Sorry, India, You Can’t Be A Superpower With A Brain Of A Mouse

India is a big country with the brain of a mouse. Take this headline from India’s largest newspaper, Times of India: Obama Mission: Billions To Pakistan, Billions To India.

I love the headline. It’s not wrong but a little exaggerated. US President Obama is offering $2 billion’s worth of military hardware purchases to Pakistan, subsidized by US government.

For Pakistan, it’s a cautious welcome. Nothing will come to us immediately. The purchases are divided over the next five years. It will be a slow process, involving government red tape, politics and the usual arm-twisting that Washington is so good at. It’s also a lollypop that the US government has dangled before the Pakistanimilitary to calm some of the anger over a US helicopter killing three Pakistani soldiers three weeks ago.

The Indian government knows all this. It also knows that recent US sale of F-16s to Pakistan came with a harsh condition: the planes will be accompanied by US ‘minders’ as part of support staff who will live on the base and ensure Pakistan does not ‘misuse’ the planes, as in against India.

Still, two weeks before Obama lands in India on an official visit, Indian media managers leaked this fabulously-titled but well-researched report, grumbling that billions of Indian dollars will be going to US pockets while Pakistan will be getting billions’ worth of weapons for free. Of course, even if Pakistan buys up all the $2 billion’s worth of US weapons immediately and not over five years, it will still not match India’s massive weapons shopping spree worth $30 billion, to be spent by 2012, meaning within the next two years.

This tells you one thing: the Indian government is really not worried about the puny $2 billion offer to Pakistan tipping the scales. We can’t match India’s $30 billion.

If that is clear, then what is it that India is worried about? Why whine about two billions to Pakistan over five years when India is spending fifteen times that figure in less than two years?

It’s just India’s small-minded pursuit of anything that would undermine Pakistan. There is no way Pakistan would ever invade or destroy India, nor are most Pakistanis interested in this proposition. It’s always the bigger countries that destroy smaller ones. Yet India doesn’t really miss a second seizing any opportunity to hurt Pakistan. Remember 1971 when peaceful Pakistanis were busy in post-elections noise? India launched an unprovoked invasion of Pakistan and, as the invasion unfolded, we discovered the Indians had actually planned it for two years and created and recruited a proxy army inside our country to help them once the invasion started.

The mindset behind the Times of India story is the same mindset that invaded us in 1971, the same mindset that refuses to resolve Kashmir and pave the way for peace, the same mindset that exploits Afghan mess to set up training camps to export terrorists to Pakistan, the same mindset that plants terrorism in Balochistan, and the same mindset that bans Pakistani TV channels across India.

And to confirm the height of this Indian small-mindedness, it is the same mindset that bans Pakistani visitors from posting comments on Indian news websites, no matter how respectful that comment is, if the comment questions official Indian positions on any question. [Let me also add that Pakistani guest columnists are banned in mainstream Indian newspapers for the same reason. Compare that to Pakistani generosity as our newspapers permit guest Indian columnists to write freely even if they criticize official Pakistani policies, and no Pakistani news website bans Indians surfers from posting comments.]

Our American friends can’t see this Indian small-mindedness, of course. That’s why we hear US officials insisting India is not a threat to Pakistan, the latest such gratuitous advice came just this week during the Pak-US strategic dialogue currently underway in Washington.

For Pakistan and India to live in peace, even resolving Kashmir won’t help if India doesn’t get itself a new mindset, big and confident, in contrast to the existing insecure, small-minded way of looking at its smaller neighbors.

NOTE: Not a single Indian visitor to Pakistan, whether a private citizen, government officer or an Indian artist, was ever harassed by Pakistanis in any way in the entire history of Pak-Indian relations. The legendary Pakistani hospitality always embraced and touched visiting Indians as is the case with other foreigners visiting Pakistan.

In comparison, Pakistanis are regularly harassed and intimidated and in some cases even physically attacked while visiting India.

The biggest example is how 60 Pakistanis were burned alive aboard the so-called Samjhota (Friendship) Express train when they believed calls for peace and headed to India in February 2007. Today, the Indian government has admitted Hindu terrorists, including two serving Indian military officers, were behind the gruesome murder. The Indian government, backed by American and British media, insisted immediately after the attacks that they were the work of Pakistan’s ISI and Kashmiri freedom groups.

There are more recent examples. Here are two of them to prove this point:

- Bigg Boss planning to send back Pakistani Artists : Pakistani participants in an Indian TV show face life threats by Hindu terrorists. The Indian government and people are unable to protect them.

- Pakistani artist beaten up in Mumbai: A well known Pakistani comedian Shakeel Siddiqui has been tortured by some extremists in Mumbai and ordered to urgently depart from India.

There is a mindset in India, in powerful circles in government, the military and the Hindu terror groups, that can’t live with a smaller western neighbor that poses no existential threat to India.

This record of anti-Pakistanism in India contradicts the ridiculous statements of US officials and think-tank types who lecture Pakistan that India is not a threat.

Read more »

Video: Uncovered 9/11 Footage Shows FBI Director Asking Firefighters About “Secondary Hits” On WTC

Amazing video also shows city officials hurriedly leaving after South Tower collapse:

Steve Watson
Infowars.com

An intriguing video has appeared on You Tube that appears to show a FDNY film crew being interviewed in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks by the the director of the FBI’s New York office, who has suspicions that one of the World Trade Center towers took a “secondary hit” before collapsing.

The video appears to be part of NIST’s recent FOIA releases and therefore has not been seen before now.

On first viewing it appears to be nothing special, just the horribly familiar scenes of dust and rubble from the aftermath of the attacks. However, it contains a stunning exchange between officials and firefighters.

The action appears to be taking place immediately after the collapse of the South tower and before the collapse of the North tower.

The film crew exits a building and make their way along the dust and debris littered streets.

At around 2 mins 50, a man in a suit approaches the crew and announces himself as “FBI, Barry Mawn.”

Mawn (pictured below with Rudy Giuliani) was at that time the director of the FBI’s New York office.

Mawn then asks the FDNY crew a question in the form of a statement – “That tower got a secondary hit?”

The firefighters respond by saying they are unsure but they heard a rumbling and ran for their lives as the tower then collapsed.

The audio is difficult to hear but one of the firefighters then says he “saw it blow right out the side of the building” to which Mawn asks “that was the plane right?”.

The firefighter then states “I don’t know if it was a plane or an explosion.”

As they continue their description of events the noise of a jet overhead interrupts them as people begin to panic. Someone, presumably another FBI agent shouts “is that ours?” to which Mawn replies “yeah that should be ours”.

At this point a large gathering of suited individuals walks into view and a woman in the group yells “go to city hall.”

Mawn then asks “where is the mayor?”, from which it can be deduced that this group is affiliated with Rudy Giuliani and they are hurriedly leaving the scene.

The woman leading the mayor’s group then curses at reporters telling them to “get the f*** out of here”.

One commenter has speculated that the reporters are with Pat Dawson, the first NBC News correspondent to report from the scene of the attacks at the World Trade Center.

We have previously covered the fact that Giuliani and his group were warned that the South tower was about to collapse, before it happened. This video of them leaving the scene just after the collapse of the South tower dovetails directly with that information – another huge finding to emerge from the NIST video releases.

The video is a fascinating piece of evidence to be added to the hundreds of other accounts and descriptionsof secondary explosions in and around the WTC on 9/11. This clearly indicates that the FBI believed that asecondary attack, aside from the use of air planes was under way.

Indeed, this backs up previous evidence that the FBI’s initial working premise was that trucks packed with explosives aided the collapse of the twin towers. This fact was reported by USA today journalist Jack Kelly:

The details were also covered by MSNBC’s Rick Sanchez, who also reported that officials strongly believed a van packed with explosives parked underneath the towers had contributed to their collapse.

Barry Mawn has other intriguing connections to the events of 9/11. He was a close friend and associate of John O’ Neil, the former deputy director for the FBI who quit his job out of frustration that his investigations into Al Qaeda terrorist plots were being blocked. O’Neil became head of security for the World Trade Center on September 11th 2001. His body was discovered in the rubble after the attacks after he had helped people escape the towers before they collapsed.

Mawn was also the individual who explained to the media how police and the FBI found the passport of one of the alleged hijackers, Satam Al Suqami, in the rubble during a “grid search” of the area close to the World Trade Center.

Mawn was later involved in the investigation of the Anthrax attacks, which he initially believed originated from US military sources. Mawn resigned from the FBI in March 2002 following the break down of this investigation.

The information revealed in this short piece of footage once again goes to show that there is still masses of evidence regarding the 9/11 attack that we are yet to discover. It should encourage 9/11 researchers to continue to dig deeper and demand a new independent investigation.

Read more »

Victory in Afghanistan is impossible. Russia cannot support NATO.

Russia’s envoy to NATO on Wednesday dismissed reports that Russian troops could be sent back to Afghanistan two decades after the Soviet Union’s Red Army was forced out by the mujahedeen.

“We’ve already been in Afghanistan and we didn’t like it much,” Dmitry Rogozin told RIA Novosti.

The UK newspaper The Guardian said on Tuesday the proposal was on the table ahead of a landmark Russia-NATO summit in Lisbon next month.

The paper said Moscow and Brussels were discussing joint initiatives including “the contribution of Russian helicopters and crews to train Afghan pilots, possible Russian assistance in training Afghan national security forces, increased co-operation on counter-narcotics and border security, and improved transit and supply routes for NATO forces.”

“Maybe someone wants Russia to supply cannon fodder to Afghanistan,” Rogozin went on.

The Soviet Union was involved in a bitter decade-long conflict in Afghanistan from 1979 to 1989. A million Afghan civilians and fighters are estimated to have lost their lives during the fighting. Some 15,000 Soviet soldiers also perished, and the return of Russian soldiers to the country would also be extremely unpopular in Russia.

The war had a profound impact on the Soviet Union, and has been cited as one of the key factors in the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.

Rogozin also said that Russia-NATO cooperation in Afghanistan consisted of training for Afghan and Pakistan police involved in the fight against drugs, transit and “the implementation of the so-called helicopter package.”

Russia is competing for a tender to supply Mi-17 helicopters to Afghanistan.

Russian crews will train Afghan pilots, but not in Afghanistan, Rogozin said. He also said that the issue of improved transit arrangements “has never been raised.”

In yet another report, published in The Telegraph, Russian envoy Mikhail Gorbachev has categorically stated “victory is impossible in Afghanistan”.

Below is the report published in The Telegraph.

Mr Gorbachev, who pulled Russian troops out of Afghanistan in 1989 after a 10-year war, said the US had no alternative but to withdraw troops.

“Victory is impossible in Afghanistan. [Barack] Obama is right to pull the troops out. No matter how difficult it will be,” he told the BBC.

Mr Gorbachev added that as the Soviets prepared to withdraw from Afghanistan, the US was training militants, “the same ones who today are terrorising Afghanistan and more and more of Pakistan”.

He said that because of this, withdrawal would be more difficult.

“But what’s the alternative – another Vietnam? Sending in half-a-million troops? That wouldn’t work.”

His comments came amid news that Dmitry Medvedev, the Russian president, will attend a NATO summit next month, to discuss plans for Russian forces to return to Afghanistan.

Nato officials said Russia had agreed to sell helicopters to Afghanistan and provide training.

Moscow will allow Nato forces to withdraw equipment from Afghanistan overland for the first time, in proposals expected to be agreed in Lisbon.

“The summit can mark a new start in the relationship between Nato and Russia,” said Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the Nato secretary-general.

“We will hopefully agree on a broad range of areas in which we can develop practical co-operation on Afghanistan, counter-terrorism, counter-narcotics.”

He also said that British and US troops would remain on Afghanistan’s front lines for years under an open-ended agreement to be signed at the summit. Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, has demanded that his forces take over the fight against the Taliban by 2014.

While his call has been embraced by Western leaders, including Prime Minister David Cameron who set a five-year deadline on the Army’s combat role, Mr Rasmussen said troops would not be withdrawn immediately.

Under a blueprint drawn up by Gen David Petraeus, Nato commander in Afghanistan, foreign troops would “thin out” but not leave disputed territory.

Read more »

Japan’s Doublespeak On Pakistan’s Nuclear Program

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—Non-proliferation has over time become increasingly discriminatory and a vehicle for the powerful to pressurize states they consider “unreliable”, and the fact that these targeted states happen to be primarily Muslim states, with the sole exception of North Korea, reflects a further bias within the developed world. In fact, the accommodating manner in which the US has treated North Korea’s open defiance of the NPT in contrast to the treatment meted out to Iran which has stayed within its NPT obligations and continuously reiterated its abhorrence of nuclear weapons, only bolsters the perception that Muslim states are being targeted by the US and its allies on multiple fronts, especially post-9/11. The Indo-US nuclear deal, and the repercussions of it within the IAEA and Nuclear Suppliers’ Group (NSG), has brought all these contradictions and dualities out into the open.

However, what has been a rude shock for many has been the growing duplicity of Japan on nuclear-related issues. Post-1945 Japan has ostensibly maintained a strong anti-nuclear posture given how it is the only country to have actually suffered nuclear attacks – courtesy the United States. Yet, over a period of time Japan is moving out of the shadows of its professed anti-militarist position as it develops a vibrant arms industry, partners the US in Missile Defense and maintains one of the largest peaceful nuclear programs in the world. As if that was not enough to worry neighbors like China and the Koreas, who still recall the bitter legacy of Japanese militarism, Japan has also begun adopting a dual approach on the nuclear issue with an unstinting opposition to Pakistan’s nuclear program, but the beginnings of an accommodation to the far more extensive Indian nuclear program. Most recently, this has been reflected in the outcome of the meeting between the Japanese and Indian premiers in Tokyo which not only resulted in a trade pact, but also the promise of Japanese export to India of its state-of-the-art nuclear technology.
India, as a result of its nuclear deal with the US, has become a vast market for nuclear exports and countries like France and the UK are casting aside their superfluous non-proliferation concerns in order to gain access to this market – with the US clearing the NSG and IAEA hurdles. For the Japanese, the road is less smooth because there is still a strong anti-nuclear weapons lobby within Japan. Yet the Japanese Premier, Naoto Kan, is undeterred and stated that India and Japan had “agreed to speed up negotiations for civil nuclear energy cooperation while seeking India’s understanding of our country’s sentiment as a nuclear-bombed nation.” So, unlike the demands on Pakistan by the Japanese to sign the NPT and CTBT, no such demand is being made on India – only an apologetic appeal for Indian understanding as to why the Japanese will take a little more time to give India sensitive nuclear technology.

On further scrutiny, it is easy to find that Japan has long harbored nuclear ambitions and its nuclear program has been developed in such a way that it is barely a “screwdriver’s turn” away from possessing nuclear weapons. So far, it has suited Japan to have a “nuclear ready” status without actually taking the last and final step in that direction. That is why, at a Pugwash Conference in Beijing a few years earlier, one heard the North and South Korean participants decry Japanese plans to build the controversial Rokkasho reprocessing plant, which has now become operational and is the first industrial-scale reprocessing plant in a non-nuclear weapon state (NNWS). As a matter of fact, Japan possesses massive amounts of excess plutonium because it also has a large fast-breeder program, which allows stockpiles of fissile material to be built up. In December 1995, Japan was reported to have 4.7 tons of plutonium – enough for 700 nuclear warheads. Japan also has an indigenous nuclear enrichment plant – something the Indians are still seeking to perfect – which can also provide enriched uranium for nuclear weapons production. Japan has also developed the M-V three-stage solid fuel rocket, similar in design to the US LGM-118A Peacekeeper ICBM, which could serve as a ready delivery vehicle. In addition, Japan has been involved in developing the latest fighter aircraft with the US also. So, it has all the nuts and bolts in place if it chooses to go nuclear. Already, there is a growing move to do away totally with the constitutional restrictions on Japan developing a full-scale military.
Unfortunately, like the US, Japan’s record on nuclear safety is not too good. Nuclear safety issues have been more acute in Japan which has had a series of nuclear accidents. The following incidents relating to nuclear safety issues in Japan once again highlights the fact that so far globally it is the more developed industrial states that seem to have had more extensive safety problems in terms of their nuclear installations.

According to the record on the Greenpeace website, between 1975-1995, the following nuclear accidents took place in Japan:

• 1975: Release of radioactivity from Japan’s Mihama nuclear power plant.
• 1979: Two workers suffer radioactive contamination at Japan’s Tokaimura nuclear complex.
• 1986: 12 people receive “slight” plutonium contamination, while inspecting a store room at the Tokaimura nuclear complex.
• 1991: Rupture of steam generator pipe causes release of radioactivity at Mihama nuclear power plant.
• 1991: Reactor shut-down due to break of control system at Japan’s Sendai nuclear power plant.
• 1991: Release of radioactivity from Japan’s Fukui nuclear power plant.
• 1993: High pressure steam accident kills one worker and injures two others at Japan’s Fukushima nuclear power plant.
• 1995: Fire due to leakage of sodium coolant from the Monju fast breeder reactor. The Japanese nuclear industry attempted to cover up the full extent of the accident and the reactor was shut-down.

Moreover, on September 30, 1999, an accident at a uranium-processing facility in Tokaimura, 70 miles northeast of Tokyo, occurred. The accident was triggered when three workers used too much uranium to make fuel and set off an uncontrolled atomic reaction. A total of 439 people, including nearby residents, were believed to have been exposed to radiation. (http://www.atomicarchive.com/Reports/Japan/index.shtml) Again, days after an earthquake, on July 24, 2000, the Tokyo Electric Power Company found 29 gallons of radioactive water leaking from a nuclear reactor at the Fukushima No 1 plant in northern Japan (USA Today, July 17, 2007). The story repeated itself on September 17, 2003, when officials at the Chuba Electric Power’s Hamaoka plant in central Japan discovered that about 1.6 gallons of radioactive water had leaked from one of the reactors. In November 2001, the same reactor was shut down after two radioactive leaks occurred within three days. Even more disturbing was the fatal accident that took place at the Mihama plant on August 29, 2004, killing at least four people. There was no leak of radioactivity, but as the Greenpeace website pointed out, it was the deadliest accident in a catalogue of nuclear scandals in Japan. Seven workers were also injured due to the steam leak, possibly caused by a lack of cooling water in the reactor. These safety problems have continued to haunt Japan’s nuclear facilities and in July 2007, Japan had to suspend operations at the nuclear plant near Kashiwazaki, after a radiation leak and other damage from a deadly earthquake raised new concerns about the safety of the nation’s accident-plagued nuclear industry (The New York Times, July 18, 2007).
Despite being a signatory to the NPT, because Japan continues to expand its civil nuclear base, issues of safety will be a source of concern within its immediate Asian neighborhood. Moreover, in the context of the threat of nuclear terror from non-state actors, Japan can be extremely vulnerable because it was in Japan that chemical weapons terrorist attacks took place in 1994 and 1995 by a group calling itself Aum Shinrikyo, presently on the US terrorist groups’ list.

With such a record, is it not time for Japan to stop its hypocrisy on the nuclear issue and treat Pakistan and India on an equal footing in terms of nuclear assistance? There is no credibility either in Japan’s non-proliferation posturing or its concerns over nuclear safety vis-à-vis Pakistan – especially with its nuclear cooperation talks with India.

Read more »

Pakistani Military Wins Gold Medal For Toughness

Pakistanis Are Tough Patrollers, Army Wins Gold Medal In UK

At an event organized by the British Army for world militaries to compete in toughness, with 750 soldiers participating from worldwide, Pakistani soldiers bagged the Gold Medal for being the toughest soldiers capable of patrolling in the most difficult conditions.

(of course you wont get this news on “patriot” Pakistani electronic media)

LONDON, UK—Beating hundreds of soldiers from major armies of the world, Pakistan Army has won the coveted Gold Award at the prestigious Cambrian Patrol Exercise held in Wales with participation from armies of India, Australia, Canada, United States and France among others.

750 soldiers from across the world descended on the Brecon Beacons in Wales to suffer through one of the toughest exercises ever devised. The Cambrian patrol tested the soldiering skills of the teams as they crossed some of the most arduous terrain one can imagine.

During the marches, the teams had to complete challenges including observation and reconnaissance of enemy forces, cold-river crossings in full kit without access to boats, first-aid and defensive shooting under attack.

The exercise is organized by the British Army [HQ 160 (W) Brigade on behalf of HQ 5 Div] with an aim to provide a challenging patrols exercise in order to develop operational capability. Cambrian Patrol is arduous and concentrates on leadership, teamwork, physical fitness and achieving the mission by drawing participants from foreign countries.

Read more »

US Seeks to Boost CIA Presence in Pakistan

WASHINGTON: The United States is trying to expand a secret CIA operation designed to eliminate radical militants’ havens located in Pakistan near the Afghan border, The Wall Street Journal reported late Friday.

Citing unnamed senior officials, the newspaper said that in recent weeks the administration of President Barack Obama had asked Pakistan to allow additional Central Intelligence Agency officers and special operations military trainers to enter the country to intensify pressure on militants.

The requests have so far been rebuffed by Islamabad, which remains extremely reluctant to allow a larger US ground presence in Pakistan, the report said.

On Friday, the United States made a new bid to improve its uneasy war partnership with Pakistan by offering a two-billion-dollar arms package but warned it will not tolerate human rights abuses.

The five-year assistance plan satisfies a key request of Pakistan’s influential military, which assists the US military in Afghanistan and was initially uneasy about a US shift to civilian assistance.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Friday that the US administration would ask Congress to approve two billion dollars in military aid from 2012 to 2016, replacing an earlier five-year package that expired.

The number of CIA personnel in Pakistan has grown substantially in recent years, The Journal said. But the exact number is highly classified.

According to the paper, there are currently about 900 US military personnel in Pakistan, 600 of which are providing flood relief and 150 of which are assigned to the training mission.

A senior Pakistani official said relations with the CIA remain strong but Islamabad continues to oppose a large increase in the number of American personnel on the ground, The Journal said. —AFP

Read more »

«-••.•´¯`•.•• Aaj ki Baat ••.•´¯`•.••-»

جب انسان کسی چیز سے ڈرتا ہے تو اس سے دور ہو جاتا ہے.
مگرجب انسان الله سے ڈرتا ہے تو اس کے اور قریب ہو جاتا ہے


When a person is afraid of something then he goes away from it
But If a person fears ALLAH, he comes near to ALLAH

or is k saath pic hai aaj ki baat ki

Read more »