Some startling Questions that arise after Balochistan attacks...

the.paki

Senator (1k+ posts)
Pakistan lost ICC champions trophy very badly
there might be other factors responsible for the bad performance like wrong selection of players ,poor coaching ,poor ground conditions
but once a team is sent into ground they are the one responsible for team's winning performance or defeat and this happens everywhere

we can comfortably say
Pakistan didn't play well

but

it happens only in Pakistan whenever there is terrorist attack or bomb blast people start criticizing politicians , TV anchors and even the terrorists but no one talks about the real culprits "the security forces" who are directly responsible to stop these kind of activities

other might be responsible at some place but direct responsibility is of the security forces

last year ISI budget was 95000 crores

this year defense budget is 97900 crores ..................

criticizing people other than security forces looks looks very funny to me
and it happens after every attacks

believe me whatsoever you do until and unless you are not going to punish these security forces there will be no improvement

we are seeing this situation for last 10 years and it will continue ...................
 
It is definitely done to achieve some political objectives,no group can carry out such attacks on their own without they help of intelligence agencies who have resources and expertise to carry out these attacks.


The Question is that why would BLA replace Pakistani flag wit their own flag?to malign themselves?when they have acquired political power and they have a Baloch Chief Minister,at such a time why would they do to invite people's wrath against them,it doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

Everyone knows that it is not a Baloch culture to target women,why would they kill their own women?why can't they pick a better target?

Why no terrorists were shown to the media?Why there is no detail about the number of attackers and their fate?This is a real serious question.

Who is the beneficiary of this attack?the answer is that the beneficiary are ISI and IRan who wants to start operation agaisnt Baloch people on this pretext and Iran has great interest in Balochistan.
 
Last edited:

murfi

Politcal Worker (100+ posts)
well next time ISI should also phone the media to say that there was no intelligence failure!!
 

Exiled-Pakistani

Minister (2k+ posts)
The sentence "it is not a Baloch culture to target women" in your post caught my attention. You should have consulted with Senator Sardar Israrullah Zehri before making such statements. He has very different ideas about women and Baluch traditions.

Personally I think, the chances of BLA involvement in this tragedy are equally likely of the animals of Lashkra-e-Jhangvi. The former are directly funded by Americans and later is also funded by Americans but through Saudi dogs.
 
The advantage Army got from attack\



  • The dialogue process with BLA and TTP would go on back burner
  • Musharaf dont have to go to Quetta due to turmoil situation.

I am not say ISI / Army are involved but they certainly got benefits
 

Believer12

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
اس علاقے سے ڈیزل کے امیدوار جیتتے آے ھیں اور اسکا ھولڈ ھے اب پچیس سال بعد اسکو اقتدار سے باھر رکھا گیا ھے تو اسکی سیاسی موت ھونے والی ھے اور وھی اس گندی گیم کے پیچھے ھے
قائداعظم کے خلاف علما دیو بند تھے اور لشکر جھنگوی اور مولانا ڈیزل بھی دیوبندی ھیں۔لشکر جھنگوی نے ذمہ داری بھی قبول کر لی ھے۔ان دونوں جماعتوں کو سعودیہ اور امریکہ کی سپورٹ بھی حاصل ھے جو کہ ایران کی وجہ سے امریکہ کی وار اسٹریٹیجی ھے۔
قائداعظم کی تعریف اور انکی دیانتداری اور اصول پسندی کو کبھی بھی مولانا ڈیزل کی جماعت کی طرف سے سراھا نھیں گیا۔کیونکہ پاکستان کا کھانے والے یہ غدار آج بھی اسکے وجود کے خلاف ھیں
مولانا ڈیزل اور اسکی جماعت اور لشکر جھنگوی جو کہ آزادانہ کام کرتے ھیں انکو پکڑ کر ایک ڈیٹینشن سنٹر میں بند کیا جاے جیسے ھٹلر نے یھودیوں کو رکھا تھا اور ملک سے غداری کے جرم میں انکو پھانسیاں دی جایئں تو امن دنوں مین ھو جاے گا
 

remykhan

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
It must be extraterrestrials who attacked. People with such a low mentalities, just bent upon blaming security agencies and trying to protect real savages. ****** ha inlogoon per.
 
:13::13::13::13:
Its agreed upon that Ulema e Deoband and other Salafi type Sects Voted Against PK , not the Shia ,

Uffffffff ,,, What a pity you are what a pity , Get out of your shell brother , You have been fed poison against other Muslim sect

Really? you can't run away from the truth...


VIEW: The demand for Pakistan and Islam —Ishtiaq Ahmed
20100608_Ishtiaq_Ahmed.jpg
The Muslim League’s propaganda struck terror in the hearts of the Hindus and Sikhs who were told that they would be paying jazya and Islamic law will prevail in all sectors of individual and collective life. The minority Shia and Ahmediyya communities were also fearful that it would result in Sunni domination

The recent attack on a congregation of Ahmedis during prayers, which claimed more than 90 innocent lives, has revived a discussion as to whether there is a connection between the creation of Pakistan and Islam. Within the Muslim League there was always a constituency in favour of Pakistan becoming an Islamic state. One of its proponents was a close confident of Jinnah: Raja Sahib Mahmudabad, a Shia. In 1939 he wrote to the historian Mohibul Hassan:

“When we speak of democracy in Islam it is not democracy in the government but in the cultural and social aspects of life. Islam is totalitarian — there is no denying about it. It is the Quran that we should turn to. It is the dictatorship of the Quranic laws that we want — and that we will have — but not through non-violence and Gandhian truth” (Mushirul Hasan, 1997: 57-8).

If the March 23, 1940, Lahore Resolution be taken as the start of the Pakistan campaign, then Jinnah had to make a breakthrough in the Muslim-majority provinces of northwestern India — Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Punjab and Sindh — each of which had regional parties headed by Muslims. The Muslim League had to convince the Muslim voters in these provinces that their leaders were courting Hindus and Sikhs and thus were paving the way for Hindu Raj under the Indian National Congress. That opportunity arrived in July 1945 when the British government announced provincial elections for February 1946. Punjab Governor Sir Bertrand Glancy has recorded in several secret fortnightly reports (FR) the tactics that the Muslim League adopted during the long election campaign. In the FR of December 27, 1945, Glancy noted:

“Among Muslims the Leaguers are increasing their efforts to appeal to the bigotry of the electors. Pirs and maulvis have been enlisted in large numbers to tour the province and denounce all who oppose the League as infidels. Copies of the Holy Quran are carried around as an emblem peculiar to the Muslim League. Feroz [Khan Noon] and others openly preach that every vote given to the League is a vote cast in favour of the Holy Prophet (PBUH). These deplorable tactics, as I have frequently said, were only to be expected; they provide a grim augury of the future peace of India and they are certainly not easy for the Unionists to counter” (Lionel Carter, 2006: 160).

In the FR of February 2, 1946, Glancy wrote:

“The ML [Muslim League] orators are becoming increasingly fanatical in their speeches. Maulvis and pirs and students travel all round the province and preach that those who fail to vote for the League candidates will cease to be Muslims; their marriages will no longer be valid and they will be entirely excommunicated...It is not easy to foresee what the results of the elections will be. But there seems little doubt the Muslim League, thanks to the ruthless methods by which they have pursued their campaign of ‘Islam in danger’, will considerably increase the number of their seats and Unionist representatives will correspondingly decline” (Carter, 2006: 171).

Similar tactics were adopted in the campaigns in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Sindh. In his doctoral dissertation, India, Pakistan or Pakhtunistan?, Erland Jansson writes:

“The pir of Manki Sharif...founded an organisation of his own, the Anjuman-us-asfia. The organisation promised to support the Muslim League on the condition that Shariat would be enforced in Pakistan. To this Jinnah agreed. As a result the pir of Manki Sharif declared jihad to achieve Pakistan and ordered the members of his anjuman to support the League in the 1946 elections” (pg 166).

Jinnah wrote in November 1945 a letter to Pir Manki Sharif in which he promised that the Shariat would apply to the affairs of the Muslim majority. He wrote:

“It is needless to emphasise that the Constituent Assembly, which would be predominantly Muslim in its composition, would be able to enact laws for Muslims, not inconsistent with the Shariat laws and the Muslims will no longer be obliged to abide by the un-Islamic laws” (Constituent Assembly of Pakistan Debates, Volume 5, 1949, pg 46).

The Muslim League’s propaganda struck terror in the hearts of the Hindus and Sikhs who were told that they would be paying jazya and Islamic law will prevail in all sectors of individual and collective life. The minority Shia and Ahmediyya communities were also fearful that it would result in Sunni domination. This is obvious from the correspondence between the Shia leader Syed Ali Zaheer and Jinnah in July 1944 (G Allana, 1977: 375-9). Although the Council of Action of the All-Parties Shia Conference passed a resolution on December 25, 1945, rejecting the idea of Pakistan (SR Bakshi, 1997: 848-9), most Shias shifted their loyalty to the Muslim League in the hope that Pakistan will be a non-sectarian state. Initially the Ahmediyya were also wary and reluctant to support the demand for a separate Muslim state (Munir Report, 1954: 196). It is only when Sir Zafarullah was won over by Jinnah that the Ahmedis started supporting the demand for Pakistan. To all such groups Jinnah gave assurances that Pakistan will not be a sectarian state.

In my forthcoming book on the partition of Punjab, now running into more than 1,000 pages but which is at last completed and for which I am now looking for a publisher, I will shed light on how the fierce Islamist propaganda impacted on the partition of Punjab. The Sikhs had more fears than anyone else about what could happen to minorities in Pakistan. In a meeting in May 1947 sponsored by Lord Mountbatten to help the Muslims and Sikhs reach an agreement on keeping Punjab united, Jinnah offered the Sikhs all the safeguards they wanted if they agreed to support Pakistan. Only in March 1947 some 2,000-10,000 Sikhs — depending on who you cite — were butchered in the Rawalpindi rural areas so the Sikhs were very wary of Jinnah’s overtures. Chief Minister of Patiala Hardit Singh Malik writes he had an inspiration and asked Jinnah: “Sir you are making all the promises but God forbid if something happens to you, what will happen then?” The exact words Jinnah used in reply will be revealed in my forthcoming book, but the reasoning was that his followers will treat his words as sacred.

Ishtiaq Ahmed is a Visiting Research Professor at the Institute of South Asian Studies (ISAS) and the South Asian Studies Programme at the National University of Singapore and Professor Emeritus of Political Science at Stockholm University. He is currently working on a book, Is Pakistan a Garrison State? He can be reached at [email protected]


http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010\06\08\story_8-6-2010_pg3_2
 
Last edited:

Ali raza babar

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Really? you can't run away from the truth...

VIEW: The demand for Pakistan and Islam —Ishtiaq Ahmed
20100608_Ishtiaq_Ahmed.jpg
The Muslim League’s propaganda struck terror in the hearts of the Hindus and Sikhs who were told that they would be paying jazya and Islamic law will prevail in all sectors of individual and collective life. The minority Shia and Ahmediyya communities were also fearful that it would result in Sunni domination

The recent attack on a congregation of Ahmedis during prayers, which claimed more than 90 innocent lives, has revived a discussion as to whether there is a connection between the creation of Pakistan and Islam. Within the Muslim League there was always a constituency in favour of Pakistan becoming an Islamic state. One of its proponents was a close confident of Jinnah: Raja Sahib Mahmudabad, a Shia. In 1939 he wrote to the historian Mohibul Hassan:

“When we speak of democracy in Islam it is not democracy in the government but in the cultural and social aspects of life. Islam is totalitarian — there is no denying about it. It is the Quran that we should turn to. It is the dictatorship of the Quranic laws that we want — and that we will have — but not through non-violence and Gandhian truth” (Mushirul Hasan, 1997: 57-8).

If the March 23, 1940, Lahore Resolution be taken as the start of the Pakistan campaign, then Jinnah had to make a breakthrough in the Muslim-majority provinces of northwestern India — Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Punjab and Sindh — each of which had regional parties headed by Muslims. The Muslim League had to convince the Muslim voters in these provinces that their leaders were courting Hindus and Sikhs and thus were paving the way for Hindu Raj under the Indian National Congress. That opportunity arrived in July 1945 when the British government announced provincial elections for February 1946. Punjab Governor Sir Bertrand Glancy has recorded in several secret fortnightly reports (FR) the tactics that the Muslim League adopted during the long election campaign. In the FR of December 27, 1945, Glancy noted:

“Among Muslims the Leaguers are increasing their efforts to appeal to the bigotry of the electors. Pirs and maulvis have been enlisted in large numbers to tour the province and denounce all who oppose the League as infidels. Copies of the Holy Quran are carried around as an emblem peculiar to the Muslim League. Feroz [Khan Noon] and others openly preach that every vote given to the League is a vote cast in favour of the Holy Prophet (PBUH). These deplorable tactics, as I have frequently said, were only to be expected; they provide a grim augury of the future peace of India and they are certainly not easy for the Unionists to counter” (Lionel Carter, 2006: 160).

In the FR of February 2, 1946, Glancy wrote:

“The ML [Muslim League] orators are becoming increasingly fanatical in their speeches. Maulvis and pirs and students travel all round the province and preach that those who fail to vote for the League candidates will cease to be Muslims; their marriages will no longer be valid and they will be entirely excommunicated...It is not easy to foresee what the results of the elections will be. But there seems little doubt the Muslim League, thanks to the ruthless methods by which they have pursued their campaign of ‘Islam in danger’, will considerably increase the number of their seats and Unionist representatives will correspondingly decline” (Carter, 2006: 171).

Similar tactics were adopted in the campaigns in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Sindh. In his doctoral dissertation, India, Pakistan or Pakhtunistan?, Erland Jansson writes:

“The pir of Manki Sharif...founded an organisation of his own, the Anjuman-us-asfia. The organisation promised to support the Muslim League on the condition that Shariat would be enforced in Pakistan. To this Jinnah agreed. As a result the pir of Manki Sharif declared jihad to achieve Pakistan and ordered the members of his anjuman to support the League in the 1946 elections” (pg 166).

Jinnah wrote in November 1945 a letter to Pir Manki Sharif in which he promised that the Shariat would apply to the affairs of the Muslim majority. He wrote:

“It is needless to emphasise that the Constituent Assembly, which would be predominantly Muslim in its composition, would be able to enact laws for Muslims, not inconsistent with the Shariat laws and the Muslims will no longer be obliged to abide by the un-Islamic laws” (Constituent Assembly of Pakistan Debates, Volume 5, 1949, pg 46).

The Muslim League’s propaganda struck terror in the hearts of the Hindus and Sikhs who were told that they would be paying jazya and Islamic law will prevail in all sectors of individual and collective life. The minority Shia and Ahmediyya communities were also fearful that it would result in Sunni domination. This is obvious from the correspondence between the Shia leader Syed Ali Zaheer and Jinnah in July 1944 (G Allana, 1977: 375-9). Although the Council of Action of the All-Parties Shia Conference passed a resolution on December 25, 1945, rejecting the idea of Pakistan (SR Bakshi, 1997: 848-9), most Shias shifted their loyalty to the Muslim League in the hope that Pakistan will be a non-sectarian state. Initially the Ahmediyya were also wary and reluctant to support the demand for a separate Muslim state (Munir Report, 1954: 196). It is only when Sir Zafarullah was won over by Jinnah that the Ahmedis started supporting the demand for Pakistan. To all such groups Jinnah gave assurances that Pakistan will not be a sectarian state.

In my forthcoming book on the partition of Punjab, now running into more than 1,000 pages but which is at last completed and for which I am now looking for a publisher, I will shed light on how the fierce Islamist propaganda impacted on the partition of Punjab. The Sikhs had more fears than anyone else about what could happen to minorities in Pakistan. In a meeting in May 1947 sponsored by Lord Mountbatten to help the Muslims and Sikhs reach an agreement on keeping Punjab united, Jinnah offered the Sikhs all the safeguards they wanted if they agreed to support Pakistan. Only in March 1947 some 2,000-10,000 Sikhs — depending on who you cite — were butchered in the Rawalpindi rural areas so the Sikhs were very wary of Jinnah’s overtures. Chief Minister of Patiala Hardit Singh Malik writes he had an inspiration and asked Jinnah: “Sir you are making all the promises but God forbid if something happens to you, what will happen then?” The exact words Jinnah used in reply will be revealed in my forthcoming book, but the reasoning was that his followers will treat his words as sacred.

Ishtiaq Ahmed is a Visiting Research Professor at the Institute of South Asian Studies (ISAS) and the South Asian Studies Programme at the National University of Singapore and Professor Emeritus of Political Science at Stockholm University. He is currently working on a book, Is Pakistan a Garrison State? He can be reached at [email protected]


http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010\06\08\story_8-6-2010_pg3_2

I can write 10 columns like that , with Claiming the history of my own choice , Dont be naive Follow some authentic history or try to talk to some of the elders who are above 80
 

cheetah

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Security forces particularly intelligence agencies are the back bone of any country to safe guard it's interests but unfortunately in our country they are just tool in the hands of our enemies against our people really pathetic I salute to those security forces who are loyal to their homeland but what about top brass just puppet.
 
I can write 10 columns like that , with Claiming the history of my own choice , Dont be naive Follow some authentic history or try to talk to some of the elders who are above 80

LOL yuou don't believe even this academic professor?lol,nothing could convince such people even if they had witnessed it themselves this is a well known fact most Pakistani historian knows this.
 

Believer12

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Just to set the historical record right, in 1945 All shia parties unanimously voted against the creation of Pakistan,look it up if you don't know this,stop sprinkling dust in people's eyes,Shias have always been loyal to Iran only.Zardari is shia and listen to his father's views about Quaid e Azam.

میں تو پھلے ھی کھتا آرھا ھوں کہ جن مذھبی جماعتوں نے بھی حضرت قائداعظم کی مخالفت کی انپر لاکھ لعنت میں تو عوام کی بات کرتا ھوں جو ان جماعتوں کے ساتھ نہ پھلے تھے اور نہ اب (الیکشن میں انکی سیتوں کی تعداد دیکھ لیں) اب بات شیعہ کی ھو رھی ھے تو یاد رکھیں قائداعظم بھی شیعہ مسلک سے تعلق رکھتے تھے لیکن انھوں نے کبھی بھی فرقہ پرستانہ بات نھیں کی تھی
 

siasitabdeeli

Councller (250+ posts)
Just to set the historical record right, in 1945 All shia parties unanimously voted against the creation of Pakistan,look it up if you don't know this,stop sprinkling dust in people's eyes,Shias have always been loyal to Iran only.Zardari is shia and listen to his father's views about Quaid e Azam.

You moron Quaid-e-Azam was a Shia. Raja Sahab Mehmoodabad was also a Shia. Most prominent leaders in the Pakistan movement were Shias. It was Salafi's and Deobandi's who were not in favour of the creation of Pakistan. Your blind hatred is only going to lead you to hell you idiot.

As far as loyalty is concerned, Takfiri Khariji's like you have always been loyal to Aal-e-Saud instead of Pakistan. All you can do is call other people Kaafir and kill them. You can't do anything better than that. Koi aur kaam aata hai tumhein. Bachpan say bas yahi seekha hai tum nay??
 

Believer12

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
LOL yuou don't believe even this academic professor?lol,nothing could convince such people even if they had witnessed it themselves this is a well known fact most Pakistani historian knows this.

دیوبند تو قائداعظم کے خلاف تھے اور پاکستان کو پلیدستان انھی نے سب سے پھلے کھا تھا۔آپ اتنا جھوٹ نہ بولو کہ خود جھوٹ بھی شرما جاے
 
It is a fact that Jinnah rejected Shiaism and became a Muslim but Shias always rejected the idea of Pakistan esp. when they failed to convince Jinnah to declare Pakistan as a Shia State

 
Thanks Waseem for deleting the messages which were off the topic.

Why is that some of the participants like Believer 12, siasitTabdeeli always start off with a sectarian tone and then some people are compelled to reply.