What's new

Rehman Malik gives evidence of Indian, Afghan involvement

Every statement of yours is absolutely insane.

You are happy that Malik blamed India. How does that help him or your country sort out the mess that you have now? There is not an iota of evidence presented. All we can see are just pathetic attempts by your government, to deviate your attention from their ghastly failure to hypothetical issues. Remember - most of the countries support India's charges against Pakistan, none supports yours.

Morale - If you have evidence, go ahead & present. If not, shut the fkuc up & plan to come out from the sh!t hole that you have dug for yourself.

OHHHH boy what do we have here a specimen from the youtube "balck cats" or BR "black cats" here...damn....look little indian "peaceful boy" my comments were in line with your provocation about proof....and if we have it why don't we show it....well like i said India is good at drama and a lie said a million times over people start believing it....and that is what india is good at....and if you might have noticed all of a sudden there is a lull in the media and in balochistan...i wonder what happened....but having said that REHMAN MALIK is an insult to every pakistani....and him and zardari are gods punishment for pakistan....having said that what "EVIDENCE" does india have off pakistan being involved in anything...oh let me think yes sorry forgot PICKLES MADE IN PAKISTAN.....damnnnnnnn.....before pointing fingers at us please look at the lies your country your media says to you...
 
.
Well, Hilbrooke has already said there is no credible evidence against India. If Rehman Malik really has credible evidence against India, they should put this in front of international media or should keep his mouth shut.
 
.
Well, Hilbrooke has already said there is no credible evidence against India. If Rehman Malik really has credible evidence against India, they should put this in front of international media or should keep his mouth shut.

Lack of evidence never stopped the Indians from blaming the Pakistani state, not during Mumbai or previously, despite their own evidence dossier indicating there was no evidence indicating Pakistani institutional support for the Mumbai attack.

Nor has lack of evidence stopped the US from pointing fingers at the IS or PA.

In RM's case, he actually did present evidence, some of which was reported in the press - you could question how good the evidence is, but evidence was presented, and this came from a senior GoP minister in a senate session.

Hollbrooke and the US are no impartial mediators here. The US's entire energy is focused on getting the PA to reorient to the West, Gen. Petraeus said that the 'extremists are a bigger threat than India', so to acknowledge Indian involvement in terrorism in Pakistan would be completely counterproductive to their aims.
 
.
sorry agnosticmuslim got carried away.....sometimes the proof is too much to stand and can bring countries to war....and looking at it from another prespective....ISRAEL does alot of atrocities and people have proof do the "WESTERN CIVILIZED POWERS" act on that proof the answer is no sir they choose to ignore it
 
.
Lack of evidence never stopped the Indians from blaming the Pakistani state...Nor has lack of evidence stopped the US from pointing fingers at the IS or PA.
Unfortunately there's this small little thing called credibility, and the U.S. and India have gobs more of it than Pakistan does. Which is why Malik's evidence must be made public - all I've seen are allegations, and highly suspicious ones at that. Do you really think he has absolute knowledge that all terrorist acts are due to outsiders, and not even a little one was entirely the responsibility of Pakistanis?

It's a strange world we're in, where it's much safer to blame nebulous Indians, Israelis, or Americans, rather than those who might kill you, arrest you, or take your family hostage, but imo that's where Pakistan is today. Some things, when people say them, you just have to realize they don't really mean the party they name and you have to think of the appropriate substitute.
 
.
Hollbrooke and the US are no impartial mediators here. The US's entire energy is focused on getting the PA to reorient to the West, Gen. Petraeus said that the 'extremists are a bigger threat than India', so to acknowledge Indian involvement in terrorism in Pakistan would be completely counterproductive to their aims.

So AgM what you are tryin to say is US also dosent wants india to carry out terror activities in Pakistan But despite all this India is still fanning hostile groups like BLA.
How much credible is US establishment in helping Pakistan in dealing with the Indian terror activities ?
In case of East Pakistan Scenario the US did sent its naval fleet but by that time the muktibani force was fully operational . So what iam tryin to say is US cannot be trusted despite all wat they are sayin .If they really want to help us and want our forces on the east then they would have to shut down the Indain Terror centers(Consolates) along the Pakistan Afghan Border and they can do this but they wont.
Frankly speaking the jew loobby in US has a soft corner for the Indians so they would never go against their wishes . And a strong India is in the best interest of Israel also where as a strong Pakistan is considered as a threat.

If we have the evidance then why cant we just go for those dam consulates in Afghanistan. Airstrike or a Surgical strike would be a best responce .Dont care for wat US is saying they need us in Afghanistan dont they so we can have tradeoff like the Indians hav to go or else we are not fighting our own people for the sake of you dam war on terror.
 
.
Unfortunately there's this small little thing called credibility, and the U.S. and India have gobs more of it than Pakistan does. Which is why Malik's evidence must be made public - all I've seen are allegations, and highly suspicious ones at that. Do you really think he has absolute knowledge that all terrorist acts are due to outsiders, and not even a little one was entirely the responsibility of Pakistanis?

It's a strange world we're in, where it's much safer to blame nebulous Indians, Israelis, or Americans, rather than those who might kill you, arrest you, or take your family hostage, but imo that's where Pakistan is today. Some things, when people say them, you just have to realize they don't really mean the party they name and you have to think of the appropriate substitute.



Look who is talking :sick: A country who has destroyed another country in the name of so called "Weopans of mass destruction" threat and later confessed it was an intelligence failure and "we apologise"..huh!!...seriously dude..your country has not left with an iota of "credibility" after that..

So go and get a life..before bragging about your credibility..:hitwall:
 
.
Unfortunately there's this small little thing called credibility, and the U.S. and India have gobs more of it than Pakistan does. Which is why Malik's evidence must be made public - all I've seen are allegations, and highly suspicious ones at that. Do you really think he has absolute knowledge that all terrorist acts are due to outsiders, and not even a little one was entirely the responsibility of Pakistanis?

It's a strange world we're in, where it's much safer to blame nebulous Indians, Israelis, or Americans, rather than those who might kill you, arrest you, or take your family hostage, but imo that's where Pakistan is today. Some things, when people say them, you just have to realize they don't really mean the party they name and you have to think of the appropriate substitute.

its simple
Those anti state actors are supported by India and Israel and indirectly US .Why ?
so that our Nukes could be nuetralized and to have an influence over China.
 
.
Unfortunately there's this small little thing called credibility, and the U.S. and India have gobs more of it than Pakistan does. Which is why Malik's evidence must be made public - all I've seen are allegations, and highly suspicious ones at that. Do you really think he has absolute knowledge that all terrorist acts are due to outsiders, and not even a little one was entirely the responsibility of Pakistanis?

It's a strange world we're in, where it's much safer to blame nebulous Indians, Israelis, or Americans, rather than those who might kill you, arrest you, or take your family hostage, but imo that's where Pakistan is today. Some things, when people say them, you just have to realize they don't really mean the party they name and you have to think of the appropriate substitute.

Ok and INDIA has credibility...may i ask how what proof have u ever given....i think ISI is blamed for everything....but MUKHRJEE said the proof is "SENSITIVE" whatever that means....and if it means anything at all.....:hitwall:
 
.
Unfortunately there's this small little thing called credibility, and the U.S. and India have gobs more of it than Pakistan does.

The US was involved in overthrowing democratic regimes and supporting dictators across Latin America and Asia. I'll post an excerpt from one of Qsaark's posts instead of repeating the same ol same ol:

After what has been done in Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Combodia, Cuba, Iran, Dominican Republic, Salvador, Nicaragua, Grenada, Panama, Colombia, Venezuela, Labenon, Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, in the name of "Peace Keeping", will you shut your mouth? And if you wont, I'll start posting individual episodes with dates and details. And by the way, "Peace keepers" accept their naked involvement in all mentioned cases...

... What a good neighbour:

1823 The Munroe Doctrine declares that Latin America is within the United States' "sphere of influence."

1846 The U.S. goes to war with Mexico and the latter is forced to cede half of its national territory to its northern "neighbor," including present-day Texas and California.

1854 The U.S. Navy bombards and destroys the Nicaraguan port town of San Juan fel Norte. The attack occurred after U.S. millionaire Cornelius Vanderbilt sailed his yacht into the port and an official attempted to levy charges on his boat. The Navy attack was to pay the way for William Walker.

1855 William Walker, operating on the half of bankers Morgan & Garrison, invades Nicaragua and proclaims himself President. During his two-year rule, Locher also invaded neighboring El Salvador and Honduras, proclaiming himself head of state in each of these countries also. Locker restored slavery in areas under his occupation.

1889 The U.S. declares war on Spain and annexes Guam, Puerto Rico, the Philippines and Hawaii. U.S. forces also occupied Cuba, another former Spanish colony, after the war.

1901 U.S. forces leave Cuba and the country gains its "independence" only after passage of the infamous Platt Amendment, under which the U.S. abrogated to itself the "right" to to intervene in Cuba's internal affairs at anytime. Kubo was also forced to cede Guantanamo Bay to the U.S. in perpetuity.

1903 The U.S. "encourages" the creation of the separate state of Panama, then a part of Colombia and acquires rights to Panama Canal. In later years, former President Theodore Roosevelt—effective creator of Panama—was to remark: "I took the Canal zone and let Congress debate." Columbia was later paid $25 million in compensation.

1905 U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt declares the United States to be "the policeman" of the Caribbean, the Dominican Republic—and part of Hispaniola—then found to have committed an offense and is placed under a "customs receivership."

1912 U.S. Marines invades Nicaragua, beginning and occupation that was the last almost continuously until 1933. In the same year, President Taft declares, "The day is not far distant when three Stars & Stripes at three equidistant points will mark or territory: one at the North Pole, another at the Panama Canal and the third half the South Pole. The whole hemisphere will be ours in fact as, by virtue of our superiority of race, it already is ours morally."

1914 The U.S. Navy shells the port city of Veracruz, the attack apparently caused by the refusal of some Mexicans to salute the Stars & Stripes. During World War I, the U.S. also invaded Mexico and Hispaniola—present-day Dominican Republic and Haiti. They stayed for 20 years.

1933 U.S. forces leave Nicaragua leading dictator Anastasio Somoza and his National Guard and control.

1954 The CIA orchestrates the overthrow of the democratically-elected government of Jacabo Arbenz, in Guatemala. The Guatemalan poet described the Arbenz government has "years of spring in the country of paternal tyranny." Almost 40 years of violence and repression followed, culminating in the "scorched earth" government terror of the 1980's. Over 150,000 people lost their lives.

1961 U.S.-backed forces conveyed Cuba but suffered defeat at the Bay of Pigs.

1965 23,000 troops sent to the Dominican Republic to "restore order," following a popular uprising against the country's military regime.

1973 A U.S.-backed coup overthrows the elected government of Salvador Allende, ushering in the regime of Gen. Augusto Pinochet.

1981 The Reagan Administration initiates the "contra war" against the Sandinista government in Nicaragua.
1983 US invasion of Grenada.

1989 US invasion of Panama to arrest one-time protégé, Manual Noriega. The operation leaves thousands of civilian casualties.

1990 Massive US intervention in the Nicaraguan election process through covert and overt means. Washington openly funded the opposition coalition, yet such foreign funding of US parties would be illegal under US law.

And I think he missed the Guatemalan genocide of indigenous Guatemalan's by forces backed by the US, that Clinton apologized for.

And now that Clinton's spouse just acknowledged the US's role in creating the problems confronting the region today through US policies in the past. We then have two massive screw ups, including the massive Iraq one with US officials lying in the UN and to their own citizens. In addition we have allegations against the PA and ISI backed up with nothing. And the Indian record of hostility and support for terrorist elements in Pakistan extends back to the 1960's at least.

Just because you claim credibility doesn't give the US or India that credibility - history shows quite the opposite.

Obama said 'President's should be able to do more than one thing at a time'. The same goes for nations, we should be able to address more than one threat at a time. The Taliban pose a serious threat, admittedly greater than the Indians at this point in time. But that does not mean we ignore the threat from India or elsewhere.
 
.
may i ask how what proof have u ever given
On this topic, I have no proofs to give, no sources of my own. What I share is my feeling is that in the current atmosphere, when it comes to credibility Pakistan has very little by comparison. I wish it could be otherwise, which is why I'm suggesting the Pakistani government publicize what proof it has.
Look who is talking A country who has destroyed another country in the name of so called "Weopans of mass destruction" threat
Congress listed dozens of reasons for going to war with Saddam in its resolution which authorized military action, the prospect of nukes was just one of them. Think it through, if illegal nukes were the only issue, why didn't the U.S. invade or destroy BOTH India and Pakistan decades ago?
The US was involved in overthrowing democratic regimes and supporting dictators across Latin America and Asia.
You aren't contradicting me by your impressive list, just providing a distraction.
we have allegations against the PA and ISI backed up with nothing.
Nothing but (1) the conviction, built up over 8 years of experience, that very often whenever the U.S. tells the ISI something the Taliban seems to find out, and very quickly. (2) Evidence that convinced U.S. officials that last summer's bombing of the Indian consulate in Afghanistan was at the ISI's behest. (3) Telephone records, made public, that suggest the Mumbai Massacre was directed by a Pakistani (ex)-general...
Just because you claim credibility doesn't give the US or India that credibility - history shows quite the opposite.
Nobody should think that the U.S. is perfect, or that what it claims shouldn't be looked at with a critical eye. But that doesn't contradict my claim, that the U.S. has far more credibility than Pakistan does.

Even when it comes to Pakistani affairs. It was the U.S. which realized that the Taliban were going on a serious offensive in Pakistan, even as Pakistanis scoffed. The Taliban wants the Army to invade (or remain deployed against) India while they take over the country. Now the Talib wolf is at the door, what are you going to do, go along with them, play the blame game, or do something else?
 
.
that the U.S. has far more credibility than Pakistan does.
In light of all available information regarding US, Pakistani and Indian activities in the past, I'd say 'credibility' is completely subjective. Your allegiance and biases lead you to make that claim in support of the US and entities with which she shares strategic interests, despite the plethora of evidence indicating that the US has been anything but an impartial or credible actor on the world stage.

Admittedly Pakistan has similar issues due to her own policies in the past, but when the Interior Adviser raises the issue with evidence in a senate session over two days, I take that very seriously as a Pakistani, as do I accusations from the US and India of ISI and PA complicity in what amount to treasonous acts along the lines of 'CIA did 911' without any evidence.

2) Evidence that convinced U.S. officials that last summer's bombing of the Indian consulate in Afghanistan was at the ISI's behest. (3) Telephone records, made public, that suggest the Mumbai Massacre was directed by a Pakistani (ex)-general...

Where is the evidence and details of those records tying them to XYZ? or is this just mroe rumor mongering to advance a particular agenda?

And if these telephone records are legitimate, why did the Indian dossier shared with the world and Pakistan indicate that their was no evidence of Pakistani institutions being involved in Mumbai?
 
.
If there is real evidence then why it has to be a close door 'sentate briefing'...why not present it to the UN or US or whatever
 
.
If there is real evidence then why it has to be a close door 'sentate briefing'...why not present it to the UN or US or whatever

This is the interesting part - people have said that 'we do not need a certificate from the US'.

That's true, we don't - but given that our concerns revolve around the Indian and Afghan governments and activities from Afghan soil (activities out of Indian soil can be handled just fine), and the US is essentially the controlling authority in Afghanistan, Pakistan does need to get the US to act to stop those activities. Its that or we take military action against any such centers of activity which would be tantamount to declaring war.

As for sharing evidence, it has been shared, the US has not acted due to its own interests and compulsions. The US is no longer an impartial figure in the Indo-Pak equation, it has chosen to woo India quite openly. Which is fine, its the US's prerogative to advance her interests however she sees fit, but what we are also seeing is that as in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, where the US has supported Israel and applied double standards despite all of the atrocities and illegal actions by the Israeli Government, the US can no longer be counted upon to address legitimate Pakistani concerns, at least overtly.

That does not mean the US may not apply pressure on India to cease her activities in private, but given US interests in pursuing a broad strategic relationship with India, there is very little likelihood of open criticism of India.

One can see this also in how the US backtracked on helping the two sides come to a resolution on the Kashmir issue under Indian pressure.
 
.
ok SOLOMON....please tell me who gives the "RATING" for credibility....AAA,AA,BBB,B,C so on...

and as for credibility....like i said before ISRAEL carries out atrocities in palestian...we know it everyone knows it but the WEST stays mum on the subject and doesn't say anytihng does that classify as credibilty....

sambha why doesn't INDIA give proof against the ISI....when you lay down your cards on the table we will showws our's as well....and don't forget INDIA has a media that is way more strong then our's you win the propaganda war....
 
.
Back
Top Bottom