mhm.

 

I must admit we did profit from this, we received an order from BAA for 5000 sleeping mats to be urgently shipped to heathrow airport to accommodate the starnded travellers.  They paid upfront too.

 

This sarcastic comment is really unfair and unfounded. You seem to have forgotten how the whole world rallied behind the United States immediately after 9-11. Canadian soldiers are still dying in Afghanistan today, a daily reminder of the real war on terrorism.

 

I don't think even the harshest critics of Bush would deny the existence of terrorism. What a lot of us cannot support and condone is the stupid way he deals with it. Hopefully more and more Americans can finally see eye to eye with the rest of the world how your moronic president has screwed things up and how, through the bad decisions that he and his buddies have made, he has actually aggravated, not diminished, the terrorist threat.

 

 

I think it will be interesting as more news comes out about this, like how these guys were caught, be sure to catch next month's news journals like Time, etc.

 

I didnt know you could aggravate terrorists? At least more then they obviously already are.

If you mean he has stirred up more applicants or supporters of terrorism then you might be right, but when people from a country like the ones that have been known to harbor terrorism, they rarely know the story. As if most Americans do as well though...........

Everybodys got a bias. "your people killed my people, your people have oppressed my people" it goes on and on. What we do need to look at are incidents like the above one stated in this thread. Killing civilians should never be accepted, although sometimes it does happen in the midst of combat but in such terrorist incidents, they are targeted.

Looking forward to # - airline travel being even more inconvinient. My sister has blue eyes and she is never checked or stopped. I wonder why?

 

That actually should be surveyed. I was with a friend who has blue eyes and blonde hair at a European airport, and I only got searched, which I didnt mind..but the searcher was gliding his hands over my chest in a most unsearchworthy manner.. 

 

I am usually quite careful with my choice of words, that's why I said "terrorist THREAT", not "terrorists".

 

Yes, I do mean he has stirred up more applicants or supporters of terrorism. But I also mean that by starting the war in Iraq, the United States has successfully (1) turned a country that was originally tightly controlled by a dictator (hence, ironically, LESS terrorist threats) into a country of suicide bombers and terrorists that is even MORE hostile to the West; and (2) turned Iraq into a battlefield for sectarians, foreign fighters, etc. Tell me, honestly and objectively, does all that HELP to fight the war on terror?

 

Let's face it, Georgie Boy has screwed things up pretty bad by making bad decisions, one after another. The terrorists are ultimately to be blamed, that's for sure. But those are terrorists, so what can we expect from them? Humanitarianism? So the second part of your post is completely irrelevant since I am not trying to point my finger to who's wrong here. I am also not criticizing the Iraq war from a so-called "moral" or "humanitarian" point of view. Of course the terrorists are wrong. You think I am daft or something? I am JUST talking about strategies and decision-making. We can't expect mercy from terrorists, but don't you think we SHOULD expect a lot more intelligence and good decision-making skills from the so-called leader of the "free world"?

 

Hopefully its back to normal by next week or i'll be doing the same thing.

 

The way it was shown in Singapore was on BBC world it showed that Pakistani's were arrested etc etc.

 

This is new for me as it is the first time a major British media outlet is distinguishing between Asians and Pakistani's. In the past it would be "Asians were arrested" when none of the other asians (like Chinese, Indian, Nepali etc) were involved.

 

These people are going to make is so hard for the hounest hard working Pakistani's living in England.

 

Did anybody else think this had something to do with Isreal? I believed so until i saw that this plot was 6 months in the making.

Though the effort to gather seperate data on S. Asians is in part motivated by S. Asians.

Wouldn't suprise me if they start gathering data on the basis of being Punjabi/Gujerati/Whatever, as well as Polish/Greek/French, who are at the moment 'other white', only the Irish are deserving of their own seperate label, sheez, i wonder why.

________________________________________________

 

Perhaps also, you've missed Senator Burton's comments that Pakistan has in fact lost more troops in the War on Terror than the coalition forces have in the whole of Afghanistan.

If I were cynical, I would suspect that this is all a great smoke-screen trying to cover the political disasters of British Foreign policy in the Mid-East, from Iraq to Lebanon.

 

You're still posting inaccurate facts, even from your own links!

"One year into the war against terrorism, "there is no overt presence anywhere" of al Qaeda, a senior US intelligence official has said."

Also the link says "The Afghanistan-Pakistan frontier, where the largest concentration of al Qaeda remains. No more than a few hundred al Qaeda are there, but they have proved able to mount lethal attacks against Pakistani and US special operations troops."

This is of course referring to a small part of Pakistan known as Waziristan, and the whole of Afghanistan. Pakistani forces are taking action against them, the US troops in Afghanistan, neither has been able to remove them entirely as yet (and it doesn't look as though the US troops are going to do so in the near future). You obviously have missed the numerous arrests of foreign Al Qaeda in Pakistan by Pakistani forces. Afghanistan is just a mess with warlordism ruling, that is what needs your "cheerleading".

A) You don't seem to have thought about where Al Qaeda originated, what was their purpose, and who were they. In short, it was Afghanistan in the 80s, to remove the Soviets from Afghanistan by siding with the Mujahideen, and they were a bunch of foreigners who should have gone back when the Soviets left. The Taliban might have sheltered Al Qaeda, this is also something that GoP is having to fight, and is in fact doing more than the soldiers across the border (Pakistan has 80000 troops on the border according to Burton, the coalition has around 10000 from time to time.)

The point referring to A) is that the Taliban are a disbanded force (partly thanks to Pakistan), Al Qaeda was created by Bin Laden. Neither has anything to do with Pakistan or the GofP.

B) Madrasahs operate in all countries, not just in Pakistan. Most of the students that enrolled in the Pakistani ones were not Pakistani till last year when one of the suicide attacks occurred. All the foreign students have been removed, and the teachings of these Madrasahs has been changed to bring them in line with other schools - that is they teach Physics and other non religious subjects in addition to religious ones. The reforms, and the throwing out of foreigners should have been done a while back, these people can now move onto other countries.

The last part of that statement that Pakistan is at the forefront of the fight against terror is most definitely what the GoP has been trying to tell you for the last 5 years, but the first part of what you say - that the attempt is not a serious one is just as dopey as your initial statement in this thread, since it was Pakistan that helped foil the latest attack, in fact was pivotal in it. There are also a string of Al Qaeda figures that have been captured in Pakistan by Pakistani forces. You have posted one link to say 1 suicide bomber visited a Madrassah in Pakistan above, but Pakistan has nothing to do with bombers who visit from other countries and are radicalized by individuals from those countries or abroad.

I am cheerleading the Pakistani government to do even more work. Though they have been spectacular on certain occasions they still have a fundamentalist problem that shelters the taliban and its supporters. Out of fear or desire. It doesn't matter. That is a hot spot that I am concerned about.

If you want to cheerlead part of the coalition forces aside Pakistan, you should do so American troops in Iraq hunting Al Qaeda or Saudi troops in Saudi. Pakistan doesnt need your cheerleading, and if you do still want to do it, then at least opine a bit further and say what you just said that there have been many occasions when Pakistan has arrested key Al Qaeda figures, which although it would be better that you didnt cheerlead, would be a bit more accurate.

Pakistan knew all along that the Taliban was a popluar entity in the northern part of her own country and around her cities.

The Taliban ruled Afghanistan!! if the Taliban were so popular with the Northern part of Pakistan as you say, they would be ruling the Northern part or at least they would be causing a civil war - neither is happening. They were associated with the Deoband way, that affiliated with the JUI, which has never been popular within Pakistan, and it's been stated on numerous occasions that this is ideologically not the attitude within Pakistan - Islamic parties win at most 6 or 7 seats average during elections (with the exception of the last), because there is no ideological support for such groups. It is left to you to "comprendo" this.

The people of Pakistan had nothing to do with Afghanistan rule, the Mujahideen did. During Soviet times, the Afghanis used to train in Pakistan, they even trained in Scotland, and the US. The Taliban in other words, was irrelevant in Pakistan from a people perspective, and in my opinion from the formation perspective, GoP had a role but a small one as did many other countries. The majority of the Taliban during the Taliban era of 1994-2001, were educated in Madrassahs in Afghanistan, it was many of the Taliban leaders, who were Mujahideen fighters in Soviet times, that received their education from Pakistani Madrassahs in the 80s. These Madrassahs were financed from the outside, not by Pakistan, and with cooperation of the anti Soviet coalition. The JUI affiliation with the madrassahs in Pakistan was in no way popular with the people, as mentioned above noone voted for them. What was popular was the ideology of an independent Afghanistan.

 

However, most of the leaders of the current Taliban regime in Afghanistan have been influenced by the teachings of Islam in Pakistan, where they had migrated with millions of other Afghans after the Soviet invasion. There, they attended religious seminaries or "madrassas", while many of them also remained active fighting the Soviets in the battlefields. They are the followers of the "Deobandi" school of thought, preached by mullahs (clerics) in Pakistani madrassas. The Deobandi school emerged as a reform movement in British India with the aim of rejuvenating Islamic society in a colonial state. The Pakistani version of the Deobandi schools in Afghan refugee camps were, however, often run by in-experienced and semi-literate mullahs, associated with Pakistan's Jami'at-e 'Ulema-e Islam (JUI) political party. Saudi funds and scholarships, during the Afghan struggle against the Soviets, in combination with a lack of appreciation on the part of the mullahs of the reformist Deobandi agenda, brought the schools and its curricula closer to ultraconservative Wahabism, which claims to teach strict adherence to the practices of the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) and the Four Rightful Caliphs. (See Foreign Affairs, November 1999, The Taliban: Exporting Extremism, by Ahmad Rashid.). But it must be pointed out that the majority of Taliban foot soldiers are the products of Afghani Masjids, may they be inside Afghanistan or within Refugee camps.
http://www.institute-for-afghan-studies.org/AFGHAN%20CONFLICT/TALIBAN/intro_kakar.htm - http://www.institute-for-afghan-studies.org/AFGHAN%20CONFLICT/TALIBAN/intro_kakar.htm

I have argued with Pakistanis about the Taliban ideology immediately after 9/11. They had a mentality that, unfortunately, accepted the taliban. For them, they were 'Islamic' and that was good enough for their support. As you may guess by now, I debated the problems that pride and religous fundamentalism produces.

You might well have argued with people claiming to be this nationality and that on internet forums. This clearly isnt very valid, as these are nothing more than a bit of unserious chat where people pretend to be anyone as I thought everyone knew. It's pretty obvious that Pakistan does not follow the version of Islam you are describing else Pakistanis would all be bearded or of Niqaab style. If you choose to hang out with Salafyah forums what other answers can you expect, when everyone knows full well that the different versions of Islam are spread across countries. If you want to speak to people on the internet who are another way then visit pakistanidefence.com, neither of which represents Pakistan, the last of which has many Indians pretending to be Pakistanis.

Second, and this is where you're having problems, is that Pakistanis in the US or whoever you speak to, are citizens of the US, not Pakistan - they are Americans, period. The GoP post 9/11 severed ties with the Taliban, and the people within Pakistan even in Waziristan do not have an ideological support for them, it is based on a foreign influx of money from foreign countries that pays well for shelter. One proof is the huge amounts of money being discovered in Waziristan. One of the ways in which Pakistan is planning to get rid of these foreign fighters from Waziristan is by bringing development to the area so the money being brought into the area is without effect.

 

I can see the pupeteers in the whitehouse reasoning with G.Bush:

"It aint so bad George, look at it this way, the more terror we have the more terror we can fight. The more terror we fight the greater the freedom we create. The people want, need and demand freedom." 

 

 

 

Israel has been around for longer than 6 months, catch my drfit?.

 

I am cynical upto a point, there may be underlying reasons. But like always i tend to follow any hype with great suspicion and reserve judgement in the same vain as Leonidas has prescribed earlier. In politics timing is everything. I dont buy the imminent threat BS, especially if they are supposed to have been monitored over the course of a whole year. Y because when there last was an imminenet threat namely 7/7 this war mongering Govt failed to unfoil it.

 

It cant even get the trains to run on time after a decade in office. Vote of no confidence.

 

 

 

 

 

 

You present a lesson in Taliban origins yet seem to have downplayed the deep connection it had with Pakistan. No one knows the number of AlQaeda left in Afghanistan or Pakistan. I don't pretent to be above that fact. I do read that Pakistan has recently been rounding up AlQaeda. I do think that it is a continual work in progress. After the US invasion. Before that your neighbors to the north and within Pakistan were free to roam. They gained support financially and militarily from Pakistan. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban

 

 

I am all for Musharref. He is cracking down. I hope that the people of Pakistan continue to do the same. However, getting defensive and calling my posts stupid shows your pride may be getting in the way of reason. I am familiar with the ways of ultra conservativism from a few countries myself. Neither you or I would want to call off the hunt for AlQaeda. I am not so naive as to say that the hunt should not be in Pakistan.

-------------
Quoo-ray sha quadou sarre.................

 

(Rhetorical question - I don't really want to know )

 

"Arriving in Kabul in 1997 as an advisor to the United Nations Special Mission to Afghanistan, I saw how the Taliban, who had come to power a year earlier on promises to end the Afghan civil war, had by then imposed their draconian rules on a cowed populace. Who were these mostly young fighters who had come from villages in southern Afghanistan and religious schools (Talib = religious student; plural, Taliban) across the border in Pakistan? http://www.afsa.org/fsj/Dec01/schiff.cfm -

The majority of Afghanistan's population is Pashtun, about 10 million, at any one time there's been around 3 million Afghan refugees in Pakistan, including Tajiks. What your missing is that the Soviets came, the Mujahideen fled Afghanistan, they trained in Pakistan, they went back to Afghanistan. Some of these men became Taliban leaders, the majority of the younger generation Taliban were educated and trained in Afghanistan. Pakistan could have stopped the flow of Afghanis back to Afghanistan in the early 90s, true, but ..we didn't want all of them, and they were political refugees who had every right to go back..

Your link is also at odds with the 4 references I've posted below that the Afghani populace was now cowed by the Taliban, they were initially welcomed with open arms and as the saying goes, "flowers". One such link

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/asia/july-dec96/afghanistan_10-9.html - http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/asia/july-dec96/afghanistan_10-9.html

 

As for the poll, call Pakistanis conspiracy theorists but only 12% believe Bin Laden carried out the attacks, which would in turn explain why 82% believe he's a "Mujahid", which by definition he is as he fought in the Afghan war vs the Soviets. Polls though, are easily twisted. But if it's popularity you want, there were plenty of reports that even the Taliban were popular with the people of Afghanistan. The following from interviews in 1996 when the Taliban took over Kabul.

CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: Ms. Maiwandi, you’ve been in touch with them, as well as all of the leaders of the various factions. How do you--do you have anything to add to how they achieved this control that they have now?

SPOZHMAI MAIWANDI, Voice of America: Yes. Based on our interviews with them, and based on our interviews at the Voice of America with people of the areas that they have captured, they are enjoying popular support. Everywhere they went according to the reports we received people were very tired, were fed up with the atrocities committed by the commanders of the Jihad--or the political factions that were in power and some of them who were in your position, so that helped them. There was no security, no stability, no food, the roads were closed, according to these people, the popular support helped him.

And again from 1996, when Pakistan and many others had supported the Taliban.

CHARLAYNE HUNTER-GAULT: And just to go back to something you said earlier, Mr. Ghani, you said, well--in the taped piece they said this was one of the most extreme forms of Islam, who calls the tune here? Who calls the shots in--within the Taliban and are they all united? Is the Taliban united?

MR. GHANI: No. I think one has to look at the--the divergences within and among them, and primarily between those who are educated in these religious schools of learning who are interpreting now religion in a particular way based on largely an Indian tradition of interpretation, rather than one than that corresponds with traditional Islam. And then there’s the rank and file who have joined the movement in the course of the last two years, and largely are from the remnants of groups that were fighting the Soviet army. These people, because of the popularity the Taliban could gain in terms of bringing law and order and freedom of trade and movement, or a secondary group, and as time would pass on, I think we would see divergences between the leadership and the rank and file who would have to adhere far more to the traditional ways of interpretation of Islam and Afghanistan than the strict interpretation that is really bookish interpretation.

From an Afghan website

The group - comprised of Afghans trained in religious schools in Pakistan along with former Islamic fighters or mujahedin - proved effective bodyguards, driving off other mujahedin groups who attacked and looted the convoy. They went on to take the nearby city of Kandahar, beginning a remarkable advance which led to their capture of the capital, Kabul, in September 1996. The Taleban's early popularity with many Afghans initially surprised the country's warring mujahedin factions. But it was not purely a question of ethnicity. Ordinary Afghans, weary of the prevailing lawlessness in many parts of the country, were often delighted by Taleban successes in stamping out corruption, restoring peace and allowing commerce to flourish again.

Just as your poll was probably biased, here's another version of Taliban popularity in Quetta, Pakistan. This even suggests the Taliban were not popular amongst the Pakistani people, but were popular amongst the Afghani people. The presence of US troops in Afghanistan is perhaps what fuels some resentment. You would not like Afghan troops in New Zealand with a detention camp in Malaysia either, I am sure.

"The Taliban's popularity grows as the bombing continues. "My God, it is terrible, the Taliban's support is increasing by the day," said Maudir Bakht, a political scientist at Quetta's university. "Before the bombing they were disliked by a majority of Pakistanis but now there is a level of moral and humanitarian support which may start turning military."

And other one from the BBC.

The Taleban's popularity with many Afghans initially surprised the country's warring mujahedin factions.

Then came 1999, UN embargoes, and per your link an acceptance by Pakistan as early as 2000 to comply with the UN embargo of the Taliban, and then complete isolation and complicity in the removal of the Taliban by 2001. The links are endless.

Is it just me, or do you never understand what I'm trying to say? I said "Part of the problem is that some people, perhaps yourself, consider the Kashmiri fight to be one of terrorism. It's even on record by Boucher recently that Kashmir and terrorism are seperate issues." To break this up into simpler parts, the Kashmiri fight has to do with the legitimate fight for freedom from Indian rule of the Kashmiri people, and the holding of a plebiscite. Richard Boucher was not talking about past methods with which to obtain freedom of the Himalayan state. Some Kashmiri Jihadis had indeed trained with the Taliban. This has never been in doubt, and this is why the Pakistan government has banned several outfits, minus those that are acknowledged as "sons of the soil".

As for your link, which is very weak, written by Amicus, and apparently with a central asian slant, that would be expected to come out with that sort of story, it's best to look at them with a neutral view.