ZodiaC Posted May 3, 2011 Posted May 3, 2011 Rachel maddow rips pakistan apart.. man.. this is awesome to watch :hysterical: She is the only made reference to mumbai incident too http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ Wow Pakis got their asses handed to them :hysterical:
vvvslaxman Posted May 3, 2011 Posted May 3, 2011 Maaan... Thats funny. Who is Rachel Maddow.. I am now a fan of hers.. . She is about to burst into laughter.. How humiliating is this.. Lets make this a most watched video on youtube.. This would be really humiliating for citizens of any other country.. For people of pakistan they would take it as a compliment.. She is a political opinionist. She is a registered democrat supporter. Just before election Obama called her and gave interview to her. He picked her among all the new hosts. Used to be working on radio only. Keith olbermann took her under wing. He got her this show as well. A Rhodes scholar. AMong all the political opinionists she probably is the most intelligent and civilized and funny. Been a fan of her since she started hosting this show.
DomainK Posted May 3, 2011 Posted May 3, 2011 Maaan... Thats funny. Who is Rachel Maddow.. I am now a fan of hers.. . She is about to burst into laughter.. How humiliating is this.. Lets make this a most watched video on youtube.. This would be really humiliating for citizens of any other country.. For people of pakistan they would take it as a compliment.. Man, that was brutal. She absolutely ripped Pakistan apart. How can they continue to live in denial still is unbelievable.
saneindian Posted May 3, 2011 Posted May 3, 2011 Is Pakistan still hosting Al Zawahiri and Mullah Umar or are they being saved till the $$$ negotiations with the US government is over? The most amusing thing is to see the Pak govt and ISI denying any role in this operation. You can almost fear in the voice of any Pakistani official speaking on live TV/Radio. They know the fundamentalists in Pakistan and Afghanistan and in the muslim world will tear the nation apart for its support to the evil Americans.
Mamu Posted May 3, 2011 Posted May 3, 2011 She is a political opinionist. She is a registered democrat supporter. Just before election Obama called her and gave interview to her. He picked her among all the new hosts. Used to be working on radio only. Keith olbermann took her under wing. He got her this show as well. A Rhodes scholar. AMong all the political opinionists she probably is the most intelligent and civilized and funny. Been a fan of her since she started hosting this show. Did not know her background, but yes she is very analytical and logical in her discussions. Been watching her shows quite often. She does not get involved in very many controversies.
Sachin=GOD Posted May 3, 2011 Posted May 3, 2011 What the end of bin Laden means In the nearly 10 years since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States, if there was a man who could claim responsibility for single-handedly setting the world's agenda, it was Osama bin Laden. As the smiling face behind the 9/11 attacks, the leader of a global terror network that reared its head in countries from the U.S. to the United Kingdom to Indonesia, bin Laden changed the way we led our lives in more ways than has yet been fully understood. With the attacks on the Twin Towers, the U.S invaded Afghanistan, unleashing a war that has claimed thousands of civilian lives, in which much of the western world is involved to a greater or lesser degree. It did not make the world a safer place as promised but only made people everywhere more vulnerable to terrorist attacks. Al-Qaeda's alleged spread into Saddam Hussein's Iraq was one of the reasons cited by the Bush administration for the 2003 invasion of that country. With an ideology that offered nothing but a pledge to destroy the U.S. and the “enemies of Islam” everywhere, bin Laden and his network of jihadists exploited a welter of real and perceived grievances of populations in the Islamic world, both against their own governments and the outside world, especially the U.S. In the al-Qaeda solution, there was no room for negotiations, bargains, or compromises with the “enemy.” The true path was that of violence, which created a self-fulfilling prophesy of a “clash of civilisations” by drawing the U.S. and other western powers into an ever-spiralling war against “terror” — a war al-Qaeda and its ally, the Taliban, and other groups linked to them by their radical ideologies were able to project as a war against Islam, strengthening bin Laden's hands with every passing day. The U.S. had been pursuing him even before 9/11, in fact from as far back as 1992. After his escape from the fierce assault on his hideout in Afghanistan's Tora Bora caves, he was suspected to be hiding in Pakistan. His killing on the night of May 1, in a targeted operation by U.S. Navy Seals at his hideout 150 km from the Pakistan capital city Islamabad, is a landmark development in the “war against terror.” Beyond relief, what implications does this development hold for the world? When President Barack Obama announced the death of bin Laden in an address from the White House, he was correct in cautioning that this did not mean the end of al-Qaeda. Over the decade since 9/11, the network has expanded, spread, morphed, and broken off into what have come to be known as “al Qaeda franchises” round the world. These franchises have shown their ability to plan and carry out attacks in their area of operation independently of bin Laden. Only last year, a plot to carry out a bombing in the United States with explosives packed in couriered parcels was uncovered in the nick of time; the plot was claimed by al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AIQM). Last month al-Qaeda warned it would unleash “a nuclear hell storm” in Europe, giving rise to fears that it might have a nuclear bomb. There is a real possibility that the killing of bin Laden will turn him into a martyr, inspiring others to take up the battle. Certainly, countries around the world are bracing for reprisal attacks. Much, however, depends on how Washington conducts itself from this point onwards. For starters, President Obama needs to rethink the war in Afghanistan. If the ultimate objective is to talk to “moderate” Taliban in order to negotiate an end to this war, there is no justification for further military operations in that country, and no excuse for delaying the departure of the U.S. and other foreign troops. Pakistan certainly has some soul-searching to do. Its political leaders and officials always rejected suspicions that the al-Qaeda leader was holed up in their country. It is deeply troubling that the 54-year-old bin Laden, for whom the U.S. had announced a bounty of $50 million, had made a home not in some remote inaccessible corner of Pakistan, but in one of its most pleasant cities, close to the capital, in a house that was so big it could not have escaped notice. That it was located less than a kilometre from the Kakul Military Academy is even more troubling. Is it believable that Pakistan's intelligence agencies did not know about the presence of the world's most wanted terrorist? Did they ignore what was going on under their noses? Or worse, were they involved in maintaining the safe haven? During his 2008 election campaign, President Obama pledged that if there was “actionable intelligence” about bin Laden in Pakistan, he would authorise action with or without Islamabad's help. In his speech, he was careful to highlight Pakistan's counter-terrorism cooperation. But this daring operation, eight months in the planning, had no Pakistanis on board. In the last few months, relations between the two countries have deteriorated over the CIA's covert operations inside the country. While much blame can be apportioned to the way the U.S. has conducted itself in the region, for Pakistan the killing of bin Laden on its soil is a moment of truth, somewhat similar to the discovery that the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks were launched from its territory, only much bigger in its implications. In India, which has tried to overcome the public's hostility towards Pakistan over the Mumbai attacks through a series of peace moves under the personal initiative of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, it will certainly be hoped that the death of bin Laden strengthens the hands of those forces in Pakistan who want their state to shut the door on militancy, extremism, and terrorism once and for all. While it may be tempting to see bin Laden's killing at Abbottabad as confirmation of India's worst fears, New Delhi must resist the temptation to crow, and must push ahead with the peace process with the civilian government of Pakistan. The Hindu
putrevus Posted May 3, 2011 Posted May 3, 2011 why is it Americans can go in and out of Pakistan as they please and get their man but Indian govt is still talking about peace process and other lame duck accuses instead of repeating what Americans did in the case of OBL. They should go and get their wanted men from pakistan , peace talking with Pakistan will lead them nowhere.
Sachin=GOD Posted May 3, 2011 Posted May 3, 2011 why is it Americans can go in and out of Pakistan as they please and get their man but Indian govt is still talking about peace process and other lame duck accuses instead of repeating what Americans did in the case of OBL. They should go and get their wanted men from pakistan , peace talking with Pakistan will lead them nowhere. because to do what the Americans did, you need g@@nd mein dum which India (more speicifically our PM) does not have.
DomainK Posted May 3, 2011 Posted May 3, 2011 why is it Americans can go in and out of Pakistan as they please and get their man but Indian govt is still talking about peace process and other lame duck accuses instead of repeating what Americans did in the case of OBL. They should go and get their wanted men from pakistan , peace talking with Pakistan will lead them nowhere. because to do what the Americans did' date=' you need g@@nd mein dum which India (more speicifically our PM) does not have.[/quote'] It's easier said than done. I don't think any other PM in stead of the current one would have done it either. US is way too powerful to pull it off and get away. If India even thinks of it, not only will Pakistan react very strongly, but even the western countries will ask us to exercise "restraint". There will be opposition from everywhere and very high chance of a war. It's nice to think that we can send a Sunny Deol to Pakistan ala the movie hero, but it's not practical.
putrevus Posted May 3, 2011 Posted May 3, 2011 because to do what the Americans did' date=' you need g@@nd mein dum which India (more speicifically our PM) does not have.[/quote'] I agree our govt is just pathetic and Indian public cannot have any justice unless these fools who in public offices are held accountable.
asterix Posted May 3, 2011 Posted May 3, 2011 because to do what the Americans did' date=' you need g@@nd mein dum which India (more speicifically our PM) does not have.[/quote'] This, and they have to take America's permission on top of that. America has even not given India permission to blame ISI of 26/11 lest it might geopardise America's campaign in Afghanistan.. You see, American's rights comes on the top..The biggest mistake Al Qaida did was to target Americans in America..If they would've targetted Americans along with few 100 Indians in India, things would've been different. Americans wouldn't have cared..
vvvslaxman Posted May 3, 2011 Posted May 3, 2011 Most importantly we live right next to them. Not United states. Imagine Afghanistan is bordering US.
putrevus Posted May 3, 2011 Posted May 3, 2011 It's easier said than done. I don't think any other PM in stead of the current one would have done it either. US is way too powerful to pull it off and get away. If India even thinks of it' date=' not only will Pakistan react very strongly, but even the western countries will ask us to exercise "restraint". There will be opposition from everywhere and very high chance of a war. It's nice to think that we can send a Sunny Deol to Pakistan ala the movie hero, but it's not practical.[/quote'] how can any western country ask Indian govt to excise restraint when whole world know pakistan is harboring these fugitives and why will Pakistan react strongly. Pakistan is ready for getting rap*ed by USA in their own country but they suddenly get balls when Indians do the same.
Sachin=GOD Posted May 3, 2011 Posted May 3, 2011 Pakistan did its part By Asif Ali Zardari, Tuesday, May 3, 5:23 AM Pakistan, perhaps the world’s greatest victim of terrorism, joins the other targets of al-Qaeda — the people of the United States, Britain, Spain, Indonesia, Afghanistan, Turkey, Yemen, Kenya, Tanzania, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Algeria — in our satisfaction that the source of the greatest evil of the new millennium has been silenced, and his victims given justice. He was not anywhere we had anticipated he would be, but now he is gone. Although the events of Sunday were not a joint operation, a decade of cooperation and partnership between the United States and Pakistan led up to the elimination of Osama bin Laden as a continuing threat to the civilized world. And we in Pakistan take some satisfaction that our early assistance in identifying an al-Qaeda courier ultimately led to this day. Let us be frank. Pakistan has paid an enormous price for its stand against terrorism. More of our soldiers have died than all of NATO’s casualties combined. Two thousand police officers, as many as 30,000 innocent civilians and a generation of social progress for our people have been lost. And for me, justice against bin Laden was not just political; it was also personal, as the terrorists murdered our greatest leader, the mother of my children. Twice he tried to assassinate my wife. In 1989 he poured $50 million into a no-confidence vote to topple her first government. She said that she was bin Laden’s worst nightmare — a democratically elected, progressive, moderate, pluralistic female leader. She was right, and she paid for it with her life. Some in the U.S. press have suggested that Pakistan lacked vitality in its pursuit of terrorism, or worse yet that we were disingenuous and actually protected the terrorists we claimed to be pursuing. Such baseless speculation may make exciting cable news, but it doesn’t reflect fact. Pakistan had as much reason to despise al-Qaeda as any nation. The war on terrorism is as much Pakistan’s war as as it is America’s. And though it may have started with bin Laden, the forces of modernity and moderation remain under serious threat. My government endorses the words of President Obama and appreciates the credit he gave us Sunday night for the successful operation in Khyber Pakhtunkhawa. We also applaud and endorse the words of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that we must “press forward, bolstering our partnerships, strengthening our networks, investing in a positive vision of peace and progress, and relentlessly pursuing the murderers who target innocent people.” We have not yet won this war, but we now clearly can see the beginning of the end, and the kind of South and Central Asia that lies in our future. Only hours after bin Laden’s death, the Taliban reacted by blaming the government of Pakistan and calling for retribution against its leaders, and specifically against me as the nation’s president. We will not be intimidated. Pakistan has never been and never will be the hotbed of fanaticism that is often described by the media. Radical religious parties have never received more than 11 percent of the vote. Recent polls showed that 85 percent of our people are strongly opposed to al-Qaeda. In 2009, when the Taliban briefly took over the Swat Valley, it demonstrated to the people of Pakistan what our future would look like under its rule — repressive politics, religious fanaticism, bigotry and discrimination against girls and women, closing of schools and burning of books. Those few months did more to unite the people of Pakistan around our moderate vision of the future than anything else possibly could. A freely elected democratic government, with the support and mandate of the people, working with democracies all over the world, is determined to build a viable, economic prosperous Pakistan that is a model to the entire Islamic world on what can be accomplished in giving hope to our people and opportunity to our children. We can become everything that al-Qaeda and the Taliban most fear — a vision of a modern Islamic future. Our people, our government, our military, our intelligence agencies are very much united. Some abroad insist that this is not the case, but they are wrong. Pakistanis are united. Together, our nations have suffered and sacrificed. We have fought bravely and with passion and commitment. Ultimately we will prevail. For, in the words of my martyred wife Benazir Bhutto, “truth, justice and the forces of history are on our side.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/pakistan-did-its-part/2011/05/02/AFHxmybF_story.html
The Outsider Posted May 3, 2011 Posted May 3, 2011 because to do what the Americans did' date=' you need g@@nd mein dum which India (more speicifically our PM) does not have.[/quote'] No, to do what America did you need to be a global superpower - g@@nd mein dum is only going to get a significant percentage of your population demolished by nukes if that's the only thing you have.
vvvslaxman Posted May 3, 2011 Posted May 3, 2011 how can any western country ask Indian govt to excise restraint when whole world know pakistan is harboring these fugitives and why will Pakistan react strongly. Pakistan is ready for getting rap*ed by USA in their own country but they suddenly get balls when Indians do the same. India will suffer more. It will destabilize our country. Pakistan is already in shambles. So there is nothing much they are going to lose. We cannot match the power of United states. We need an ally. A strong one. In this case United states. You have to let them do the dirty work.
Sachin=GOD Posted May 3, 2011 Posted May 3, 2011 Pakistan, perhaps the world’s greatest victim of terrorism, joins the other targets of al-Qaeda — the people of the United States, Britain, Spain, Indonesia, Afghanistan, Turkey, Yemen, Kenya, Tanzania, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Algeria — in our satisfaction that the source of the greatest evil of the new millennium has been silenced, and his victims given justice. looks like he "forgot" India while making this list :phehehe:
ganeshran Posted May 3, 2011 Posted May 3, 2011 I am saying it again and again. All we need to do with Pakistan is step back and let them self destruct. Externally Our worry should be China.. Internally problems are corruption, poverty and unemployment. Pakistan can do much less harm to us than these three.
putrevus Posted May 3, 2011 Posted May 3, 2011 No' date=' to do what America did you need to be a global superpower - g@@nd mein dum is only going to get a significant percentage of your population demolished by nukes if that's the only thing you have.[/quote'] so till then innocent Indian public have to deal with these atrocities committed on them.All Indian govt will do is give some lame excuses and statements every now and then to appease their sentiments.
EnterTheVoid Posted May 3, 2011 Posted May 3, 2011 No' date=' to do what America did you need to be a global superpower - g@@nd mein dum is only going to get a significant percentage of your population demolished by nukes if that's the only thing you have.[/quote'] The only comparison I can draw to what America did is what Israel did to Iraq in 1982 (?) They flew over hostile Arab countries and pretty much blew up their nuclear reactor to pieces. And we all know how small Israel is, they're the size of New Jersey. Israel are a strong mob but calling them a global superpower would be far fetched. I mean, they live on US handouts. I can't imagine either country using nukes on the other. I mean, after all, we're neighbors. If a nuke was dropped in the neighbor, surely some part of that explosive would seep into your borders and take out a good chunk of your civillian population as well ?
Recommended Posts