid to propagate it's implementation which he revels in...

A prophecy doesn't need to happen once. It could be repeated, not hard to understand really.

he Policy was actually revised. the US had no idea how backward Afghanistan was nor how resilient Afghani Taleban were. Plus they had no idea how clever the Pakistan Army was in terms of US-Pak co-operations...

It was the US who were involved in helping the Afghans to take out the Soviets. History is clear Afghanistan cannot be occupied. It's daft to think the US didn't know this would be tough.

The objectives too changed as the Pak Army managed to play the most elaborate double game of modern times - At the cost of 40,000 lives...

The Elephant in the room is the Pak Army... Which Zaid barley mentions unless it's to "Attack Attack Attack" like it's the 90th minute of a football match with the team down a goal.

It wasn't in the interest of the army to send troops into the tribal areas. When foreign backed terrorists known as the TTP started to take control over the area using the people only then the army was sent in. Sure there are some army leaders who are traitors but the ISI which is the heart of the Pakistan army on the whole are there to protect the nation. ZH understands this, you clearly don't.

Obama's poll ratings are what affected his strategy a great deal, as did the Economy, not to mention Russia, India and China and the big one that is Iran and Israel.

It doesn't matter who is in charge of the US of A. Foriegn policy in the region is Zionist led not President led. It's for the interest and protection of Israel.

Not some intrinsic US Conspiracy.
Again would things be worse or better under the Republicans? if you can't see the difference between one of the nutjobs in the US Republicans taking over instead of Obama, than you are skewering the debate like Zaid to fit your interpretation of the US's foreign policy.

Personnel matters greatly even if the overall strategy is seemingly the same. They can alter Strategy and Tactics more than Zaid Hamid saab... I suggest you watch the documentaries in the documentary thread...

Do define where you think Zaid is right and we'll take it from there Re: US Policy and Pakistan's Situation.

ZH is correct in saying the US invaders in the region are trying to not only occupy Afghanistan but would like to see a weakened Pakistan with no nuclear weapons. The only problem is they cannot attack or invade Pakistan directly so are doing so by covert means.

Please go ahead and dismantle this theory if you disagree. At the same time don't forget to provide evidence of your claim regarding Mossad training the resistance.

 

[Tasavur]

If majority of Kashmiris supported independence like majority of Bangladeshis,Kashmir would have independent long back.You cannot suppress 50million people,no matter what.Pakistan has 1st hand experience of that in Bangladesh.

50 million people?!!!!

The population of Occupied Kashmir is around aout 12 million people; the Valley, where the majority of the freedom movement has been, has about 5-6 million people. Indian armed forces number from 500,000-700,000, with the vast majority concentrated in the Valley. That's one of the most saturated soldier:civilian ratios in the world. No wonder Kashmir has often been described as the world's largest prison.

However, having said all of this, you're right that if the majority of the people want independence, India won't be able to do anything. And that is what is going to happen Insh'Allah. I believe as time goes on, with the rise of social and electronic media, you'll see greater agitaton in Kashmir. And with cross-border infilitration by Pakistani-backed individuals at an all-time low, India will no longer be able to hide behind the 'Pakistani-sponsored terrorists' excuse it used in the 90's.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Oh its a race.If your nuclear capability is crippled by a pre emptive strike you cant hit back.

Please explain who pre-emptive nuclear strikes by India on Pakistan could cripple Pakistan's ability to launch their own nuclear weapons on India. This should be fun.

Wow.Why should i cry? Your classification isnt worth anything.LOL.
Who takes power in India is a matter for Indians not anyone else.

It is to me and I'm glad you have accepted the BJP could take control of India, therefore India could be run by Hindu nationalists as it has done in the past.

LOL.Iran doesnt have relations with half the world.Cant trade with most.Pakistan cant help them as it will mean no American aid.India maintains such huge business interests with Iran because of strategic options else it can buy oil from anywhere.Iran has been since the Islamic revolution a close ally of India.It has resisted almost every resolution in OIC that PAkistan brings againist India.

DO you know why the Chabahra Port,the Delaram highway and north south rail corridor being built by India in Iran.

You still can't understand the difference from business interests and security interests do you? Iran also wants to build a pipeline through Pakistan into China. Iran has been under sanctions for over 30 years but is still doing well. Unlike India it doesn't have hundreds of millions starving.

Why did Pakistan invade a free Kashmir in 1948?With what legal right?

Tell me why the Standstill agreement which was signed and agree upon broken?

UN resolution asks Pakistan to vacate Kashmir,has it done that?

Free Kashmir?You mean where people are governed by pakistani laws and hold Pakistani passports?

Why not let that Pakistani Kashmir be free.remove every Pakistani from there.Ask UN to send UN forces for protection.But no Pakistan has never done that

There is Pakistan occupied KAshmir and there is Jammu and KAshmir.

Pakistan can remember whatever it wants to,perhaps they will remember Bangladesh and not make the same mistake in Balochistan.

they have no legal right in 1948 have no legal right now.

Pakistan will do whatever it takes as soon as India allow the plebiscite which is promised to the Kashmiri's. It's idiotic to suggest Pakistan shouldn't have done this or should do this before India openly calls for the right of the Kashmiri's to self determination but no instead India has a huge military presence in the region causing rape, murder and imprisonment of innocent. It is India who is the clear criminal here. Accept it.

 

[Tapori]

KingKhanWC - How good of you to reply, kind Sir.

So you accept some do you now? Why?

No. Read the rest of that part of my post before, about how wrong you are in insinuating I reject all Hadith de facto. Again, even if i did, it still wouldn't detract from my point. Tut tut, you should know that's not how debates work...

Accept some? Zaid quoted them. It's not about me accepting them. We were dealing with reasons why Zaid is a tool. This is one of them.
Again I'm just pointing out the hilarity in his views. Either the hadith is right and Ghazwa-E-hind happened or it didn't happen and Zaid will help initiate it.

Irregardless of what the Indian Muslims want. They shall have no choice in the matter... Zaid kind of glosses over that.

As for your

A prophecy doesn't need to happen once. It could be repeated, not hard to understand really

Coulda Woulda Shoulda - That's your point, not Zaid's. He's firm in his belief that it will happen and hasn't happened. Which is why he's a tool.

That argument is just so weak it's laughable. The Hadith that Zaid cites, lists an event, not a series of events like Lemony Snicket...

If you believe that Isa (PBUH) will return, he won't return, then die then return again. etc.etc.

Saudi are puppets of the west correct but it is also the place of Mecca and Medina which are protected by God. Even the puppet family cannot destroy Islam. The Saudi's know for the sake of their rule they have to uphold this aspect. The Arabs in general look for Pakistan for military and security support when required when it comes down to the holy sites. Pakistan will always do what it can if these sites are threatened by anyone.

Good. But thh rest of your point is full of random points which may be partly ture, but I never asked about nor are relevant to my question.

Again, why does Zaid Hamid gloss over this aspect of interference Pakistan that gave rise to the same TTP that are part of the wave of Fundamentlaism that goes back to Gen.Zia's carte blanche approach to Saudi funding of Madrassas...

Is that Imperialism now justified by your points?

It was Pakistani soldiers who were called when terrorists entered Mecca

And? So what? How does that point stand as comment on my question of Saudi interference in Pakistani affairs...

and Pakistan was also ready to protect the sites at the first Gulf war.

What? When were the holy sites in danger between a war of Iraq and Kuwait with Kuwait being backed by the allies? By Israel? Who?

Even if you're right, How is this relevant to my point asking you why you de facto accept Saudi's propogating their brand of Islam on Pakistan as ok, when it contravenes the interpretations of the founding fathers of Pakistan!

It was the US who were involved in helping the Afghans to take out the Soviets. It's daft to think the US didn't know this would be tough.

It's what they're own heads working in the early part of the invasion said. There's a world of difference between arming Militias with the support of the Pakistani Army to do the dirty work and actually doing it yourself.

Which the US found out now to their cost. In their key Military advisors own words, they had no idea it was that disparate, that tribal and that Medieval.

The US's arrogance in Vietnam and recently in Iraq and Somalia, should show you that the Neo-con advisors always underestimate the enemy and overestimate themselves... Whilst making a shtload of money for their own retirements...

History is clear Afghanistan cannot be occupied.

Why would that stop a supposed Imperialist arrogant nation from trying? Again a weak argument to say just because it hasn't been done it will never be done or people won't try...

It wasn't in the interest of the army to send troops into the tribal areas. When foreign backed terrorists known as the TTP started to take control over the area using the people only then the army was sent in. Sure there are some army leaders who are traitors but the ISI which is the heart of the Pakistan army on the whole are there to protect the nation. ZH understands this, you clearly don't.

When did I say they aren't there generally to protect the nation? Strawmen...

In any case why doesn't Zaid highlight military blunders? He's hardly ever critical of the Army!

Do you agree with that the Army's tactics have created even more terrorism?

It doesn't matter who is in charge of the US of A. Foriegn policy in the region is Zionist led not President led. It's for the interest and protection of Israel.

Says yourself and Zaid "Conspiracy Theorist No.1" Hamid.

Yes the Zionist lobby is large and influences policy, but it is not and will never trump the US's own interest.
As long as the US benefits when the Israel benefits fine.
This may change with Iran and Obama; Are you seriusly telling me McCain would have been as reserved in the face of Zionist pressure to attack Iran as Obama has been?

I think you and Zaid really don't know how International politics works. It's heavily dependent on Personnel and their acumen... Ever heard of Oliver North/Iran/Contra/Reagan? Was that Zionism led too?

But hey we are all sheep in the face of Zaid the Lion's Pride and Insight. Well done him. An expert because he was a soldier... He knows what his Hukamraan were planning yeah?

ZH is correct in saying the US invaders in the region are trying to not only occupy Afghanistan but would like to see a weakened Pakistan with no nuclear weapons. The only problem is they cannot attack or invade Pakistan directly so are doing so by covert means.

Agreed. For once.

He's wrong for insinuating all of Pakistan's problems are down to democracy, the west, the US and regularly glossing over the role of the Pak Army when they get it wrong or do things contradicting his own Conspiracy Theories...

And of course providing solutions which are as solid as quicksand.


Oh and before I forget...

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_20-7-2003_pg1_4

Charlie Wilson’s War: The Extraordinary Story of the Largest Covert Operation in History.



Do watch the film. It's rather good too.

 

[Garuda]

Pakistan will do whatever it takes as soon as India allow the plebiscite which is promised to the Kashmiri's. It's idiotic to suggest Pakistan shouldn't have done this or should do this before India openly calls for the right of the Kashmiri's to self determination but no instead India has a huge military presence in the region causing rape, murder and imprisonment of innocent. It is India who is the clear criminal here. Accept it.

But you said you do not want kashmir now.

So one less party in the dispute. Let other two decide.

And about India being criminal, fair enough. Can you tell me why Pakistan attacked Kashmir in 1948 ? India was not there then. It was independent.

 

[Tapori]

It doesn't matter what he mentioned or not.

Er, it does. because you say he's not wrong and isn't a tool.

We say he is a tool, his arguments are generally conspiratorial, populist faux-bravado drenched musings on Global and Regional Politics and his solutions are infantile and dangerous.

I'm telling you what could occur thus making his thinking to be correct.

Oh, so his rhetoric deals in hypothetic scenarios, now does it? Well more fool me. More points on the board for Zaid the Bravehaeart.

And here we all were thinking he was advocating unilateral military and Nuclear action as solutions to Pakistan's current woes... we are so wrong.

Here are some of facts for you.

1. Pakistan has the capability to target Israel with a nuclear strike.

2. Israel has been digging under the Al-Aqsa mosque for a while.

3. Jewish belief is the temple will one day be restored.

4. Jewish rabbi's and others have openly called for the destruction of the mosque and the building of the temple.

Now if or more likely when they do knock down the mosque the Muslim world will be very very angry causing a massive regional war. Pakistan's nukes come into play.

You can carry on with your daft imagination but this is the reality of the times we live in.

When have you ever allowed me to critique these arguments?

Israel are currently doing all this - How can Pakistan and it's nuclear capability stop this from happening?

Don't tell me what you think, tell me what the Zaid Hamid says...

ZH is correct in saying Pakistan's nukes are a threat to Israel. Israel knows this and has attempted in the past to strike within Pakistan.

Are you denying this reality?

Has in the past yes. Will it do so now? No.

No i'm not denying that Pakistan's current Nukes could be used against Israel in anay apocalyptic war/Hypothetical scenario.

The fact is Pakistan has Nuclear capability. So does Israel.

What I am saying, as do others, is that ZH's rhetoric does not solve anything.

It merely entrenches a flashy false view of Pakistan's own capacity for a full-scale conflict be it Nuclear or Conventional and offers little in the way of insight or solutions.

 

[Tapori]

But you said you do not want kashmir now.

So one less party in the dispute. Let other two decide.

And about India being criminal, fair enough. Can you tell me why Pakistan attacked Kashmir in 1948 ? India was not there then. It was independent.

Did this actually happen? Genuine question.

 

[KingKhanWC]

KingKhanWC - How good of you to reply, kind Sir.

Of-course.

If you only could respond to your claim regarding Mossad in Afghanistan training the resistance.

Accept some? Zaid quoted them. It's not about me accepting them. We were dealing with reasons why Zaid is a tool. This is one of them.
Again I'm just pointing out the hilarity in his views. Either the hadith is right and Ghazwa-E-hind happened or it didn't happen and Zaid will help initiate it.

Irregardless of what the Indian Muslims want. They shall have no choice in the matter... Zaid kind of glosses over that.

As for your

Coulda Woulda Shoulda - That's your point, not Zaid's. He's firm in his belief that it will happen and hasn't happened. Which is why he's a tool.

That argument is just so weak it's laughable. The Hadith that Zaid cites, lists an event, not a series of events like Lemony Snicket...

If you believe that Isa (PBUH) will return, he won't return, then die then return again. etc.etc.

Forget your views on hadiths they are not important to the debate but only allow you more deflection tactics which you seem to be great at.

You failed to explain why a prophecy cannot be repeated and why it would only be limited for a one off time period.?India has been invaded numerous times. It may happen again in the future, 100 years or 1000 years. Why not?

Good. But thh rest of your point is full of random points which may be partly ture, but I never asked about nor are relevant to my question.

Again, why does Zaid Hamid gloss over this aspect of interference Pakistan that gave rise to the same TTP that are part of the wave of Fundamentlaism that goes back to Gen.Zia's carte blanche approach to Saudi funding of Madrassas...

Is that Imperialism now justified by your points?

Gen Zia was in charge, what Saudi was in total acceptance with Pakistan. If a nation is partner to any plan then one side cannot be the imperial master, it's daft to suggest this.

And? So what? How does that point stand as comment on my question of Saudi interference in Pakistani affairs...

Hello? It shows there is a common bond when it comes to matters of security based on religious ideals even if the leaders of one or both states are not fully aligned to national interests.

What? When were the holy sites in danger between a war of Iraq and Kuwait with Kuwait being backed by the allies? By Israel? Who?

You really are clueless. Too much time watching Anil Kapoor?

During the 1990-1991 Persian Gulf War, Pakistan sent troops to protect the Islamic holy sites in Saudi Arabia,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan–Saudi_Arabia_relations

It's what they're own heads working in the early part of the invasion said. There's a world of difference between arming Militias with the support of the Pakistani Army to do the dirty work and actually doing it yourself.

Which the US found out now to their cost. In their key Military advisors own words, they had no idea it was that disparate, that tribal and that Medieval.

The US's arrogance in Vietnam and recently in Iraq and Somalia, should show you that the Neo-con advisors always underestimate the enemy and overestimate themselves... Whilst making a shtload of money for their own retirements...

I agree with you on the arrogance of the US but from a different angle. The arrogance imo led them to think they could do the impossible. Even in the early days of the conflicts their generals were saying the occupation could last for many many years. This show they knew of the difficulties.

Why would that stop a supposed Imperialist arrogant nation from trying? Again a weak argument to say just because it hasn't been done it will never be done or people won't try...

Any nation who isn't arrogant would never have attempted to subdue the Afghans. As per previous point.

When did I say they aren't there generally to protect the nation? Strawmen...

In any case why doesn't Zaid highlight military blunders? He's hardly ever critical of the Army!

Do you agree with that the Army's tactics have created even more terrorism?

You don't even understand IK either.

It's not tactics within in the fight but the mere presence of the military in the tribal areas which causes deaths of people doesn't help. The Pakistan army doesn't urinate on people, butcher children or rape women, these are the tactics of the Americans and Indians.

Says yourself and Zaid "Conspiracy Theorist No.1" Hamid.

Yes the Zionist lobby is large and influences policy, but it is not and will never trump the US's own interest.
As long as the US benefits when the Israel benefits fine.
This may change with Iran and Obama; Are you seriusly telling me McCain would have been as reserved in the face of Zionist pressure to attack Iran as Obama has been?

I think you and Zaid really don't know how International politics works. It's heavily dependent on Personnel and their acumen... Ever heard of Oliver North/Iran/Contra/Reagan? Was that Zionism led too?

But hey we are all sheep in the face of Zaid the Lion's Pride and Insight. Well done him. An expert because he was a soldier... He knows what his Hukamraan were planning yeah?

Man you are naieve.

The US is run by Zionism. Congressmen recently voted in the vast majority to stop all negotiations with Iran...ie stop dialogue. O'Drama keeps on harping about let's continue to work things out blah blah blah. He is the showman, the puppet, the actor, the fraud who only fools the fools, who only fools the movie lovers like you.

Take a read dear chap. .

http://capwiz.com/fconl/vote.xc/?votenum=927&chamber=H&congress=1121&voteid=58672521&state=US

Come on buddy, you seriously can't figure out why a small nation in Asia holds so much strength in the most powerful nation on the planet. The reason is clear as spring water, Zionism has infiltrated the US of A.

Agreed. For once.

He's wrong for insinuating all of Pakistan's problems are down to democracy, the west, the US and regularly glossing over the role of the Pak Army when they get it wrong or do things contradicting his own Conspiracy Theories...

And of course providing solutions which are as solid as quicksand.


Oh and before I forget...

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_20-7-2003_pg1_4

Charlie Wilson’s War: The Extraordinary Story of the Largest Covert Operation in History.



Do watch the film. It's rather good too.

Pakistan's problems today are mainly due to two things.

1. Corruption and lack of policing which are down to sell out governments. Who has bought them the US with their aid.

2. The occupation in Afghanistan. There were no suicide bombings in Pakistan before this.

Of course some things are down to the people but the key factors are down to foreign US interference on the back of Zionist ideology.

p.s I've seen the film.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Er, it does. because you say he's not wrong and isn't a tool.

We say he is a tool, his arguments are generally conspiratorial, populist faux-bravado drenched musings on Global and Regional Politics and his solutions are infantile and dangerous.

You mean like your conspiracy of Mossad training the Mujahids?

Oh, so his rhetoric deals in hypothetic scenarios, now does it? Well more fool me. More points on the board for Zaid the Bravehaeart.

And here we all were thinking he was advocating unilateral military and Nuclear action as solutions to Pakistan's current woes... we are so wrong.

Of course he's not. What he is advocating is growing a pair of footballs and standing up like God has allowed us Muslims to do instead of continuing to be slaves of others.

You either God or fear people.

You either submit to God, be a slave of God or be a slave of other humans.

Take your pick brother.

When have you ever allowed me to critique these arguments?

Israel are currently doing all this - How can Pakistan and it's nuclear capability stop this from happening?

Don't tell me what you think, tell me what the Zaid Hamid says...

I'm telling you what I think he means from my perspective. I don't listen to him and then form my conclusions. I study the topics and then listen to others to see if I agree with them or not. Most things ZH says I agree but not all.

I never ever suggested Pakistan's nukes will stop this from happening, it won't. What I'm saying is when it happens the nukes will come into play.

Has in the past yes. Will it do so now? No.

No i'm not denying that Pakistan's current Nukes could be used against Israel in anay apocalyptic war/Hypothetical scenario.

The fact is Pakistan has Nuclear capability. So does Israel.

What I am saying, as do others, is that ZH's rhetoric does not solve anything.

It merely entrenches a flashy false view of Pakistan's own capacity for a full-scale conflict be it Nuclear or Conventional and offers little in the way of insight or solutions.

What it does Tapori is highlight the real reality of what the world and esp the Muslim world is facing. This is the reality my brother, it's not a conspiracy. Since 911 how many Muslims nations have been bombed, ive lost count. I know this is hard to digest for many Muslims but turning a blind eye or hitting the bottle like Nisar is not the answer. We have to recognise the path the Zionist ideology is on. They want to bring about the Messiah and for that to happen Muslims have to suffer and this suffering is not something everyone can imagine or foresee.

 

[Garuda]

Did this actually happen? Genuine question.

Yes.

You can find many source from Pakistan itself confirming this.

The J & K state was independent and didn't wanted to be part of India or Pakistan.

Pakistan Lashkars attacked on Srinagar and the king wanted Indian help.

India played the card there. They asked the king to join India if they want Indian Army's help.

So if Kashmir is not with Pakistan today, can be blamed on this incident. Wrong foreign policy.


I found one here. Listen to the then Air chief Marshall of Pakistan after 2:57

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/GN8xr_1_anE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Lalafied]

What it does Tapori is highlight the real reality of what the world and esp the Muslim world is facing. This is the reality my brother, it's not a conspiracy. Since 911 how many Muslims nations have been bombed, ive lost count. I know this is hard to digest for many Muslims but turning a blind eye or hitting the bottle like Nisar is not the answer. We have to recognise the path the Zionist ideology is on. They want to bring about the Messiah and for that to happen Muslims have to suffer and this suffering is not something everyone can imagine or foresee.

this will be hard to understand for all those who reject the 2nd coming of Isa (as) & arrival of Imam Mahdi (as) to defeat the Dajjal, false Messiah, of Jews & Zionists.

 

[Tapori]

Of course he's not.

Err, he like, kind of is.

What he is advocating is growing a pair of footballs and standing up like God has allowed us Muslims to do instead of continuing to be slaves of others.

You either God or fear people.

You either submit to God, be a slave of God or be a slave of other humans.

Take your pick brother.

Now Zaid or you are gonna define choices to us as Muslims? Please! The world ain't as black and white like you and he wants it to be in this situation!

Growing any semblance of Testicular-termed fortitude comes from having Knowledge and Intelligence aswell as Courage and Heart. 2 out of 4 ain't bad for Zaid though...

The one who submits to God is the one who investigates his laws and uses them to understand the world and apply it effectively.

The west understand this as well as Aql and cause and affect, logic and reason. Zaid and his ilk couldn't form a coherent long-term solution if it was fired at them at point-blank range...

He plays Tiddlywinks.

They play Chess.

I'm telling you what I think he means from my perspective. I don't listen to him and then form my conclusions. I study the topics and then listen to others to see if I agree with them or not.

All sarcasm aside, Good.

Most things ZH says I agree but not all.

Good. So you won't be completely delusional.

I don't listen to him and then form my conclusions.

Well we are talking about him. If you did you wouldn't be wrong.

I never ever suggested Pakistan's nukes will stop this from happening, it won't. What I'm saying is when it happens the nukes will come into play.

Good. I disagree though.
Israel is currently excavating the Al-Aqsa mosque and even if Zaid were right now in charge of Pakistan's military, he couldn't do sht about it if he adopted his strategy of Military strikes.

This is Chess not Checkers.

What it does Tapori is highlight the real reality of what the world and esp the Muslim world is facing. This is the reality my brother, it's not a conspiracy. Since 911 how many Muslims nations have been bombed, ive lost count. I know this is hard to digest for many Muslims but turning a blind eye or hitting the bottle like Nisar is not the answer. We have to recognise the path the Zionist ideology is on. They want to bring about the Messiah and for that to happen Muslims have to suffer and this suffering is not something everyone can imagine or foresee.

Look, I'm with you, but after you've smashed Hassan's bottle over his head, which I know you'd love to do, listen to what he says when sober and think.

Let's say we do face all these huge obstacles? Whats the answer? Whats the conclusion and what's the solution?

Zaid wants to bring back a Pan-National Caliphate to restore Muslim identity. Fine. How do we do this? He ain't got a clue.

That's why Nisar is right when he talks about the fact that we as Muslims can't unite in the street and Mosques, how on earth currently can you talk about a Pan -National Caliphate?

Zaid's rhetoric sounds good but offers no concrete solutions. That's the point.

Only from a combination of true inward reflection and outward progressive thought can we find the answers we seek as a Muslim Ummah; None of this oral posturing about invading this and protecting the Ummah, when we're morally and spiritually and intellectually anorexic.

You failed to explain why a prophecy cannot be repeated and why it would only be limited for a one off time period.?India has been invaded numerous times. It may happen again in the future, 100 years or 1000 years. Why not?

Then it's just India being invaded Historically. Fine.

But Ghazwa-E-Hind according to Zaid is a specific one-off event.

Either it's happened or will happen. It can't happen over and over again otherwise it's not THE Ghazwa-E-Hind that Zaid harps on about!

You just don't get it. It's not my definition that you're questioning. It's Zaids! In any case common sense would tell you:

1) A prophecy cannot be repeated if it dictates the coming of 1 particular event.

2) Zaid Hamid says it hasn't happened and uses that to justify the coming Ghazwa-E-Hind which is talk that will cause more conflict in the regions and more unrest. No matter how much India is to blame for the Kashmir situation, it certainly doesn't help them or those Muslims who reside in India.

Is Zaid Hamid that myopic and venal? Yes. Yes he is.

As a result most rational people can deduce Zaid is a tool.

You don't even understand IK either.

Er, he says the Army shouldn't be there in their current guise full stop as this breeds more terrorism.

It's not tactics within in the fight but the mere presence of the military in the tribal areas which causes deaths of people doesn't help.

Que? What? Please clarify what you mean here exactly? *Nisar -esque*

The Pakistan army doesn't urinate on people, butcher children or rape women, these are the tactics of the Americans and Indians.

What are you talking about? I said Zaid Hamid rarely castigates the Pakistani Army for their misdeeds or blunders. Why bring the Americans and Indians into it? (Yes, yes, for two I know about the Kashmir and Vietnam situations before you start to do the whole "Your an apologist for them" tactic...)

And you accuse me of deflection!

If you only could respond to your claim regarding Mossad in Afghanistan training the resistance.

redefining what I said. Classic. Now it's specifically in Afghanistan!

Please click the link. Go ons I dares ya!

The most you could accuse me of is implying that Mossad agents were physically in Pakistan; I stand by that... but if you disagree fine.

In any case, their role in the conflict cannot be understated. You implied it didn't exist..
Especially given the fact that the Islamic Defender of the nation and whom we owe much of Zaid's Paranoia to, was Gen. Zia, that gave the green light for the Zionist Mossad's active participation...

 

[Tapori]

Yes.

You can find many source from Pakistan itself confirming this.

The J & K state was independent and didn't wanted to be part of India or Pakistan.

Pakistan Lashkars attacked on Srinagar and the king wanted Indian help.

India played the card there. They asked the king to join India if they want Indian Army's help.

So if Kashmir is not with Pakistan today, can be blamed on this incident. Wrong foreign policy.


I found one here. Listen to the then Air chief Marshall of Pakistan after 2:57

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/GN8xr_1_anE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Thanks. What do the others think?

 

[Tapori]

Gen Zia was in charge, what Saudi was in total acceptance with Pakistan. If a nation is partner to any plan then one side cannot be the imperial master, it's daft to suggest this.

What? Look at the result. Zia got playyyyed.

Saudi - Got the backing of Pakistan when they needed it, their brand of Islam contrary to Jinnah and Iqbal's version, installed in much of Pakistan, A Cheap labour force and more cannon fodder for the King.
Pakistan - Got some money and a few trips to Mecca. Oh, and a Frankenstein version of Islam...

So the Saudi brand of Islam has taken over large swathes of the Pakistani psyche, whilst Iqbal's message has affected how many Saudi's?

Or is Imperialism to you only black and white?

Hello? It shows there is a common bond when it comes to matters of security based on religious ideals even if the leaders of one or both states are not fully aligned to national interests.

When have I said they can't share that? The issue is you don't see the Saudi's treating Pak like their little lapdog.

Which is cool. They are Kings. They know how these things work.

 

[Tapori]

You mean like your conspiracy of Mossad training the Mujahids?

Even if that is true which it's not, my conspiracy would result in a few misquoted facts.

Zaid's conspiracies would result in WW3...

 

[Tapori]

Man you are naieve.

The US is run by Zionism. Congressmen recently voted in the vast majority to stop all negotiations with Iran...ie stop dialogue. O'Drama keeps on harping about let's continue to work things out blah blah blah. He is the showman, the puppet, the actor, the fraud who only fools the fools, who only fools the movie lovers like you.

Take a read dear chap. .

http://capwiz.com/fconl/vote.xc/?vot...72521&state=US

Come on buddy, you seriously can't figure out why a small nation in Asia holds so much strength in the most powerful nation on the planet. The reason is clear as spring water, Zionism has infiltrated the US of A.

When have I denied Zionist influence? So spare me the lecture.

I just think it's overstated by Zaid for his posturing to an already conspiracy driven mindset that then leads to no solutions except for a false-sense of knowing whats actually going on.

Again you glossed over how different policy would be, had McCain been in charge or if say, Santorum or Gingrich would get elected.

What next Free-masons and the Illuminati running tings bruv too?

Come on buddy, you seriously can't figure out why a small nation in Asia holds so much strength in the most powerful nation on the planet. The reason is clear as spring water, Zionism has infiltrated the US of A.

Read the post back again. I'm not denying the above. Just you and Zaid overstating it in relation to Pakistan's current predicament...

 

[azhar329]

Even if you're right, How is this relevant to my point asking you why you de facto accept Saudi's propogating their brand of Islam on Pakistan as ok, when it contravenes the interpretations of the founding fathers of Pakistan!

@tapori: side issue brother;

So long as the government has established the Sharia what does it matter what the founding fathers envisaged pakistan to be; for example; if the founding fathers of a muslim country wanted a secular democracy does that mean that one should not strive to implement the Sharia ? who should be obeyed, the founding fathers or Allah ?

 

[Tapori]

Even if you're right, How is this relevant to my point asking you why you de facto accept Saudi's propogating their brand of Islam on Pakistan as ok, when it contravenes the interpretations of the founding fathers of Pakistan!

@tapori: side issue brother;

So long as the government has established the Sharia what does it matter what the founding fathers envisaged pakistan to be; for example; if the founding fathers of a muslim country wanted a secular democracy does that mean that one should not strive to implement the Sharia ? who should be obeyed, the founding fathers or Allah ?

Hey, genuine greetings.

The Saudi's haven't established the Sharia.

Allah should be obeyed. Not the Al-Saud family.

Read what their brand of Sheikhs say and if you agree with them fine. You won't find them ever critiquing the western lifestyles of their underserving Royal Family will you? If you want to believe their hypocritical brand of Islam then fine. That's your prerogative.

What I won't stand is Zaid Hamid lecturing me about US Imperialism whilst never acknowledging Saudi Imeprialism in Pakistan.

Remember just because the Saudi Government keep Mecca and Medina all nice and shiny, doesn't mean they are accepting of all modes of Islamic thought and Jurispridence which is the true nature of Islam in it's best days.

And as for Secularism, You might attribute that to Jinnah (Though abdulrazzaqfan will logically call you up on it) But Iqbal was one of the greatest Islamic Theologians of our times for all Muslims.

and the Saudi brand of Islam would never have allowed a poem as beautiful as Jawaab-E-Shikwaa where Iqbal writes from Allah's perspective, as allowed according to their Sharia.

There is not one Shari'a as witnessed throughout the Caliphates. Compare and contrast the Caliphate of Mansur to say the Ottoman Caliphates years later.

Different rulers, equal different interpretations. The Saudi Royal Family are no different.

Plus there's no Monarchy in Islam in the first place...

 

[Tapori]

if the founding fathers of a muslim country wanted a secular democracy does that mean that one should not strive to implement the Sharia ? who should be obeyed, the founding fathers or Allah ?

If it's the Al-Saud's favoured interpretation of Islam Vs Iqbal's favoured interpretation, I think I'll stick with him on this one.

Or better yet let the people of Pakistan decide. As a sovereign country. After everyone gets educated with a wide exposure to all views and thoughts and Philosophies, not where there is gross literacy compounded by Saudi-Funded Madrassas that only teach one way of thinking...

 

[azhar329]

Genuine question:

If the founding fathers of a muslim country wanted a secular democracy or any other type of non Sharia based system does that mean that one should not strive to implement the Sharia ?

Who should be obeyed, the founding fathers or Allah ?

Your opinion bro ?

 

[Lalafied]

I do find it odd that Zaid Hamid has nationalistic tone to his views yet wants to establish Khilafah Rashida in Pakistan because in Islam there is no concept of nation-state & nationalism...Pakistan under Khilafah of Imam Mahdi (as) or if Khilafah is established before his time, will be a province of Islamic Khilafah.

 

[Tapori]

Again, depends entirely on your interpretation.

You could say that Iqbal's vision of Pakistan along with Jinnah's was a brilliant example of how they wanted the Shari'a implemented. Most Pakistanis agreed.

If you think they or people of that persuasion are not right then that's fine; What you can't do is seek to change their minds by slyly targetting illiterate and the poor and indoctrinating them solely with your view.

Or insinuate they are against Allah... Even if you do I have the right ti turn around and say no, you're wrong. Which I couldn't do in Saudi of course against the Monarchy that are the Al-Saud rulers...

Give them access to all views and let them decide. Which the Pakistanis did in 1947.

The issue of Secularism is a different one with regards to Pakistan. Both sides make a valid case.

The Al-Saud backed interpretation of Shari'a is not the be all or end all of the matter; As witnessed in the Caliphate examples I gave.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Now Zaid or you are gonna define choices to us as Muslims? Please! The world ain't as black and white like you and he wants it to be in this situation!

Growing any semblance of Testicular-termed fortitude comes from having Knowledge and Intelligence aswell as Courage and Heart. 2 out of 4 ain't bad for Zaid though...

The one who submits to God is the one who investigates his laws and uses them to understand the world and apply it effectively.

The west understand this as well as Aql and cause and affect, logic and reason. Zaid and his ilk couldn't form a coherent long-term solution if it was fired at them at point-blank range...

He plays Tiddlywinks.

They play Chess.

All this talk of aql. It seems to me by the time the those searching for aql find it they will be six foot under getting ready for God's justice against them for being slaves to their desires and slavish mentality.

Only understanding and accepting the gound realities of the nation and the wider world will there be a sensible answer. If not then you see pilled up, drunk, camp sounding jokers coming up with all kinds of rubbish and even abusing the Muslim whose ideas were behind the creation of the very nation they pretend to be upholding. It's a farce. :iq

So you won't be completely delusional.

)) I'm not the one medication or drunk, remember.

Good. I disagree though.
Israel is currently excavating the Al-Aqsa mosque and even if Zaid were right now in charge of Pakistan's military, he couldn't do sht about it if he adopted his strategy of Military strikes.

This is Chess not Checkers.

It's neither. This ain't no board game.

You are very far away from reality in not accepting the downfall of the Al-Aqsa compound to built a Jewish temple by Israel will not bring Pakistan nukes into play. Whether they are used or not in the end is another story but if there is a regional war with Muslim nations Pakistan would be pressured to either hand over or use this game changer. If other Muslim nations had the bomb Pakistan's role wouldn't be as important.

Look, I'm with you, but after you've smashed Hassan's bottle over his head, which I know you'd love to do, listen to what he says when sober and think.

)

I prefer bare knuckle stuff rather than using glass bottles but even sober he's so daft he wouldn't win a debate let alone a brawl.

If you've got his e-mail do pass point out this thread to him.

Let's say we do face all these huge obstacles? Whats the answer? Whats the conclusion and what's the solution?

Zaid wants to bring back a Pan-National Caliphate to restore Muslim identity. Fine. How do we do this? He ain't got a clue.

That's why Nisar is right when he talks about the fact that we as Muslims can't unite in the street and Mosques, how on earth currently can you talk about a Pan -National Caliphate?

Zaid's rhetoric sounds good but offers no concrete solutions. That's the point.

Only from a combination of true inward reflection and outward progressive thought can we find the answers we seek as a Muslim Ummah; None of this oral posturing about invading this and protecting the Ummah, when we're morally and spiritually and intellectually anorexic.

This is the key point.

The solution is understanding the truth. The truth of your religion, the truth of the ground realities and the truth of your destiny. Apply the constitution of Pakistan, set up law and order and deal with what comes in your terms not by the terms of the US who have been directing Pakistani policy while at the same time slowly trying to break Pakistan for Zionism.

Whether it's with Al-Aqsa or something else the time will come where Muslims will have no choice but to deal unite. Call it the Caliphate or not but a unison of direction is powerful enough for change. This is what you have to look/aim for.

With people like Nisar, the Ali guy their solutions are just the continuation of previous rhetoric which has fooled Pakistani's for decades with the country downhill faster than a bike tyre.

Then it's just India being invaded Historically. Fine.

But Ghazwa-E-Hind according to Zaid is a specific one-off event.

Either it's happened or will happen. It can't happen over and over again otherwise it's not THE Ghazwa-E-Hind that Zaid harps on about!

You just don't get it. It's not my definition that you're questioning. It's Zaids! In any case common sense would tell you:

1) A prophecy cannot be repeated if it dictates the coming of 1 particular event.

2) Zaid Hamid says it hasn't happened and uses that to justify the coming Ghazwa-E-Hind which is talk that will cause more conflict in the regions and more unrest. No matter how much India is to blame for the Kashmir situation, it certainly doesn't help them or those Muslims who reside in India.

Is Zaid Hamid that myopic and venal? Yes. Yes he is.

As a result most rational people can deduce Zaid is a tool.

It's not a specific event as such since he would obviously know Muslims have ruled before. He has mentioned this. The fact is nobody can rule it out in the future, however long it may be.

Er, he says the Army shouldn't be there in their current guise full stop as this breeds more terrorism.

Que? What? Please clarify what you mean here exactly? *Nisar -esque*


What are you talking about? I said Zaid Hamid rarely castigates the Pakistani Army for their misdeeds or blunders. Why bring the Americans and Indians into it? (Yes, yes, for two I know about the Kashmir and Vietnam situations before you start to do the whole "Your an apologist for them" tactic...)

And you accuse me of deflection!

There is a difference between a military strategy and the tactics of that particular strategy. ie. The strategy is to invade while the tactics employed are more specific. The army could go in very aggressive or more passive. This is not important as the mere presence ie the stategy of sending troops to fight is causing deaths even though the soldiers are trying their best to limit casualties.

The Pakistan army was never employed to be heavy handed like the American or Indian forces are in the regions they are occupying. Because Pakistan is in it's own terrority. Occupation forces act differently to forces within their own borders. This is why you witnessed a very passive approach in Swat but since the leadership of the terrorists always wanted destabilisation rather than just to live there it didn't work. This also highlights the terrorists agenda's come from the outside.

redefining what I said. Classic. Now it's specifically in Afghanistan!

Please click the link. Go ons I dares ya!

The most you could accuse me of is implying that Mossad agents were physically in Pakistan; I stand by that... but if you disagree fine.

In any case, their role in the conflict cannot be understated. You implied it didn't exist..
Especially given the fact that the Islamic Defender of the nation and whom we owe much of Zaid's Paranoia to, was Gen. Zia, that gave the green light for the Zionist Mossad's active participation...

I'm not in the mood for cartoons but I would appreciate if you could simply provide some credible evidence for what you wrote.

You think you know it but I hate to break it to you buddy but no Mossad agents trained the Mujahideen, it was the ISI with CIA backing.

Ironically you call others conspiracy theorists.

 

[Tapori]

^

Oh and before I forget...

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default...0-7-2003_pg1_4

KingKhanWC -

Hope that answers the brothers question.

For the 3rd time...

 

[KingKhanWC]

The link doesn't work. Go to sleep and try again in the morning...you conspiracy theorist.

 

[Tapori]

The link doesn't work. Go to sleep and try again in the morning...you conspiracy theorist.

Now that's freaky. Conspiracy indeed. Try the version I posted originally, I just checked it works.



-

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_20-7-2003_pg1_4

For the 3.5th time!

 

[Iffitheking]

another phainta to schizophrenic laal topi wala uncle John by Marvi Sarmad its little old program but worth sharing
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/caPjDGkDIgg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[smoothcriminal]

Now that's freaky. Conspiracy indeed. Try the version I posted originally, I just checked it works.



-

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_20-7-2003_pg1_4

For the 3.5th time!

Hey man thanks for providing that link. I was not aware of this information. Charlie Wilson is a highly credited personality even by Pakistanis. A lot of the people in our nation LOVE Charlie Wilson's War(the movie) and considering the ending to be pretty consistent with U.S. betrayal.

People blame external forces for ruining our sovereignty and "pride," but look how far the Generals and the civil-bureaucracy has gone in the past. Hypocrisy much.

 

[Third Umpire]

another phainta to schizophrenic laal topi wala uncle John by Marvi Sarmad its little old program but worth sharing
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/caPjDGkDIgg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

This was legendary

 

[KingKhanWC]

Tapori. That's not evidence of Mossad training the Mujahid which you claimed very clearly. This is just a view of one man who think the ISI had contact with Mossad and Israeli weapons were used. The Mujahid would use any weapons given to them, it didn't matter where they came from. The there is no evidence to suggest the ISI had any direct contact with Mossad, these are just rumours. You can't use this as evidence.

I ask again please prove what you said. When did Mossad TRAIN the Mujahids.

another phainta to schizophrenic laal topi wala uncle John by Marvi Sarmad its little old program but worth sharing
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/caPjDGkDIgg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

This woman does not believe in a two nation state and is dressed as a Hindu. She doesn't want Pakistan to exist.

 

[Garuda]

This woman does not believe in a two nation state and is dressed as a Hindu. She doesn't want Pakistan to exist.

I have not seen the video but really

Do you decide against someone depending on what she is wearing ??

Bravo.

 

[smoothcriminal]

Tapori. That's not evidence of Mossad training the Mujahid which you claimed very clearly. This is just a view of one man who think the ISI had contact with Mossad and Israeli weapons were used. The Mujahid would use any weapons given to them, it didn't matter where they came from. The there is no evidence to suggest the ISI had any direct contact with Mossad, these are just rumours. You can't use this as evidence.

I ask again please prove what you said. When did Mossad TRAIN the Mujahids.






This woman does not believe in a two nation state and is dressed as a Hindu. She doesn't want Pakistan to exist.

Wow man.. just wow. You have a problem with a Hindu Pakistani who has different views than an average Pakistani? Hindus and Christians are just as much a part of Pakistan as Muslims are. Our Constitution and media promotes and protects all train of thoughts and religions. Maudidi did not believe in a two nation theory but it did not stop Jamat-e-Islami from having him as their role model and i'm sure they are equally patriotic about Pakistan now. Big deal its just a train of thought that just happens to be different from yours.

 

[the Great Khan]

I have not seen the video but really

Do you decide against someone depending on what she is wearing ??

Bravo.

actually it says a whole lot about the mindset of someone. why else would the west and most have a problem with the hijab?

 

[KingKhanWC]

Wow man.. just wow. You have a problem with a Hindu Pakistani who has different views than an average Pakistani? Hindus and Christians are just as much a part of Pakistan as Muslims are. Our Constitution and media promotes and protects all train of thoughts and religions. Maudidi did not believe in a two nation theory but it did not stop Jamat-e-Islami from having him as their role model and i'm sure they are equally patriotic about Pakistan now. Big deal its just a train of thought that just happens to be different from yours.

I don't care who it is but anyone who speaks against the two nation theory is basically saying Pakistan shouldn't have been created. This is a slur on the nation and all those who died in partition, the wars and conflicts since upholding Pakistan's sovereignty. Is this woman actually a Hindu? If she is then she should accept Pakistan and live in peace.

 

[smoothcriminal]

^ You clearly did care that it was a person that was dressed as a "Hindu." Your bigotry was exposed.

 

[Garuda]

actually it says a whole lot about the mindset of someone. why else would the west and most have a problem with the hijab?

Sick mentality who have a problem with hijab.

But what was your point ?

 

[Garuda]

I don't care who it is but anyone who speaks against the two nation theory is basically saying Pakistan shouldn't have been created. This is a slur on the nation and all those who died in partition, the wars and conflicts since upholding Pakistan's sovereignty. Is this woman actually a Hindu? If she is then she should accept Pakistan and live in peace.

What is 2 nation theory ?

 

[Namak_Halaal]

Sick mentality who have a problem with hijab.

But what was your point ?

Clothes exert mindset.

 

[DesiMunda]

This woman does not believe in a two nation state and is dressed as a Hindu. She doesn't want Pakistan to exist.

Oh bhai mere, sari and bindi are old cultural garments and decoration that were and are commonly worn in all of the subcontinent. Would you rather she wear garments and decoration in the style of arabia or the west ?

 

[Garuda]

Clothes exert mindset.

So are you saying the lady is saying wrong things (lets assume she was wrong) because she is wearing a saree ?

Because that is what I opposed in WC's post. You can not give a reason for someone being wrong because she is wearing something.

 

[PakPrince]

This woman does not believe in a two nation state and is dressed as a Hindu. She doesn't want Pakistan to exist.

What do you mean that she is dressed as a Hindu? Do Hindus have some monopoly over that type of dress?

Many Bengali muslim women dress like that! Are they in reality hindus too? Do they become less Muslim because they wear a type of dress which their ancestors may have been wearing long before they converted to Islam.

you need to expand your horizons and get out of this midset. I say this as a well wisher.

I understand when I see villagers or illiterate Pakistanis reach such conclusions by looking at outward appearances but someone who is born and bred in Britain and thus has the advantages of a good education regardless of socioeconomic background should know better

 

[carbon11]

I don't care who it is but anyone who speaks against the two nation theory is basically saying Pakistan shouldn't have been created. This is a slur on the nation and all those who died in partition, the wars and conflicts since upholding Pakistan's sovereignty. Is this woman actually a Hindu? If she is then she should accept Pakistan and live in peace.

Basically in 2022 the British government will release all documents regarding partition they should have been released earlier.
Some documents have already been released showing Jinnah British agent and qadiani involvement via chaudry zafurullah Muslim league.

Basically Pakistan children have been brainwashed about Jinnah And basically have adopted the dictator zias view on Jinnah and iqbal as some Islamic heroes.

Read document of f burrow to chief fied Marshall of Bengal proof Jinnah was British agent. Under code name Patel

Also read letter of Sir mieville to Mountbatten on his meeting with Jinnah

First of all what we can call west Pakistan today was under Muslim rule and control anyway run by feudals nawabs agents of British.

Jinnah broke Muslims and its heartland northern India and doing the British master work of kicking and weakening Muslims of Hindustan/ India proper not west Pakistan. Basically plan was to weaken Muslims and to kick them out of India into the barren underdeveloped lands of west Pakistan near the wilds of Afghanistan and Iran held by vicious feudals agents of British. All was plan bybbritish raj to massacre Muslims

And to destroy Muslim political power and it's heartland in northern India

All freedom fighters went to jail or were killed or did jihad apart from Jinnah because he was British agent

Jinnah accepted British Mountbatten plan

Gave all access of rivers to India Now we are at their mercy with our water supply and they can release water and flood Pakistan anytime during monsoon season.

Built Pakistan on already Muslim controlled areas mostly by Muslim feudals in west Pakistan a large chunk which Were independent states like northerareas, state of chitral, dir state, swat state etc,and disputed territories of Afghanistan , and separate nation like Baluchis, even British
Had to get visas to enter Baluchistan why it was separate country.


Jinnah gave 36 Muslim states to India , ones with more Islamic history than the badlands of west Pakistan inhabited by warlike tribes and feudals.
Hyderabad, junagadh, Bhopal, rampur, Agra,
Audh


He accepted 2 Pakistan wings separated by thousand of miles of hostile India even a retard would not do this
So within 25 yrs Pakistan got broke thanks to this failed insight and racist feudal Bhutto.


Now today the result Pakistan a bankrupt banana republic begging for donations handouts and charity! Broken by civil regional conflicts within
And basically being ruled by liberal westen agents since its inception

Muslims would have been ruling India if they stayed united but their political back was broken

Baluchistan would be an independent Islamic country

Pakistan Punjab (Chach doab) western areas of Punjab nwfp , kashmir would have ended up back with durrani and Afghanistan. Basically the durrani agreement signed in 1892 with the durranis who founded Afghanistan.

British used the nawabs feudals and Paid agent Jinnah To destroynmuslim unity smash the backbone of the Indian Muslims proper the ones in northern India and divide muslims In three.


His British creation after 65 yrs as Pakistanis we can see everything that Pakistan is today with the Rahman Malik giving us assurance everything is ok.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Partition was never about every single Muslim being taken out of India. Sorry but I can't entertain this conspiracy theory. I suggest you read upon the history.

 

[Garuda]

Partition was never about every single Muslim being taken out of India. Sorry but I can't entertain this conspiracy theory. I suggest you read upon the history.

Wow. So muslims can't live under hindu and wanted a separate country. but it was not for all muslims. How did you decide for which muslim it is and whom to leave to be ruled by hindus ?


Anyway, I was not talking about the muslims you left behind.

I am talking about 51% muslims who went with you but then decided to leave you after 25 years. So the nation didn't work for many majority.

 

[Lalafied]

Basically in 2022 the British government will release all documents regarding partition they should have been released earlier.
Some documents have already been released showing Jinnah British agent and qadiani involvement via chaudry zafurullah Muslim league.

Basically Pakistan children have been brainwashed about Jinnah And basically have adopted the dictator zias view on Jinnah and iqbal as some Islamic heroes.

Read document of f burrow to chief fied Marshall of Bengal proof Jinnah was British agent. Under code name Patel

Also read letter of Sir mieville to Mountbatten on his meeting with Jinnah

First of all what we can call west Pakistan today was under Muslim rule and control anyway run by feudals nawabs agents of British.

Jinnah broke Muslims and its heartland northern India and doing the British master work of kicking and weakening Muslims of Hindustan/ India proper not west Pakistan. Basically plan was to weaken Muslims and to kick them out of India into the barren underdeveloped lands of west Pakistan near the wilds of Afghanistan and Iran held by vicious feudals agents of British. All was plan bybbritish raj to massacre Muslims

And to destroy Muslim political power and it's heartland in northern India

All freedom fighters went to jail or were killed or did jihad apart from Jinnah because he was British agent

Jinnah accepted British Mountbatten plan

Gave all access of rivers to India Now we are at their mercy with our water supply and they can release water and flood Pakistan anytime during monsoon season.

Built Pakistan on already Muslim controlled areas mostly by Muslim feudals in west Pakistan a large chunk which Were independent states like northerareas, state of chitral, dir state, swat state etc,and disputed territories of Afghanistan , and separate nation like Baluchis, even British
Had to get visas to enter Baluchistan why it was separate country.


Jinnah gave 36 Muslim states to India , ones with more Islamic history than the badlands of west Pakistan inhabited by warlike tribes and feudals.
Hyderabad, junagadh, Bhopal, rampur, Agra,
Audh


He accepted 2 Pakistan wings separated by thousand of miles of hostile India even a retard would not do this
So within 25 yrs Pakistan got broke thanks to this failed insight and racist feudal Bhutto.


Now today the result Pakistan a bankrupt banana republic begging for donations handouts and charity! Broken by civil regional conflicts within
And basically being ruled by liberal westen agents since its inception

Muslims would have been ruling India if they stayed united but their political back was broken

Baluchistan would be an independent Islamic country

Pakistan Punjab (Chach doab) western areas of Punjab nwfp , kashmir would have ended up back with durrani and Afghanistan. Basically the durrani agreement signed in 1892 with the durranis who founded Afghanistan.

British used the nawabs feudals and Paid agent Jinnah To destroynmuslim unity smash the backbone of the Indian Muslims proper the ones in northern India and divide muslims In three.


His British creation after 65 yrs as Pakistanis we can see everything that Pakistan is today with the Rahman Malik giving us assurance everything is ok.

Amazing post. I have been told by a few friends also that Jinnah sahab was a British agent and it has been quite the rude awakening really! But this is quite the detail bro! just wow!

Btw, anyone who is familiar with Sheikh Imran Hosein's legendary lectures, he is of the same opinion that a 2 nation theory was detrimental for Muslims.

 

[violet_may]

Agreed.

But many Defence/Cant/Model-Town-istas don't have a clue whats going on either... and they live in Pakistan!



You don't know TBH, how many people they help in pakistan? Maybe they've sponsored a local family and are getting their children education and health care.

Maybe they have helped their own families get educated to a good level where once they would have stayed in illiteracy.

Maybe they've invested in Pakistan and helped create jobs.

Or simply maybe they travel regularly and love the country too.

Argue the points first they make about the Politics first if you can...

I think it was a valid point.

IMO, especially when it comes to discussing problems relating to societal values/trends in Pakistan, etc, for instance, I think it makes sense that the person projecting those views should have at least lived in Pakistan for the majority of their life.

It's quite simple. Once you are a citizen of a particular country and have lived there for quite a long time, you would be more apt in having a say in the country's matters (as a general rule). 'Apt' being the keyword here.

I will give velu's example here. He is what, living in South Korea at the moment and will be staying there for a couple of months/years due to his job requirement. While he may get a brief perspective about the country, it is completely different than say, being born in South Korea and growing up there, or living in South Korea for several years, and thereby experiencing what normal citizens have gone through... and how their lives have been shaped over the years to provide them with their current sense of perspective regarding South Korea. Citizens will have differing perspectives, many may agree on a particular viewpoint...but it is not so much about 'which perspective is right', but the fact that their views will have been shaped by their prolonged experiences in the country, over several consecutive years. As such, their viewpoint will likely be more..'apt'...even if one doesn't completely agree with it (i.e there's some truth to it).

Not sure how to really best express it, but yeah, especially when it comes to a country like Pakistan..I think it's more pertinent that you have actually lived there for quite some time. That doesn't mean your opinion doesn't matter or you don't love the country your parents were born in...ugh, hope you get what I am trying to say here.

Anyways, not surprised that people who actually live in Pakistan have differing views than what most others have about the country...

I realize that probably 90% of the posters here fall into that category of 'I have never really lived in Pakistan apart from visiting for a couple of months from time to time/every year' or 'I am Indian/Bangladeshi/British/_________ but visited Pakistan once', etc, so I hope this post isn't perceived as something demeaning or something like..'your views don't matter' because that's not what I was getting at!

 

[carbon11]

Partition was never about every single Muslim being taken out of India. Sorry but I can't entertain this conspiracy theory. I suggest you read upon the history.

we have the region u come from i believe is mirpur which was part of durrani empire adminsistered under jech or chach doab with its seat in attock.

the ruling tribes were ghakkars, janjuas and chibs

ghakkars becaming powerful force and allies of durrani PASHTUNS and even accompanied them to panipat to fight the marathas who were raiding as far as punjab and were hindu fndamentalists.

bugti tribe also was allied to durranis and formed the cavalry teh valiant cavalry that busted marathas at panipat

baloch camel caravans traded up to attock

bugtis took many hindu marathas slaves and a lot of hindus in dera bugti with black dark faces are decendents of these marathas


sikhs attacked durrani empire , and invaded the jech doab and fought ghakkars, ghakkars did jihad, sikhs transfered power to their misls and musalman jats were given land in mirpur who were enemies of ghakkars and khatri hindu traders were bought in and were very wealthy they had bricks of gold in mirpur which they buried when 1947 partitoned happened and they had to flee.

the ghakkars and afghans and other rajput tribes continued to do jihad against sikhs and dogras in poonch and kashmir/mirpur
especially sudhan tribe which is durrani offshoot of poonch fought dogras and sikhs.

then british came and took over and they used nawabs and feudals to control the region and used money to buy of various tribal sardars but they met sporadic resistance so built a lot of garrisons in the region and also lured a lot of the men into military service in more extreme areas in tribal areas they got humiliated since the tribal sardars could not control pashtun tribals who were crazy fighters. but even then british were succesful in making the durrani king cede afghan territory and sign durrand agreement.

conclusion british are too clever

 

[KingKhanWC]

we have the region u come from i believe is mirpur which was part of durrani empire adminsistered under jech or chach doab with its seat in attock.

the ruling tribes were ghakkars, janjuas and chibs

ghakkars becaming powerful force and allies of durrani PASHTUNS and even accompanied them to panipat to fight the marathas who were raiding as far as punjab and were hindu fndamentalists.

bugti tribe also was allied to durranis and formed the cavalry teh valiant cavalry that busted marathas at panipat

baloch camel caravans traded up to attock

bugtis took many hindu marathas slaves and a lot of hindus in dera bugti with black dark faces are decendents of these marathas


sikhs attacked durrani empire , and invaded the jech doab and fought ghakkars, ghakkars did jihad, sikhs transfered power to their misls and musalman jats were given land in mirpur who were enemies of ghakkars and khatri hindu traders were bought in and were very wealthy they had bricks of gold in mirpur which they buried when 1947 partitoned happened and they had to flee.

the ghakkars and afghans and other rajput tribes continued to do jihad against sikhs and dogras in poonch and kashmir/mirpur
especially sudhan tribe which is durrani offshoot of poonch fought dogras and sikhs.

then british came and took over and they used nawabs and feudals to control the region and used money to buy of various tribal sardars but they met sporadic resistance so built a lot of garrisons in the region and also lured a lot of the men into military service in more extreme areas in tribal areas they got humiliated since the tribal sardars could not control pashtun tribals who were crazy fighters. but even then british were succesful in making the durrani king cede afghan territory and sign durrand agreement.

conclusion british are too clever

No I'm not from Mirpur, not that far away but still not from there.

Dude as I said I'm not willing to entertain this conspiracy theory.

 

[nish_mate]

Matey only entertains the theories that suit his agenda, rest is all conspiracy...

Ahh the irony.....