but pappu can't dance saalla....
- Thread starter luckyy
- Start date
Al-zakir
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2008
- Messages
- 8,612
- Reaction score
- -8
- Country
- Location
Pakistani court made judgment based on evidence available thus why Indian crying about? Just because Indian said things about him, it doesn't mean true. Doing not enough BS going out of hand now so abandon this crap. Enough already.
I am happy that he is a free man and my Allah bless him.......
I am happy that he is a free man and my Allah bless him.......
Al-zakir
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2008
- Messages
- 8,612
- Reaction score
- -8
- Country
- Location
zubair723
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- May 5, 2009
- Messages
- 363
- Reaction score
- 0
Zob
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2009
- Messages
- 1,403
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
now we will send him across the border and write on his forehead WITH LOVE from PAKISTAN......and make him blow up a few trains & kill a few people in DELHI all in the name of A DAYS WORK!!!
look people we need proof against him!!! tell india to proivde it!!
look people we need proof against him!!! tell india to proivde it!!
Keysersoze
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2006
- Messages
- 4,858
- Reaction score
- 2
How about we see some evidence that FBI and Scotland yard agree with India first please.
third eye
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2008
- Messages
- 18,519
- Reaction score
- 13
- Country
- Location
.... implying thereby that GOP feels differently from what the court has decided.
The case made by the prosecution was / is weak.
Khajur
BANNED
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2009
- Messages
- 1,131
- Reaction score
- 0
what the hell...his organisation was banned by UN(united nations) aganist anti terrorism law to which pakistan is a signatory.
Now pakistan cant provide enough evidence in courts of what the whole world believes in.
I must warn those ppl who support his activies, hafiz saeed and his ilk of terroists will only bring death & destruction to pakistan and sooner or later pakiastan will pay a heavy price for sheltering hafiz saeed just like in the case of Talibani leader mullah umer.
All-Green
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2008
- Messages
- 1,824
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
He was not held based on any evidence, that is a misconception.
He was detained as per maintenance of public order law which enables government to temporarily detain individuals likely to create disorder.
This may have been done to cool down the temperature after Mumbai attacks and to kick off the preliminary investigation since at that time India was not sharing any information with Pakistan.
Without evidence his prolonged detention is unconstitutional, so court has done the right thing as per law.
Maybe GOP is not convinced but hard evidence is what will matter in the courts, no other way about it.
The fact the JUD has been involved in countless charity projects for the poor makes it quite tough for GOP to act without evidence.
He was detained as per maintenance of public order law which enables government to temporarily detain individuals likely to create disorder.
This may have been done to cool down the temperature after Mumbai attacks and to kick off the preliminary investigation since at that time India was not sharing any information with Pakistan.
Without evidence his prolonged detention is unconstitutional, so court has done the right thing as per law.
Maybe GOP is not convinced but hard evidence is what will matter in the courts, no other way about it.
The fact the JUD has been involved in countless charity projects for the poor makes it quite tough for GOP to act without evidence.
Skeptic
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 5, 2009
- Messages
- 1,146
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Wanted: better laws
Dawn Editorial
Thursday, 04 Jun, 2009 | 07:35 AM PST |
The release of Hafiz Saeed raises many questions about the sincerity and efficacy of the state in quashing jihadi networks that operate on its soil. It may have been a full bench of the Lahore High Court that ordered Saeeds release, but the fact is the court was left with little option given the prosecutions reliance on weak grounds for the extension of the preventive detention of Saeed while he possibly awaits trial on charges related to the Mumbai attacks last November.
At the heart of the issue here is really the question of whether Pakistans legal framework is adequate for dealing with men such as Saeed who are the ideological leaders and figureheads of groups which may be engaged in terrorist activities either abroad or on Pakistani soil. Do we have the laws that can put such people out of business while acknowledging the difficulty of tracing any particular crime to a groups top leadership? It appears not. Clearly, this is a matter for parliament to debate and to draw up a set of a laws as Pakistan presses ahead in its counter-insurgency activities in the northwest and Fata.
The issue is bigger than just Hafiz Saeed and the Mumbai attacks it extends to militant leaders like Maulana Fazlullah and Baitullah Mehsud, too. Imagine a scenario in which Fazlullah or Mehsud are captured by the state and are held for trial: is it beyond the realm of possibility that they too may be set free on technicalities because the laws of the land are inadequate to deal with such leaders?
Pakistan has tried in the past to put in place special anti-terrorism laws, but because they were too draconian or ran afoul of constitutional safeguards, the superior courts have largely defanged them. No doubt every care must be taken to protect civil liberties and the government must work within the framework of the constitution, but there is clearly a need to acknowledge that militant networks pose a unique threat and therefore sensible, careful and well-drafted legislation must be introduced to tackle the threat. Parliament can be aided in the task by legal experts, retired judges with the relevant experience, and international experts familiar with anti-terrorism laws and their practice around the world.
Finally, a word about India-Pakistan relations and the Mumbai attacks. India is unhappy that Saeed and some of the others arrested in the aftermath of the attacks have been released. At the very least, their release sends a bad sign that the government here is perhaps not up to the task of prosecuting them even if evidence is adduced. The Pakistan government must urgently explain what it plans to do next, or else risk losing another opportunity for peace now that the elections have concluded in India.
Dawn Editorial
Thursday, 04 Jun, 2009 | 07:35 AM PST |
The release of Hafiz Saeed raises many questions about the sincerity and efficacy of the state in quashing jihadi networks that operate on its soil. It may have been a full bench of the Lahore High Court that ordered Saeeds release, but the fact is the court was left with little option given the prosecutions reliance on weak grounds for the extension of the preventive detention of Saeed while he possibly awaits trial on charges related to the Mumbai attacks last November.
At the heart of the issue here is really the question of whether Pakistans legal framework is adequate for dealing with men such as Saeed who are the ideological leaders and figureheads of groups which may be engaged in terrorist activities either abroad or on Pakistani soil. Do we have the laws that can put such people out of business while acknowledging the difficulty of tracing any particular crime to a groups top leadership? It appears not. Clearly, this is a matter for parliament to debate and to draw up a set of a laws as Pakistan presses ahead in its counter-insurgency activities in the northwest and Fata.
The issue is bigger than just Hafiz Saeed and the Mumbai attacks it extends to militant leaders like Maulana Fazlullah and Baitullah Mehsud, too. Imagine a scenario in which Fazlullah or Mehsud are captured by the state and are held for trial: is it beyond the realm of possibility that they too may be set free on technicalities because the laws of the land are inadequate to deal with such leaders?
Pakistan has tried in the past to put in place special anti-terrorism laws, but because they were too draconian or ran afoul of constitutional safeguards, the superior courts have largely defanged them. No doubt every care must be taken to protect civil liberties and the government must work within the framework of the constitution, but there is clearly a need to acknowledge that militant networks pose a unique threat and therefore sensible, careful and well-drafted legislation must be introduced to tackle the threat. Parliament can be aided in the task by legal experts, retired judges with the relevant experience, and international experts familiar with anti-terrorism laws and their practice around the world.
Finally, a word about India-Pakistan relations and the Mumbai attacks. India is unhappy that Saeed and some of the others arrested in the aftermath of the attacks have been released. At the very least, their release sends a bad sign that the government here is perhaps not up to the task of prosecuting them even if evidence is adduced. The Pakistan government must urgently explain what it plans to do next, or else risk losing another opportunity for peace now that the elections have concluded in India.
Zob
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2009
- Messages
- 1,403
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Hafeez is no direct threat to PAKISTAN as of yet.....so we aren't concerned...the common pakistani is more concerneed about TALIBAN currently.....and as for UN i think ZUBAIR is absolutely right in stating that if you so want to go down the UN way then let's hold the plebiscit first.....secondly keysersoze makes an excellent point if the FBI & SCOTLAND yard think the proof is sufficent then why hasn't it been made public...
India is dragging its feet and lack of seriousness on the INDIAN GOVERNMENT part is shown by them giving KASAB's DNA samples.....
India is dragging its feet and lack of seriousness on the INDIAN GOVERNMENT part is shown by them giving KASAB's DNA samples.....
salman nedian
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2007
- Messages
- 1,374
- Reaction score
- 0
I think the thread starter didnt consider the wordings of the title and several other posters kept on repeating the sentence.
Who will teach pappu to dance? Indians? First stop the bullshit which you people are doing from Afghanistan.
Who will teach pappu to dance? Indians? First stop the bullshit which you people are doing from Afghanistan.
blueoval79
BANNED
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2009
- Messages
- 1,189
- Reaction score
- 0
Please stop all the bullshit you are doing through LOC......
....its a chicken and egg story.......
Schultz
FULL MEMBER
New Recruit
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2009
- Messages
- 39
- Reaction score
- 0
Well buddy it was all over the news that both the FBI and the Scotland Yard got to interview Kasab and have confirmed the Indian investigation. I am surprised that you missed it. Just google it up and you will get scores of leads.
Similar threads
