I'm sure you do, only because the source does not suit your taste so you come up with the argument that you have better sources though he is an Indian but nevertheless, a Pakistani educationist "Pervaiz Hoodbouy" become more important and relevant to you for your own convenience.
Certainly, you would think so. But that is not the truth. I do not select my source according to my taste, I have not developed any taste to hate Pakistan. After all what is my convenience for blaming Pakistan when I honestly do not have any hard feelings for it? Do I want war? No! Do Indians in general want war? No. But if war remains the only choice left to be exercised, when all else has failed, then it is perfectly justified.
I select my source based on other pragmatic criteria, like, from where it is coming from (its historicity), what is the quality of information they have, what is the quality of argument they present, the credibility of the person arguing, and so on. Your source did not fit into these criteria.
As I said earlier there are different POVs, different people hold. As far as the confidence about Pakistan being involved in anti-civilian activities goes, what exactly leaves no confusion in your mind about the involvement? any proofs? there has been times when you and the whole of India was 200% sure about Pakistans involvement and in the end you were only embarrassed that it was your own Colonel from M.I etc etc, so please spare me with your typical indian mind set that is based on nothing but assumptions motivated by hate.
Again, you need to re-read my posts. Think of implicative evidences, think of news reports suggesting tracks leading to Pakistan and Pakistan based groups claiming responsibilities for attacks in India, think of Pakistani leaders calling the products of terror camps in Pakistan as "freedom fighters".
You seek hard-core evidence as if such evidences can be manufactured. As I said before, it is not in the hands of investigators to bring any such hard-core evidences when the schemers are in some other country and even more so when the establishment of that nation is, at some level, itself involved in scheming. But then there are plethora of suggestive and implicative evidences, which you can collect from various sources, of so many years of state-sponsored terrorism. I certainly gave you one in my earlier post, and there are more such information on this very forum, you just need to look.
Let me also tell you that every time there has been terrorist attacks in India whose tracks have led to Pakistan, India has provided evidence to Pakistan, and Pakistan has most of the time discarded those evidences. A perfect example is of Kasab, who Pakistan completely disowned initially, despite evidences of him being a Pakistani was shared with Pakistan by India. Eventually, though Pakistan had to admit that Kasab is Pakistani national. You know why? Not because of evidences but because of immense international pressure. So why would Pakistan try to hide its face, if it is not involved? That is just one example out of numerous other.
Now of late, since 2003-04, Pakistan has started to blame India for attacks there, just to make an impression that if their deeds are wrong then India is in the same league, while this is completely false, as it is absolutely against the interest of India to destabilize Pakistan and see it become a rogue nation.
My friend, no one in India has developed any notion against Pakistan out of his imagination and we have not to come to believe that Pakistan is involved in anti-India activities overnight. It has taken years and we have watched very closely, that is the first thing you need to understand. The other point to understand is that it is Pakistan that wants to tear away Kashmir from India, and prominent sections of Pakistani establishment considers
every means to fulfill this cause. (That is why I posted that video, and also because there were more known and informed people involved there) India on the other hand has no ill-feelings for Pakistan.
Ever heard of U.N security Council and ICJ ?
oh, I'm sorry the last experience of going to U.N was not very pleasant so .....
It seems you did not get my point. I said, matters between nations are not and cannot be decided in courts. Who is UN to decide over India's territorial issue?
yeah lets level up, all your claims are based on "we think" "we are sure" and "we have no confusion" please provide substantial evidence to the International Media and embarrass us, we are waiting.
Some very authentic evidences comes through the media itself, what are you talking about? You have already been embarrassed in the international community, it is another thing that your establishment does not deem fit to let you know that.
Trust me brother we have alot of toys to hold all sorts of adventures and if really boils down to that it will be devastating for everyone.
But I must say that Gates has done his job.
I don't have to trust you for that, I already know. Again people here are not so fool as you might be suspecting, and there is the catch.
