We know how to deal with you, India warns Pakistan

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

If I understand your logic, it goes like this..

While UNSC has declared Saeed as a terrorist, Pakistan does not want to take any action against him because the law of the land does not allow an individual to be prosecuted without evidence

understandable that you are arguing that Pakistan has to give precedence to its laws over the UNSC declarations..

I read through the text of the committee that banned the JUD, but I do not see where it mandates Pakistan to arrest Saeed. It does call for the seizure of JuD assets, and on that count Pakistan has publicly announced that the assets of the JuD have been frozen,and many of the charitable works of the JuD have been taken over by the GoPu.

However, the same logic then applies to the UNSC resolution of 1948. Whatever it says, the law of land in India does not allow for any state to vote for its independence/secession to another country..

Kashmir may be a disputed area to you because of a UNSC resolution fo 60 years back. However, realistically, not all Indians will share that sentiment.

The same logic does not apply here since the UNSC resolutions contained a very specific set of proposals regarding the disputed status of J&K and a plebiscite to resolve the dispute, which were committed to repeatedly by India and Pakistan.

That is not the case with arresting Hafiz Saeed since (based on the text you posted) there is no categorical statement related to his arrest nor a commitment by Pakistan in the UN to arrest him.

 

[karan.1970]

I read through the text of the committee that banned the JUD, but I do not see where it mandates Pakistan to arrest Saeed. It does call for the seizure of JuD assets, and on that count Pakistan has publicly announced that the assets of the JuD have been frozen,and many of the charitable works of the JuD have been taken over by the GoPu.

The same logic does not apply here since the UNSC resolutions contained a very specific set of proposals regarding the disputed status of J&K and a plebiscite to resolve the dispute, which were committed to repeatedly by India and Pakistan.

That is not the case with arresting Hafiz Saeed since (based on the text you posted) there is no categorical statement related to his arrest nor a commitment by Pakistan in the UN to arrest him.

Its splitting hairs Agno.. The resolution asks all member states to prohibit travel of the mentioned individuals thru their territories and to freeze his assets as well. Isnt Hafiz saeed able to freely move thru Pakistan. Also I dont think his personal assets have been frozen (not too sure of that though)

And I am not planning to make a legal case here.. Simply the question of letter and spirit of a resolution (What else would you do with a terrorist if not arrest him).. Not questioning why Pakistan is not following that resolution (committment or no committment) because I think I know why..

I will repeat what i posted in a reply to Kasrkin

Pakistan can not chose to disregard one UNSC resolution while still trying to claim high moral ground on India not adhering to another..

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Its splitting hairs Agno.. The resolution asks all member states to prohibit travel of the mentioned individuals thru their territories and to freeze his assets as well. Isnt Hafiz saeed able to freely move thru Pakistan. Also I dont think his personal assets have been frozen (not too sure of that though)

And I am not planning to make a legal case here.. Simply the question of letter and spirit of a resolution (What else would you do with a terrorist if not arrest him).. Not questioning why Pakistan is not following that resolution (committment or no committment) because I think I know why..

I will repeat what i posted in a reply to Kasrkin

Pakistan can not chose to disregard one UNSC resolution while still trying to claim high moral ground on India not adhering to another..

The UNSC resolutions on Kashmir were explicit in their language on the status of J&K and the means to resolve it.

Now whether you consider it splitting of hairs or not, the fact is that the committee does not call for either imprisonment nor 'house arrest' (your argument of limiting travel within country).

It reads, 'prevent the entry into or the transit through their territories', which applies more to other nations. HS is already in Pakistan, so we cannot 'prevent his entry' and since he is already in Pakistan, we cannot prevent his 'transit through our territories', since he is not traveling through Pakistan for any other destination.

Pakistan is therefore in no violation of the committee's recommendations and therefore your comparison with the Indian violation of her commitment to the UNSC resolutions on Kashmir is invalid.

 

[ajpirzada]

Are there any neutral sources for the bold part above??

for 1971 and siachin? do you really need any source for this
given your past attitude, wats the logic for india not doin it again?
we have similar proves lik you gave us for mumbai. pictures of your weapons, those caught telling about your involvement ......... if this is not the proof then wats so special about your dossiers.

 

[ajpirzada]

A mess that India has nothing to do with. Pakistan would've hammered India diplomatically had we really been stirring up trouble in Pakistan's tribal regions.

Pakistan created the mess on its western border, albeit unintentionally. Anti-India organizations like the LeT OTOH were nurtured for a single purpose, to wage war on India. India believes that Pakistan has done close to nothing to uproot India specific terrorist organizations. Short of war, diplomatic pressure (for what its worth) is about the only leverage we have on Pakistan.



I think it has more to do with self righteousness.

Pakistan isn't the victim here, your hands are anything but clean. What about '65, '99, Punjab & Kashmir?

never said that india created the afghan mess. secondly LeT was clamped in musharraf's time. and now wat proof do you have that those restrictions have been lifted? as far as those involved in mumbai attack they are already been prosecuted so what is india crying for? this diplomatic pressure is only for one purpose which i have already mentioned.
secondly defeating taliban will also help india in a big way if you think with an open mind. can there be any other ideal place for anti india splinter groups to get the training from? so instead of continuing with pakistan bashing, which is goin down the drain, better support us.

 

[karan.1970]

The UNSC resolutions on Kashmir were explicit in their language on the status of J&K and the means to resolve it.

Now whether you consider it splitting of hairs or not, the fact is that the committee does not call for either imprisonment nor 'house arrest' (your argument of limiting travel within country).

It reads, 'prevent the entry into or the transit through their territories', which applies more to other nations. HS is already in Pakistan, so we cannot 'prevent his entry' and since he is already in Pakistan, we cannot prevent his 'transit through our territories', since he is not traveling through Pakistan for any other destination.

Pakistan is therefore in no violation of the committee's recommendations and therefore your comparison with the Indian violation of her commitment to the UNSC resolutions on Kashmir is invalid.

Transit is defined by thesaurus
1. Transportation
2. shipment
3. transfer
4. transoport
5. journey
6. passage
7. travel.

Transit necessarily does not applies to going to other nations. Transit thru means travel thru. When someone refers to goods in transit, it does not necessarily imply foreign shipments. It simply means under transport. Hence your supposition is wrong.. Its fairly clear that its Pakistan's responsibility to prevent him from leaving Pakistan or to travel thru it. Also you do consider Azad Kashmir to be an independent entiry.. dont you?? So by your logic, Pakistan didnt even prevent him from leaving Pakistan to go to Azad Kashmir

We can sit and split hair till cows come home.. That way, there are multiple caveats in the UN resolution on Kashmir as well which are not fulfilled... So while in letter both India and Pakistan can argue to not have violated the resolutions, in spirit, they both have...

Hence my point

 

[karan.1970]

for 1971 and siachin? do you really need any source for this
given your past attitude, wats the logic for india not doin it again?
we have similar proves lik you gave us for mumbai. pictures of your weapons, those caught telling about your involvement ......... if this is not the proof then wats so special about your dossiers.

My request for source was on the statement ..
"India pretending to be the nice guy while supporting covert activities at the same time"

I dont know what so special about our dossiers. There must be something though because your govt did agree that pakistani citizens were responsible for the Mumbai carnage.. Dont see any such credible proofs coming from Pakistan yet..

 

[ajpirzada]

My request for source was on the statement ..
"India pretending to be the nice guy while supporting covert activities at the same time"

I dont know what so special about our dossiers. There must be something though because your govt did agree that pakistani citizens were responsible for the Mumbai carnage.. Dont see any such credible proofs coming from Pakistan yet..

well you missed the first few words of my statement. there you go

2: and also the perception of india pretending to be the nice guy while supporting covert activities at the same time. after all you did the same during 1971 and siachin war.

nothing comin from pakistan is debatable. going by GoP, they have already shared the evidence with GoI during Sharm ul Sheikh and on other occassions.
better not get into this. or we will be builiding blocks on something we cant see.

 

[karan.1970]

well you missed the first few words of my statement. there you go



nothing comin from pakistan is debatable. going by GoP, they have already shared the evidence with GoI during Sharm ul Sheikh and on other occassions.
better not get into this. or we will be builiding blocks on something we cant see.

My bad on missing the perception bit...

It surely is debatable.. GoP itself is divided on whether a dossier was given to Indian PM or not..

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan

India however is fairly clear that no dossier of any sort or any such proof was shared.. This is also in line with Qureshi's statement above..

 

[ajpirzada]

My bad on missing the perception bit...

It surely is debatable.. GoP itself is divided on whether a dossier was given to Indian PM or not..

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan

India however is fairly clear that no dossier of any sort or any such proof was shared.. This is also in line with Qureshi's statement above..

i am not referring to dossier. this dossier thing first appeared in Dawn without any credible source. there was no official response to it except that the matter was discussed with GoI. later this dossier word was refuted.
the fact that balochistan made it to the joint statement is a fair indication that this issue was definitely taken up by GoP with their counterpart. now what kind of evidence was shown or not shown, we cant be certain about that.
well see its debatable.

 

[SMC]

I am talking about both.. Both are terrorist organizations and are fairly homogeneous in nature. About India funding them, show me any credible neutral source saying that

My original argument still stands. The groups that have been against us have existed for a long time and they only needed funding. As far as neutral source argument goes, we have been over this. There's no such thing as a neutral source. Pakistani media has said this enough, and other sources will only say it if its in their interests to do that.

Not at all.. Just like you think India is sponsoring terrorism in Pakistan, I believe its not. Just like you are putting forth your point of view, I am putting forth mine. I guess when you say in your post

"Well well, a mass terrorism supporting state such as india "

or

"epic terrorists"

you are trying to paint a fairly black and white picture yourself..

The difference is I am not replying to anyone directly. I am replying to the original topic. You on the other hand are doing exactly the opposite. i.e. trying to force your opinion down my throat.

Well, when you call india as mass supporter of terrorism and Epic Terrorist on an Internet forum, you are hadly keeping your opinion to yourself.. I am simply replying bassed on the best information available. No one believes what pakistan is propogating about India sponsoring terrorism. While this can not be construed as a solid proof on India's innocense, but till proven other wise, will have to do... And since its not yet been proven, I will have to go with the stance of this being poppycock..

I am getting my opinion across, which is exactly what I said in my post - if you ignored that part. As far as no one believing what Pakistan is saying, again, we have been over this before. People believe what their state tells them. And thus that's a really futile argument.

No doubt my example is an exaggeration. And it is meant to be.. Thats how you show the futility of an arguement that has been made to sound plausible by intertwining it in the complexities of if, maybe, probably and other shades of grey..And Pakistan's accusations are just that. The burden of proof is on the accuser and not accused. Just like India proved that Kasab is a pakistani and Pakistan agreed..

No, again, has India ever provided proof for ISI involvement? Never ever. So again, you can go into how I am interwining the complexity, but all the arguments you guys throw become irrelevant considering India has never done that. But for some reason, we all know ISI involved. Considering that, the accusations become a plausible explanation, however not enough by themselves. But regardless, it does throw out all the arguments indians give.

And thats why India does not officially accuse ISI. While media and localized statements by Think Tanks may refer to ISI, the official stand of India (at least recently) is to go after LeT and Hafiz Saeed..

Chidambaram gives such an statement about 2 weeks ago, accusing ISI for supporting several groups.

I dont remember making that arguement..

Several indians have done that.

We were talking of Pakistan's arguements about Indian involvement here.. And accusing without giving proof is what is irrelevent since GoP has not given any proof to anyone (except internal sources in ISI and Army) .. Publically or otherwise (since there is no reaction to it).

I am using a similar story to prove your and other indians' arguments are futile. i.e. india never proved ISI involvement either really. And neither did US. However whole world knows about it since it's in US interests to talk about it. Use the same logic here, and all the arguments that indians have given so far become void. i.e. Indian involvement is plausible.

I really dont know where does hypocrisy come in here since you have not even stitched your arguement together..

That's a pretty pathetic reply. Your reply here was hardly a good one. Hypocrisy, i.e. indians believe ISI involvement without proof, however use proof not being there as their counter-argument. In other words, what you're doing yourself, you use against us. Best thing to do would be to not talk about not believing in indian involvement here and just discuss the rest of the topics.

 

[afriend]

There has been an overwhelming fall in infiltration because of active efforts by the Pakistani Army from our side of the Disputed Territory. The drop is more than 90% actually, as has been bitterly acknowledged by Indian military officials themselves. Do some research please. I will not do it for you. Please understand that the discourse is extremely unrewarding this wy.

Well i too have access to information, and i wish the fall was permenant, but unfortunately that was not the case to be.. i would say you should update your information bank so that your comments are relevant to todays times.

This 'hypocrisy' is a reality, regardless of whether it pisses nationalistic indians off or not. These organizations were birthed due to the conflict in Kashmir. Many foreign and neutral observers do stress on resolving the issue of Kashmir as a primary means of relieving tensions between the two countries and making terrorism more and more ineffective and irrelevant. Like I said before, you need to have the courage to explore the other side of views outside the very narrow spectrum you're constraining yourself to.

all wrong things cannot be justified int he name of kashmir, well lot of things have gone into kashmir situation as it is today, both my and ur countries are responsible for it nobody can acts saints here.. but if u start supporting terrorsim in the name of kashmir, then where in the hell is a just and free system. Every right person, if they are going to take arms, then will there be anything left??? U know this mentality has resulted in a society where guns and miltary uniforms are more important than the rule of democracy and will of people, but i hope you are moving in the right direction now. But until your contry show some tangible results in the form of a system with a commitment to a mature and responsible society till then this hypocracy will continue to cause resentment in india. The bottom line is terrorism and promoting violance cannot be part of a state policy and at the expense of a just system. As much as the causes of the naxals and the LTTE's where justified at the same time the route they chose to achieve their objectives is and never will be justified. The same is the case with any system or your system..!!!!

And one interesting thing i noted from your post is that you are justifying the reason why your contry is not taking or i would say is not effective in keeping these anti india elements at check at the same time you are crying foul and saying your country is doing moer than enough to put these people in check, isnt it a irony mr.kaskrin. But i know kashmir is the root cause and the a solution is not pracitcal now. But if we are really intrested in a peaceful relation ship i would say or suggest we put kashmir on hold and talk about other issues more often, but if you are adamant bout kashmir then you know we too are not saints as well.. The crux is understanding both our countries are wrong in one way or in place or the other.. Then we will ahve a mind to put down the guns and talk. Then only my friend we can all grow up.. else down a 100 years,we will be still crying and cribbing and fighting about kashmir..!!!!!

 

[karan.1970]

the fact that balochistan made it to the joint statement is a fair indication that this issue was definitely taken up by GoP with their counterpart. now what kind of evidence was shown or not shown, we cant be certain about that.
well see its debatable.

Issue was taken up ... yes.. Anyone can say any thing in a discussion.. What justifies it is the response.. below are the relevent sentences about Mumbai and Balochistan from the statement

Mumbai

Prime Minister Singh reiterated the need to bring the perpetrators of the Mumbai attack to justice. Prime Minister Gilani assured that Pakistan will do everything in its power in this regard. He said that Pakistan had provided an updated status dossier on the investigations of the Mumbai attacks and had sought additional information/evidence. Prime Minister Singh said that the dossier is being reviewed.

Balochistan

Prime Minister Gilani mentioned that Pakistan has some information on threats in Baluchistan and other areas.


Now honestly, going by the text above, I dont think that credibility of what was shared about balochistan can be compared with the credibility of the evidence shared on Mumbai. And I never said nothing is coming out of Pakistan but nothing credible

There must be something though because your govt did agree that pakistani citizens were responsible for the Mumbai carnage.. Dont see any such credible proofs coming from Pakistan yet..

 

[karan.1970]

My original argument still stands. The groups that have been against us have existed for a long time and they only needed funding. As far as neutral source argument goes, we have been over this. There's no such thing as a neutral source. Pakistani media has said this enough, and other sources will only say it if its in their interests to do that.

Who cares what you or Pakistani media says unless its backed by a credible source..Enjoy your delusions..

The difference is I am not replying to anyone directly. I am replying to the original topic. You on the other hand are doing exactly the opposite. i.e. trying to force your opinion down my throat.

Not really.. You made a statement and I added to that commenting how it sounded childish and foolish like the kid in the story.. Upto you to react to that or not..

I am getting my opinion across, which is exactly what I said in my post - if you ignored that part. As far as no one believing what Pakistan is saying, again, we have been over this before. People believe what their state tells them. And thus that's a really futile argument.

You are entitled to your opinion and I am to mine. If you keep responding to my opinion you will have to bear my response too..

No, again, has India ever provided proof for ISI involvement? Never ever. So again, you can go into how I am interwining the complexity, but all the arguments you guys throw become irrelevant considering India has never done that. But for some reason, we all know ISI involved. Considering that, the accusations become a plausible explanation, however not enough by themselves. But regardless, it does throw out all the arguments indians give.

You are mixing 2 things.. We were discussing whether there is credible evidence of India's involvement in terror activities and the may be's, probably's that you have intertwined in your arguement..

Chidambaram gives such an statement about 2 weeks ago, accusing ISI for supporting several groups.

I must have missed it..

Several indians have done that.

Respond to them

That's a pretty pathetic reply. Your reply here was hardly a good one. Hypocrisy, i.e. indians believe ISI involvement without proof, however use proof not being there as their counter-argument. In other words, what you're doing yourself, you use against us. Best thing to do would be to not talk about not believing in indian involvement here and just discuss the rest of the topics.

It was my arguement and show me where have I accused ISI??

 

[ajpirzada]

Issue was taken up ... yes.. Anyone can say any thing in a discussion.. What justifies it is the response.. below are the relevent sentences about Mumbai and Balochistan from the statement

Mumbai

Prime Minister Singh reiterated the need to bring the perpetrators of the Mumbai attack to justice. Prime Minister Gilani assured that Pakistan will do everything in its power in this regard. He said that Pakistan had provided an updated status dossier on the investigations of the Mumbai attacks and had sought additional information/evidence. Prime Minister Singh said that the dossier is being reviewed.

Balochistan

Prime Minister Gilani mentioned that Pakistan has some information on threats in Baluchistan and other areas.


Now honestly, going by the text above, I dont think that credibility of what was shared about balochistan can be compared with the credibility of the evidence shared on Mumbai. And I never said nothing is coming out of Pakistan but nothing credible

both these event cant be compared as they are at very different stage and of very different nature.

pak has already accepted that its land was used by 'non-state' actors. while in case of balochistan, its not the not state actors but the RAW actors who are being blamed for assisting the terrorists. if india was to blame ISI with all the evidence etc, how will it appear in a joint statement?

therefore both the issues will appear in a statement in very different way.