What's new

US responsible for the Murder of Pakistani Troops - Pak Rejects NATO Probe

So the accusation of a "state within a state" is true then?
We don't care if there is state within a state or not but we need justice for spilling out the blood of our poor soldierz so brutally by these evil butchers/US/NATO rascalz ......:smokin:
 
.
False flag comments doesn't matter.

What matters is that Gilani and Ghadari being the dummy head of states, while real man behind the curtain is this double agent 'Rehman Malik'.
What drives Rehman Malik's anti Pakistan spirit is... quite a mystery, but i have my guesses though.

We don't care if there is state within a state or not but we need justice for spilling out the blood of our poor soldierz so brutally by these evil butchers/US/NATO rascalz ......:smokin:

Both comments speak volumes of being blinded by irrationality to the point of self-inflicting damage. That will only serve to strengthen opponents despite your intent.
 
.
So the accusation of a "state within a state" is true then?


yes
but true for the politicians, who r out of touch with people and their miseries.
filling their accounts,
not following supreme court
 
.
yes
but true for the politicians, who r out of touch with people and their miseries.
filling their accounts,
not following supreme court

It does not matter how the state within the state is defined, but the admission does mean that there is a deep fracture in national unity open to exploitation, internally and externally, for all sorts of purposes, none of which can be good for Pakistan.
 
. .
Both comments speak volumes of being blinded by irrationality to the point of self-inflicting damage. That will only serve to strengthen opponents despite your intent.
Don't worry we already know the extent of the damage and the benefit as well.....:D
 
.
Don't worry we already know the extent of the damage and the benefit as well.....:D

I appreciate the reassurance. I hope the results are commensurate with your level of confidence.
 
. .
Army finds fault with US probe head
...........................
Army finds fault with US probe head - The Nation

Talk of entrusting thieves to investigate a theft.

The time to raise this issue was when the investigative team was being formulated, but Pakistan lost that opportunity due to its decision not to join the investigation.

Attacking the personalities now might (<please take note of this word in particular) create an impression that Pakistan is finding it difficult to contest the content of the report, and is resorting to other criticisms that may not be as effective.
 
. .
The time to raise this issue was when the investigative team was being formulated, but Pakistan lost that opportunity due to its decision not to join the investigation.

Attacking the personalities now might (<please take note of this word in particular) create an impression that Pakistan is finding it difficult to contest the content of the report, and is resorting to other criticisms that may not be as effective.

It is not only common sense but a well accepted in western legal circles that a judge is disqualified from being judge, same applies to an investigating officer in a case where they have an interest in the outcome.

One Crown Office Row - Article

It is not the job of the victim to tell the west what common sense
 
.
this is a stupid reply.......if pakistan didn't trust NATO then why didn't they join the investigation themselves???

Please read the article by Brian Cloughley posted earlier - he indicated that the US proposal for Pakistani participation would have relegated Pakistanis to 'observers'. Pakistani investigators would not have had any authority to summon and question individuals they deemed complicit, nor would they have been able to request access to records etc. on their own.

In essence, a Pakistani presence would have made no difference to the outcome of the investigation, but it would have allowed the US to claim that its investigation was 'impartial' since Pakistanis were 'involved'. I believe Pakistan denied the US that propaganda opportunity by not participating in the investigation.
 
.
It is not only common sense but a well accepted in western legal circles that a judge is disqualified from being judge, same applies to an investigating officer in a case where they have an interest in the outcome.

One Crown Office Row - Article

It is not the job of the victim to tell the west what common sense

then why didn't pakistan join the investigation themselves if they don't trust US???
 
.
this is a stupid reply.......if pakistan didn't trust NATO then why didn't they join the investigation themselves???

As they say; 'The two most common elements in the world are hydrogen and stupidity.'

Did you even read the news link? Here, allow me to help you:


....Pakistani officials say that the military refused to cooperate on last month’s probe because the probe’s findings in the presence of General John Allen, the NATO Commander in Afghanistan, and Brigadier General Clark were “pretty obvious”.

Military circles believe that an impartial inquiry was not possible without putting into probe General Allen, Clark and Afghan National Army’s Head General Sher Muhammad Karimi...... Army finds fault with US probe head - The Nation


P.S. The "time to raise this issue" is absolutely ripe now.
 
.
It is not only common sense but a well accepted in western legal circles that a judge is disqualified from being judge, same applies to an investigating officer in a case where they have an interest in the outcome.

One Crown Office Row - Article

It is not the job of the victim to tell the west what common sense

Military law, specifically that applicable to ISAF, has its own procedures, not to be confused with common criminal law.
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom