| Submit your comments on this article |
| Afghanistan-Pak-India |
| Recognising Israel to follow birth of Paleo state, sez Musharraf |
| 2005-11-12 |
| Move along, folks. Nothing ISLAMABAD: President Pervez Musharraf has said that Pakistan will not recognise Israel and establish trade links with it until an independent state of Palestine does not come into existence. "⊠does not [sic] come into existence." So, in other words, your stance is indistinguishable from that of every other Middle Eastern sh!thole that demands Israel abandon its self-defense as a pre-condition to any installation of progressive policy in innumerable terrorist regimes. Shuckey darn! I owe Rantburg such a debt of gratitude for teaching me how to observe this exact sort of philosophic prestidigitation! He said this while talking to American Jewish Congress (AJC) Chairman Jack Rosen who called on him on Friday. Jack Rosen told the president he had visited quake stricken areas and was saddened by the massive devastation caused by the quake. He informed the president that the AJC was raising funds to help quake victims. The president thanked Mr Rosen and said Pakistan needed billions of dollars for reconstruction and rehabilitation of quake victims. And this is the naked face of evil. Itâs quite all right to send Pakistan untold âbillions of dollarsâ in quake relief, but Musharraf refuses to recognize Israel until their most dire enemy is ensconced without the least challenge to their psychotic anti-Semitic stance. Pakistan was not opposed to Israel, he said adding âwe want lasting peace and stability in the Middle East. Israel should evacuate other occupied territories and help establish an independent Palestine.â To paraphrase; Israel must surrender all defensively captured territory without the least reciprocity from those who demand complete and total destruction of the Jewish State. The president condemned terrorist activities in Palestine saying that an end to Without the least mention of how Palestine must abandon all âterrorist activitiesâ in turn. Musharraf really needs Let us not revel in the fact that Pakistanâs utterly corrupt enforcement of civil engineering codes directly contributed to this massive and avoidable slaughter. Yet, how can any of us not exult in the self-ordained predestination that so many of Pakistanâs madrasahs met with in natureâs most recent cataclysm? |
| Posted by:Zenster |
| #16 And Pakistan isn't much of a country. It is founded on a principle that muslims cannot live in peace in a country in which they are not a majority. In any event, Pakistan as envisaged by Jinnah died in 1971 when the Pak army committed genocide against the Bengalis (most of whom were muslims). Link to photos and article- warning - graphic |
| Posted by: john 2005-11-12 17:30 |
| #15 Moreover, there was an agreement signed that would indeed have put most of Kashmir under Pakistan and not India .... the Indians had second thoughts and reneged on that deal (for better or for worse - I'm not judging the wisdom, just noting the history). Incorrect. The Act of Independence passed by the UK parliament gave the rulers of all princely states the option to join either India or Pakistan provided their territories were contiguous with either state. No independence was allowed. There was no agreement between Jinnah and Nehru on Kashmir. Jinnah tried to persuade the maharaja of Jammu-Kashmir to join Pakistan but he vacillated. Only after Pakistan sent irregulars to capture J+K did the Maharaja accede to India. The accession document was co-signed by Lord Louis Mountbatten, the last Viceroy of India. |
| Posted by: john 2005-11-12 17:24 |
| #14 To quote the immortal Alice, "Curiouser and curiouser." Thanks, all. I'll have to rely upon my habitual and painstaking bolding of screen names and the like to preserve my reputation for reasonably competent coding. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2005-11-12 17:23 |
| #13 No Zen, the tag 'span' and the attrbute 'hilite' should be case-insensitive. span in lower and hilite in lower case span in upper and HILITE in upper case |
| Posted by: Tony (UK) 2005-11-12 17:01 |
| #12 Shuckey darn, it worked. Thank you, Steve. Is the command case sensitive? That may have been my problem. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2005-11-12 16:50 |
| #11 Steve, thank you for your assistance. I'll give it another shot here and see what happens. It's nice to know that others use my own trick of creating an "alpha file" of ready-to-wear HTML tags. I'm goint to try using your code tag. Here goes nuttin'[/SPAN> |
| Posted by: Zenster 2005-11-12 16:46 |
| #10 Arrgh, that hilited that text. Here is the text in a way you can use it: [SPAN CLASS=HILITE>text goes here[/SPAN> Change the square bracket to an angle bracket and you're all set to hilite. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2005-11-12 16:25 |
| #9 Zen, I also post from a Mac. I've created a series of text tears in a folder that give me all the codes I normally use (strike text, hilite, my comments, etc) and drop into into the box as necessary. Here is the text for hilite: text goes here I just drag this into the box where I want it and type in-between the brackets as shown. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2005-11-12 16:24 |
| #8 Please ensure that you put your comments in HILITE, not italics. That way readers can see immediately what comments are yours, and what is the original source. Thx. AoS Steve White, if you examine my posting history, you'll see that I have scrupulously followed the posting guidelines here. For some reason, the Mac computers at my job and my decrepit back-up computer at home do not implement the hilite function, even when I enter the HTML code manually. All this should change once I repair my main home computer. I thank you for editing the above article. I would also like to take this opportunity to remind other posters to please, please condense the text of articles submitted. Many are still being posted with text bodies consisting almost entirely of single sentence paragraphs. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2005-11-12 16:18 |
| #7 So???? If having delusions of grandeur were a bar against being a country, the UN would have a lot fewer members and our State Department would be a lot smaller. Not saying that wouldn't have its benefits, but it isn't a likely scenario ... and in any case our military would have to increase proportionally - or more. Pakistan is a country. It's not a 1st world, industrialized, wealthy, Western democracy. But it's a country. |
| Posted by: lotp 2005-11-12 14:55 |
| #6 Your dig about Pakistan not really being a country It's not. It's a pack of religious fanatics with delusions of grandeur. Fer crissake, its name means "Land of the Pure". |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2005-11-12 14:01 |
| #5 Give it a rest, gromgoru. Pakistan is not the Palestinians and India is not Israel. When the Zionists returned after centuries to restart a Jewish state, they did not encounter organized Arab states ... they encountered the thin remnants of an old Muslim empire that had long since withered away or grown so feeble (Ottomans) as no longer to rule effectively - and which fell to the Brits well before Israel was established as a modern state. Moreover, a Zionist state would still not have been formed without the Balfour Declaration, of which many repented quickly but not before Israel was a fact on the ground. The Moghuls, on the other hand, ruled the Indian subcontinent effectively for several centuries after they conquered most of it and they were still in power in many areas when the Brits moved in. Moreover, there was an agreement signed that would indeed have put most of Kashmir under Pakistan and not India .... the Indians had second thoughts and reneged on that deal (for better or for worse - I'm not judging the wisdom, just noting the history). Your dig about Pakistan not really being a country would more usefully be applied to Afghanistan prior to the recent elections. We are in the process of changing that as well. |
| Posted by: lotp 2005-11-12 13:20 |
| #4 So, the question is: would the Pakistani myth (Indian subcontinent's Mussies are a nation, and are capable of self-determination) disappear before the Palestinian myth (which we all know and cherish), or not? |
| Posted by: gromgoru 2005-11-12 13:10 |
| #3 Zenster: I left the title alone (gotta keep it to one line). Please ensure that you put your comments in HILITE, not italics. That way readers can see immediately what comments are yours, and what is the original source. Thx. AoS |
| Posted by: Steve White 2005-11-12 11:12 |
| #2 This is just pak disappointment that their overtures to Israel would not result in a stream of weapons for themselves or denial of same to India. |
| Posted by: john 2005-11-12 06:57 |
| #1 Recognising Israel to follow birth of Mods, please change this thread's title to: Recognising Israel to follow birth of (And then delete this post, if possible. Thank you.) |
| Posted by: Zenster 2005-11-12 04:51 |