October 13th, 2012, 12:22 PM
Girls in India, Pakistan and Afghanistan have united in support of Malala Yousafzai the
very brave young 14 year old girl shot by taliban for wanting to go school, the story
of hope to come out of a terrible and horrific event.
BBC News - Today - 'National awakening' after girl shot in Pakistan
October 13th, 2012, 05:24 PM
Watch my video "Malala Yousufzai - Free Pakistan - Kill the Taliban"
Video in 2 parts -
1) CBS News story reporting Malala Yousufzai shot
2) Musical tribute to Malala Yousufzai - Free Pakistan - Kill the Taliban - "May it be" by Enya.
May it be the shadow's call
Will fly away
May it be your journey on
To light the day
When the night is overcome
You may rise to find the sun
...
A promise lives within you now
The SkyNews term "stick Islamic code" is unfortunate--extremist, or even traditional would have been better and more accurate. There' are few prohibitions against women getting an education in Islam, women scholarship is a prominent part of Islamic history (women established many educational institutions during the gold age) and some Muslim nations have a quite high degree of female education.
It's a very sad story I hopes clutches the heart of the people there as much as it's tugging on at Westerners so they stop supporting the extremist.
October 13th, 2012, 10:54 PM
Unfortunately, American tax-dollars are clutching at the wallets of the Pakistani elite to encourage them to support the Taliban extremist terrorists!Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox
The sincere Pakistani politicians who are fighting the Taliban are not winning, they are getting assassinated.
The insincere Pakistani politicians may well say they are fighting the Taliban so as to get US and Western cash in billions of dollars a year but then take the cash and spend it on something else, such as nuclear weapons and other expensive items desired by the Pakistani elite.
The Pakistani military intelligence agency appears to be organising, training and arming the Taliban and other terrorist groups. Watch this video -
VIDEO: BBC Documentary - "SECRET PAKISTAN - Double Cross / Backlash" (2 hours)
Secret BBC - Pakistan Double Cross on Terrorism - Full - YouTube
So if the Pakistani military support the Taliban what chance do unarmed civilians have against armed terrorists? None.
What sense does it make for the USA to give military aid to the Pakistani military which is supporting the Taliban? None.
Yet American tax-payer money flows to the Pakistani military in billions of dollars every year.
So however much the deaths of innocents clutches at the hearts of the Pakistani elite, the clutch of American tax-dollars on their wallets is a stronger influence.Kansas City Star: ""Pakistan freed of anti-terrorism obligations; U.S. billions flow instead"
WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration has refused for the first time to declare that Pakistan is making progress toward ending alleged military support for Islamic militant groups or preventing al Qaida, the Afghan Taliban or other extremists from staging attacks in Afghanistan.
Even so, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has quietly informed Congress that she’s waived the legal restrictions that would have blocked some $2 billion in U.S. economic and military aid to Pakistan. Disbursing the funds, she said in an official notice, is “important to the national security interests of the United States.”
So long as the US government continues to give no-strings billions of dollars to the Pakistani state with a naive wish that aid money will be well-spent against terrorism, the reverse will be guaranteed.
We need a proper military strategy to fight the Taliban and their supporters in the Pakistani state.
Only very intelligent military strategists, as smart as I am, can carry such a strategy out.
Popular but foolish politicians will never beat the Taliban and innocents will continue to slaughtered, all for show, because the US government has more money than brains.
Read
"Afghanistan – Pakistan (AfPak) military strategy and the war on terror"
Sorry I'm not going to watch your two hour vid. But I will say that backing a government fighting the an enemy, where some amount ends up in the wrong place because of corruption, is not the same as supporting the enemy. Your claim is baseless and deeply flawed logic.Unfortunately, American tax-dollars are clutching at the wallets of the Pakistani elite to encourage them to support the Taliban extremist terrorists!
--Also please remove the personal solicitations from your signature--this isn't the place for your crusade.
Last edited by Lynx_Fox; October 14th, 2012 at 12:37 AM.
It's two hours well spent.
Does it help making time for it any if I give you the video in 2 separate 1 hour videos?
Secret Pakistan : Documentary by BBC Part 1 (Double Cross) (1 hour)
Secret Pakistan : Documentary by BBC Part 2 (Backlash) (1 hour)
The notional "government" of Pakistan is not fully in charge of the Pakistani military. Remember Pakistan has recently been run as a military dictatorship and the military only agreed to allow a civilian government under pressure from the US and the West.
Pakistani politicians who have dared to cross the Pakistani military have been assassinated. You don't survive in Pakistani politics by confronting the military.
The Pakistani military support for the Taliban is a military secret, kept secret to maintain the relationship between the US and Pakistan, to maintain the aid funding.
Some amount, a percentage, is "re-invested" to sustain the Taliban and to maintain the running sore of terrorism which provides the begging bowl excuse for military aid. The rest is available to spend as the Pakistani military wish - on more nuclear weapons for example.
It amounts to the same thing.
Well you would say that not having watched the video.
Done.
The word "crusade" is inappropriate in this context. I am an atheist and smearing our NATO campaign against the Taliban as a "crusade" (a Christian religious war against Islam) is what the enemy does.
Last edited by Peter Dow; October 14th, 2012 at 09:31 AM.
Basically what it comes down to, in the eyes of the disenfranchised, is the USA is guilty of these accusations because their mint prints the money. If it makes you angry then please go to the Euro conversion charts.
I would prefer to focus on the courage and bravery of a remarkable young girl as she fights for her life. We can only hope she makes a full recovery and all send her our best wishes, thoughts and (prayers) from our religious members.
Also to focus on the inspiration she has provided for a generation of young girls to stand up to the extremists. We can only hope that this clear signal of defiance towards the Taliban will make then realise that children will not be intimidated and they have a right to their education no matter what gender they are.
One cannot hold the mint responsible for the decisions of the US government as to how it spends its money.
The quoted news story clearly identifies the Obama administration and specifically the US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as the person responsible for (or "guilty of") disbursing the funds to Pakistan.
Kansas City Star: ""Pakistan freed of anti-terrorism obligations; U.S. billions flow instead"
WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration has refused for the first time to declare that Pakistan is making progress toward ending alleged military support for Islamic militant groups or preventing al Qaida, the Afghan Taliban or other extremists from staging attacks in Afghanistan.
Even so, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has quietly informed Congress that she’s waived the legal restrictions that would have blocked some $2 billion in U.S. economic and military aid to Pakistan. Disbursing the funds, she said in an official notice, is “important to the national security interests of the United States.”I would have thought it would be a matter of political concern for Americans to have it revealed to them that their own government is disbursing their tax-payer funds as military aid to Pakistan whose military in turn is funding the very same Taliban terrorists who are killing US soldiers in Afghanistan!
Americans do not pay tax with the understanding that their taxes will be used by foreign terrorists to kill their own sons and daughters serving in the US military!
Therefore I would have thought there would arise a political question of a misuse of US government funds for Congress and other American political representatives to look into.
Last edited by Peter Dow; October 14th, 2012 at 01:59 PM.
Sending money to the government helps us get influence, monitor things and establish money trails from which we can gain useful intelligence. It works at the tactical level the same way--like when I helped support a artillery school for the Iraqi Army despite not having complete trust that some the students weren't working against us. After the course was over, we passed the graduate list to our intel folks so they'd have a suspect list if enemy mortar attacks on our bases suddenly became more effective. America has a long history of making Faustian deals-- and things aren't as black and white or neat and tidy as some people would like (what is?)--Most Americans already realize this and thus aren't surprised or particularly alarmed by the so called "revelations."
My first post in this topic did focus in that direction.
Yes we can but those are not the only things scientists can do.
- What chance do unarmed or poorly armed Pakistani civilians have of successfully standing up to well-armed extremists and defying the Taliban terrorists?
No chance unless they are defended by those who are well armed.
- What chance do unarmed or poorly armed Pakistani civilians have of standing up to and defying the Pakistani military for its covert support for extremist terrorist groups such as the Taliban to use as proxies to do their dirty work in Afghanistan and to provide a pretext for foreign aid requests?
No chance unless foreign armed forces such as our own come to their aid against their own state instead of our governments inadvertently funding the terrorists.
For consideration of an effective standing up to and defying the Taliban strategy, please see my topic here
Afghanistan NATO Taliban Pakistan Jihad Madrasah Arabs Drones Raids - AfPak strategy
Do you know the story of the King with no clothes who was conned into paying for an invisible "set of clothes" because the conman said only clever people could see them, and fools saw no clothes? Well the King pretended to put on these invisible clothes and all the nobles bowed and scrapped to the naked King in fear that if they said anything they would be said to be the fools. Then one little boy said "Oh look, the King has no clothes on!" and everyone laughed because it was obviously true and the King had been made a fool of?
Well the Pakistani state has made a fool of the USA by selling it a military aid policy whose benefits are invisible and you sound like one of the nobles in the story pretending to see the non-existing benefits.
The little boy now needs to speak up and say the Pakistani state is killing our soldiers and our government is paying them as they do it.
It's embarrassing for you but better in the long run to admit our governments have been fooled.
(something about the baby and the bathwater....)
How do you suggest we help Peter...other than some vague notion "supporting the people."
I think to a large degree your presumptions are faultly anyhow. Much like Afghanistan, and every other insurgency, if their already wasn't considerable support in the nation for the terrorist than they'd be far less successful in their attacks--like it or not it's the primary responsibility of the people living there to dry up the pond (using British terms to describe counter insurgency).
But I'll ask again, what do you suggest happens here? And please something realitic that doesn't involve crippling tens of thousands of our young people in both our nations--or borrowing more money we don't have from our grandchildren.
For years, the USA has been funding both sides of the war in Afghanistan - Pakistan,
Therefore it would help immensely if the USA would stop funding the terrorists via Pakistan and only funded our side of the war.
- funding our soldiers and
- funding the terrorists via aid to Pakistan.
So - that billions of dollars that Hillary just paid to Pakistan - put a stop on that payment.
Now there's a lot more that can be done - by spending less money than is being spent now, and by spending what is spent, smarter - that would entirely change the dynamics of this war for the better.
I have posted a lot of details in this topic -
Afghanistan NATO Taliban Pakistan Jihad Madrasah Arabs Drones Raids - AfPak strategy
Last edited by Peter Dow; October 14th, 2012 at 06:23 PM.
Heck Ya....that's a great IDEA!!!!!!!!!Therefore it would help immensely if the USA would stop funding the terrorists via Pakistan and only funded our side of the war.
Now why didn't we think of that?
--
All kidding aside, I agree with you in that we should be much harsher with the Saudi government. But given American's addiction to oil, that simply isn't going to happen.
As for calls for more prisoners in Gitmo, I think that works against us. I think it was morally wrong to use Gitmo to sidestep American and International Laws, and still think so--it is an embarrassment to the very ideals I spent most of adult life in uniform defending.
I also think propagandizing the Paki population would just increase the hostility the population already feels towards the West. We are evil...why should they listen to us? What ever we do is most effective if it happens from the inside. The tough part is figuring out how to do that. How do we bolster the moderates without appearing to interfere with their affairs? If we had the perfect answer we'd already be doing it--of course in the real word that doesn't' happen.
In general, non-country-specific terms, the Bush Doctrine did think of that.
Unfortunately, when Pakistan told the Bush government, and still tells the Obama government, the lie that that "Pakistan is with you, not with the terrorists" but in reality, secretly the Pakistani state was not with us, was with the terrorists, our governments naively took Pakistan at their word instead of researching their secret deeds, and failed to name Pakistan as a hostile regime, a "sponsor of terrorism".We will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime.
Many have named Pakistan as an untrustworthy recipient of aid. I have. Senator Rand Paul has. So have many others.
Politically, "we the people" don't tend to think new political thoughts until they are broadcast a fair number of times on TV, radio and increasingly now the internet, especially by people known to and trusted by the people.
Regime-change Saudi Arabia and buy the same oil from the new regime.
Has the law got something against Gitmo as a site for a prisoner of war camp?
It's a more humane solution to the likes of the Father of the Taliban to bang him up in Gitmo than take him out with a drone attack - but have it your way. BOOM!
The current propaganda being broadcast on satellite TV increases hostility. Change the propaganda, change the increase to a decrease.
That's what their satellite TV now tells them.
If we control their satellite TV they could. Right now, they can't. They should because they'll be looking for the truth as to why we have stopped funding their government and are bombing the Taliban and ISI HQs.
Like the drone attacks are, the Bin Laden raid was effective. Like satellite broadcasting into Pakistan and bombing and missile strikes on Taliban and ISI HQs would be effective. Yes.
That's what political and military scientists are for - figuring out how to win wars. I am happy to help.
The moderates could really do with us interfering to get the Taliban off their backs. They'd welcome it.
In war, there's no such thing as "perfect" but there is "good, maybe imperfect but much better than perverse and counter-productive" which is what the military aid to Pakistan is.
In the real world, governments are often are stupid and go on doing the wrong thing for a while until some great leader comes along and shows them the way.
Last edited by Peter Dow; October 14th, 2012 at 08:23 PM.
Ya just like that.....Regime-change Saudi Arabia and buy the same oil from the new regime.
No thanks...the vast majority of Muslims don't hate America. But your suggestion we simply replace the leadership of at the center of their holy lands would most likely turn all 1.5 billion of them against us. We don't need that fight.
Not to mention Hollywood also tells them.That's what their satellite TV now tells them.
--
Between me and you I don't care that much if the Taliban win. They didn't attack us, Al Q did. They'll likely take control of Afghanistan after we leave despite our best efforts because a good number of the Afghan still agree with them--as they do in Pakistan.If they become a problem we can rain brimstone back on them without killing a bunch of our own guys in the process. Containment is often the best option.
Pakistan, because of the nukes is far more problematic, especially for India. There's an old saying about keep your enemies close-- that might be a good way to represent our approach there.
... Arab Spring.
... the people, including the Muslim people ...
.. and our .. (some of us are Muslims, right?)
.. the Saudi monarchy.
No, not "us". Why would Muslims who overthrew the Saudi monarchy with our help turn against us? They would thank us.
The fight that you are thinking of, we don't need. The fight I am thinking of, we do need.
No, I'm fairly sure that we are not the villains in most Hollywood movies. Or are you thinking of Hollywood Al Qaeda branch?
Ah well, in this topic, there's Malala and her supporters in here with us.
Malala's supporters care if the Taliban win.
2000 dead US soldiers in Afghanistan says the Taliban did attack us.
Would you agree or disagree with a Taliban gunman with his gun at your head?
When
I hope that brimstone will be raining on Taliban and ISI HQ and not on the cities, towns and villages that the Taliban occupy in Afghanistan and Pakistan. If it will be on those HQs, why not rain it now?
We are poised for a complete victory, to crush the Taliban, and you want to settle for "containment"?
Pakistan is the same indivisible problem as Afghanistan. The Taliban government of Afghanistan always was and would be a client state of Pakistan.
Isn't Gitmo close enough for you?
The current approach is not working for Malala and for millions of others in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree.
I find your suggestion of replacing the Saudi government lunacy. The very reason Al Q had so much support was because of Western meddling in the Muslim world. I suggest you go back and read transcripts of Bin Laden--it was the most prominent message of his writings and talks--get the West out of the holy land. He hated the Saudi government for cooperating with the US, Saddam for the same reason. Western cultural impact has similar affect--no one likes to see their culture replaced--especially when it directly contradicts your most basic cultural values.
Most Westerners just assume that's what's happening--sometimes its even true. On the other hand, without support from the populatoin the Taliban wouldn't exist. We have a hostile population to our values--and like it or not there's not much we can do to change that.Would you agree or disagree with a Taliban gunman with his gun at your head?
That doesn't' count-- I don't consider deaths of soldier acts of terrorism--Soldiers are legitimate targets, myself included when I was attacked not so long ago. We should have come home years ago, instead of trying to change a culture--not our job and damn near impossible even under ideal conditions.2000 dead US soldiers in Afghanistan says the Taliban did attack us.
BBC News - Malala Yousafzai, schoolgirl shot by Taliban, now in UK
Extract from the article:
"Malala Yousafzai came to prominence in 2009 at the age of 11, when she started writing a diary for BBC Urdu about life under the Taliban.
Under the pen-name Gul Makai, she described the problems caused by militants who had taken control of the Swat Valley where she lived in 2007 and ordered girls' schools to close.
Although the Taliban were ousted from Swat in 2009, her role as a young campaigner for girls' education meant that she received death threats.
She was attacked last week as she returned home from school in the town of Mingora, in the Swat Valley. "
I dont have time to watch it, but in a nutshell, is this Propaganda to support more war and more killing of humans that happen to live in Pakistan or Afghanistan?
Does it mention that girls were going to university in Afghanistan before the US supported Muslim extremists in the first place (when they fight the US or corporate rubber-stamping US puppets they're called terrorists, but when they fight Russian backed non-extremist government they're called freedom fighters) ?
Im reminded of this mountain of bullshit that was used to muster mindless flag-waving support for mass murder:
War is a Racket.
(The BBC offers premium quality Propaganda, not the cheap and vulgar stuff that other channels propagateExcept when they announced WTC7 collapsing before cue, but nobody's perfect
)
Last edited by icewendigo; October 15th, 2012 at 06:47 PM.
As an update to this story from last year, on the day that most media is now reporting that the man that ordered the execution attempt on Malala Yousafzai to stop her speaking out against the Taliban has been elevated to their new leader, I thought it would be rather fitting to post a link for her speech to the United Nations.
BBC News - Malala Yousafzai speech in full
I heard her talk for short... where she claimed that women are chosen by god and stronger than males.. and such... pure feminine thougts... not equality thoughts...
I'd argue about that, but my wife might hear.
Your post says it all, nothing changes in Pakistan. The bad guys advance, the heroine of the day, no longer lives in Pakistan. I do wonder why.
He's a Taliban leader not head of Paskistan....at least not yet.
| « Massive arachnid and bug emporium. | If you're from an EU member state, would you say the institution benefits or hinders your country? » |
| Bookmarks |
Bookmarks |
2Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
