Zardari says Pak ‘created militancy for short term tactical gains’

[L'Indien]

You can keep repeating it as much as you want, but it still does not answer my question - where is the evidence that the Pakistani state supported terrorism in India, and specifically the Mumbai attacks?

The article you posted only shows that Pakistan is prosecuting individuals allegedly involved in the attacks, it does not establish Pakistani state complicity.

Okay, for the sake of argument lets assume for a minute that Pakistani state was not directly involved in planning and executing terror attacks in India like Mumbai 2008.

However Pakistani state has in the past and continues to this day to support and and allow terrorist organizations like LeT and Jaish to run their training camps, to allow them to recruit young impressionable Pakistanis like Kasab to carry out attacks on India, allow them to finance their operations, procure arms...etc. Can you deny all this? Do you deny that all these India centric terror outfits are not based inside Pakistan?
Therefore the state of Pakistan, if not directly at lest indirectly, is complicit in anti India terror operations from Pakistan.
Thats why I have welcomed the statement from Zardari. It shows there is a sense of realization at the very top of Pakistani leadership that their policies need an urgent overhaul. If he is honest, it can only be a good news for the people of Pakistan nd to a great extent to the people of India

 

[notting hill]

You can keep repeating it as much as you want, but it still does not answer my question - where is the evidence that the Pakistani state supported terrorism in India, and specifically the Mumbai attacks?

The article you posted only shows that Pakistan is prosecuting individuals allegedly involved in the attacks, it does not establish Pakistani state complicity.

only if you consider indian embassy in afghanistan AN INDIAN PROPERTY .

here is the link below :
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/01/world/asia/01pstan.html

 

[AstanoshKhan]

but i doubt if anybody agreed to do it . i doubt american president ever made a public comment that they did initiate terrorist for a stratagic advantage on russians.

This will only give a bad name already defamed name of pakistan in world community.

This is where Hillary admits we had/have dealings with Talibans and we funded them.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Okay, for the sake of argument lets assume for a minute that Pakistani state was not directly involved in planning and executing terror attacks in India like Mumbai 2008.

There is no 'for the sake of argument' here, the Pakistani state was not involved and there is no evidence indicating this involvement.

Pleas stop lying about it.

However Pakistani state has in the past and continues to this day to support and and allow terrorist organizations like LeT and Jaish to run their training camps, to allow them to recruit young impressionable Pakistanis like Kasab to carry out attacks on India, allow them to finance their operations, procure arms...etc.

To fight the Indian occupation in Kashmir, not to carry out terrorism, and Pakistan has essentially assisted India in preventing a vast majority of these people from infiltrating into Kashmir and joining the insurgency.

The camps and rehabilitation will be handled as time goes on, possibly as there is movement towards a resolution of Kashmir and/or a defeat of the insurgency in FATA, which will make the popular support for the freedom movement drop and make it easier for the GoP to crack down on individuals and entities fighting a legitimate struggle against Indian occupation.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

only if you consider indian embassy in afghanistan AN INDIAN PROPERTY .

here is the link below :
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/01/world/asia/01pstan.html

No evidence Pakistan was involved in that either - the only argument in support of that allegation was that the ISI had links to the Haqqani network, which carried out that attack. Those links have always existed, and still exist - the ISI and GoP have indicated that they will maintain those links for intelligence purposes (different from actively or tangibly supporting them) and the necessity and legitimacy of maintaining those links has been accepted by senior US military officials as well.

By the way, those allegations of 'anonymous officials' were shown to be overblown in this interview given by Gen. Petraeus, where instead of these 'several cases and intercepts' the best he can offer is 'one unambiguous case' of someone in the Pakistani establishment tipping off militants before a Pakistani operation.

BAIER: A big part of this strategy is the Pakistan side. Do you see evidence that the Pakistani military or the intelligence service — the ISI — is assisting the Taliban and Al Qaeda?

PETRAEUS: Well, let's remember the history. The intelligence services, the ISI, with our money and equipment and resources back during the days of the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, built many of these Mujahideen organizations that sadly have now turned on Pakistani forces and authorities, assassinated Benazir Bhutto, and have killed hundreds of innocent Pakistani civilians.

There are some relationships that continue. It is not as clear as one would like. There's certainly additional focus on that. Obviously, we've had these conversations with our counterparts, with the head of ISI, Lieutenant General Pasha, and others. There is a case in the past year or so that we think was unambiguous. There appears to have been a warning prior to a Pakistani operation.

The others though are a little bit less clear in the sense that any intelligence organization has contacts with extremist groups because they're trying to recruit sources among them. And we do the same thing.

FOXNews.com - Exclusive: General David Petraeus Discusses Mission in Afghanistan - Special Report w/ Bret Baier

This is not sensationalist spin from some journalist quoting anonymous sources - this is straight from one of the top US military leaders. In response to a direct question on Pakistani involvement, the most he could offer was the instance of 'one unambiguous case'.

So what happened to all those 'intercepts'? Were they not damning? Or more than likely, it was nothing but sensationalism.

 

[Joshi]

To fight the Indian occupation in Kashmir, not to carry out terrorism

To fight the supposed "Indian occupation in Kashmir", Pakistan did use Terrorism, which is even now acknowledeged by the President of the country.

, and Pakistan has essentially assisted India in preventing a vast majority of these people from infiltrating into Kashmir and joining the insurgency.

Any specific reasons for this generosity by Pakistan towards India?

Anyways India must thank Pakistan officially for this generous help .

The camps and rehabilitation will be handled as time goes on, possibly as there is movement towards a resolution of Kashmir and/or a defeat of the insurgency in FATA, which will make the popular support for the freedom movement drop and make it easier for the GoP to crack down on individuals and entities fighting a legitimate struggle against Indian occupation.

No. It won't happen. Hafeez Saeed who had made public statements announcing his involvement in Delhi Red Fort Blasts, who has been freed by the charges of his involvement in 26/11, whose group Lashkar-e-Toiba openly publishes a Jihad weekly magazine Al-Dawa, which vouches for Jihad against India, US and Israel, which is distributed fearlessly with 80,000 copies per edition, roams freely in Pakistan as a respected citizen.

Even if GoP wants to be serious on this issue, there is always a doubt of the capability they carry to execute things, with presence of more stronger players to negate their good efforts WRT India.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

To fight the supposed "Indian occupation in Kashmir", Pakistan did use Terrorism, which is even now acknowledeged by the President of the country.

Err no - we used people who turned into terrorists - there is a difference.

Any specific reasons for this generosity by Pakistan towards India?

We are calling your bluff on using dialog to resolve issues, despite the fact that your side has already violated its commitment in the UN.

Anyways India must thank Pakistan officially for this generous help .

No need for thanks - just stop being perfidious and be sincere in negotiations and willing to compromise.

No. It won't happen. Hafeez Saeed who had made public statements announcing his involvement in Delhi Red Fort Blasts, who has been freed by the charges of his involvement in 26/11, whose group Lashkar-e-Toiba openly publishes a Jihad weekly magazine Al-Dawa, which vouches for Jihad against India, Us and Israel, which is distributed fearlessly with 80,000 copies per edition, roams freely in Paksitan as a respected citizen.

Even if GoP wants to be serious on this issue, there is always a doubt of the capability they carry to execute things, with presence of more stronger players to negate their good efforts WRT India.

Red Fort attack was targeted at soldiers primarily I believe.

He should be respected, he led a legitimate struggle against Indian occupation in Kashmir - now if his involvement in terrorism can be proven, then he should be jailed.

So far I have not seen any evidence from the Indian side (such as the intercepts linking Lakhvi and Zarrar Shah to the attacks) implicating Saeed in the MUmbai attacks.

Perhaps this evidence will come to light later, but so far the Pakistani courts have ruled that there is no incriminating evidence.

As for Pakistani state clamping down on these groups, please see my previous posts and what sorts of conditions will likely be needed to accomplish that.

As of now, Pakistan has at least cooperated tremendously in almost eliminating the insurgency in Kashmir.

 

[haawk]

There is no 'for the sake of argument' here, the Pakistani state was not involved and there is no evidence indicating this involvement.

Pleas stop lying about it.



To fight the Indian occupation in Kashmir, not to carry out terrorism, and Pakistan has essentially assisted India in preventing a vast majority of these people from infiltrating into Kashmir and joining the insurgency.

The camps and rehabilitation will be handled as time goes on, possibly as there is movement towards a resolution of Kashmir and/or a defeat of the insurgency in FATA, which will make the popular support for the freedom movement drop and make it easier for the GoP to crack down on individuals and entities fighting a legitimate struggle against Indian occupation.

\


assist india?????-lol
so by your above arguement you are accepting that pakistan has supported terrorists who infiltrate into india!!!!!!!you also agree to the fact that pakistan has numerous camps training terrorists to attack india / is it not?

why should pakistan support india to tackle terrorism ? it can close down the camps immediately -that is if it wanted to do so sincerely.....in every meet your leaders assure india of closing down those camps -the existance of these camps by itself shows pakistan's commitment to its assurances.....

saying we helped reduce terrorism in india is like telling your neigbhour "you should be grateful because i am protecting your crops by not allowing/ reducing the frequency that my cattle damage your crops"

 

[haawk]

Err no - we used people who turned into terrorists - there is a difference.

is this not called sponscering terrorism? what else do you call this ?state policy!!!!!

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

is this not called sponscering terrorism? what else do you call this ?state policy!!!!!

The Mukti Bahini also committed atrocities, as did the LTTE, as did the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan, as did (and does) the BLA?

So is that State support for terrorism by India?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

\


assist india?????-lol
so by your above arguement you are accepting that pakistan has supported terrorists who infiltrate into india!!!!!!!

No - we supported freedom fighters against Indian occupation in Kashmir. Haven't you figured that out yet?

you also agree to the fact that pakistan has numerous camps training terrorists to attack india / is it not?

Nope - insurgents fighting the Indian security forces to end their occupation and atrocities against kashmiris.

why should pakistan support india to tackle terrorism ? it can close down the camps immediately -that is if it wanted to do so sincerely.....in every meet your leaders assure india of closing down those camps -the existance of these camps by itself shows pakistan's commitment to its assurances.....

Reasons for not acting immediately have already given - and Pakistan's cooperation in almost eliminating the cross-loc infiltration and insurgency against Indian occupation and atrocities in disputed territory has been acknowledged by international and Indian military and defence officials.

Become better informed before shooting your mouth off please.

saying we helped reduce terrorism in india is like telling your neigbhour "you should be grateful because i am protecting your crops by not allowing/ reducing the frequency that my cattle damage your crops"

We were never supporting terrorism to begin with - we were supporting an insurgency in disputed territory, and we are giving dialog a chance again.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Thread closed, since it is really going no where, with some of the Indians now stooping to the age old blame game and unsubstantiated accusations.

Can't believe there are still idiots out there who believe the Pakistani state supported the Mumbai attacks, despite India's own dossier saying that there was no evidence showing that.